Assume Trump Committed Crimes

[jc456]

They are INDICTMENTS, fucking dumbass

meaningless pieces of paper.

 

[The5thHorseman]

naw, you lied and presented zero material to back up your claim, so you lied.

You will say that forever.

I can't make you admit that you understand, and you won't.

 

[The5thHorseman]

meaningless pieces of paper.

No...they are the product of Due Process, even if you don't like them.

 

[The5thHorseman]

You ignorant bag of human waste. you know what he was asking. Get rid of 11,000 corrupt votes. They ran stacks over and over. They ran secret hidden ballots w/o observation. The voter roll is chock full of BS names. Bad signatures. it never ends.

STFU and tonguebathe my taint.

 

[Dadoalex]

holy fk what a pile of manure. Did you write this mess? Freedom of speech is not against the law, feel free to post the law he supposedly violated as president, BTW, as president he received immunity from all of this.

So you haven't bothered reading the indictments.
Understood.
You've zero basis for any comments.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Regardless of guilt or innocence, you can't drop over two million pieces of evidence on a defense team and expect them to read, understand and research them in six months. That's a dick move and should be a sanctionable offense for both the prosecution and judge.

 

[Dadoalex]

nope, only in a demofks fantasy cave

Please show in the constitution, any state or federal statute

anything resembling

a right to be presumed innocent.

I'll be excited to see it.

 

[Dadoalex]

Same with Biden.

Great...

Show me the evidence!

 

[Dadoalex]

The rule of law the Constitution lays out.

So just your imagination then.

Consider your McNuggets appropriately flattened.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Sure...

But it's prima facie risible.

No one denies that Grifty called Raffensperger looking for votes.

From reading the transcript of the call, Trump was looking for LEGITIMATE missed votes. He said "FIND" not invent votes. Like a lot of things Trump has said over the years, it has been misconstrued, Trump is not professional politician and doesn't use their language.

 

[The5thHorseman]

and you can't prove that's a crime. Back at you

Read the indictment.

 

[The5thHorseman]

but you need a law he broke. Feel free to post it. LIAR

Read the indictment.

 

[The5thHorseman]

From reading the transcript of the call, Trump was looking for LEGITIMATE missed votes. He said "FIND" not invent votes. Like a lot of things Trump has said over the years, it has been misconstrued, Trump is not professional politician and doesn't use their language.

Sure...

But he had no business making that call...

 

[Independent thinker]

Only applies to the jury.
If that applied everywhere...
No one would be arrested, charged bail, held with or without bail, need to hire an attorney...

The justice system presumes guilt, then proves it.

If you think it works any other way you haven't been paying attention.

Thanks for your admission that Democrats are abusing their power to get Trump.

 

[Independent thinker]

I didn’t say convict him. I’m just saying assume the charges are legitimate then wait until after he loses in 2024 to have the trial(s).

Why can't we assume the charges are illegitimate?

 

[The5thHorseman]

Thanks for your admission that Democrats are abusing their power to get Trump.

That's Due Process.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Sure...

But he had no business making that call...

Why not? Candidates and their staffs make calls like that all the time. They even file cases with friendly judges to force Secretaries of State to violate State Laws in their favor. One thing that really bothers me is that all these cases have been judge shopped to put them in court rooms unfavorable to Trump in areas where Trump lost more than 90% of the vote. I'd feel a lot more confident in the process if the trials were moved into areas where the votes were closely contested, and the judges were picked at random AFTER all who had contributed to either Republican OR Democratic candidates had been excluded from the pool. Justice is supposed to be blind and in politically sensitive cases any more it certainly doesn't appear to be.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Why not? Candidates and their staffs make calls like that all the time. They even file cases with friendly judges to force Secretaries of State to violate State Laws in their favor. One thing that really bothers me is that all these cases have been judge shopped to put them in court rooms unfavorable to Trump in areas where Trump lost more than 90% of the vote. I'd feel a lot more confident in the process if the trials were moved into areas where the votes were closely contested, and the judges were picked at random AFTER all who had contributed to either Republican OR Democratic candidates had been excluded from the pool. Justice is supposed to be blind and in politically sensitive cases any more it certainly doesn't appear to be.

Why not? Candidates and their staffs make calls like that all the time

No...they don't.

 

[Independent thinker]

That's Due Process.

It is not the American way to find someone you don't like and abuse your power investigating and indicting someone and then claim the person gets due process. That's the very same thing they do in Russia. They find a political enemy, investigate and file charges against them, and then do due process just before finding them guilty and imprisoning them. Our country is supposed to be better than that.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I already posted the immunity clause. Need to see it again?

Presidential immunity in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Read it carefully!!!!!

The president of the United States enjoys absolute immunity from many lawsuits while in office; it is legally untested whether they also enjoy criminal immunity from arrest or prosecution.[a] Neither civil nor criminal immunity is explicitly granted in the Constitution or any federal statute.[1]

The Supreme Court of the United States found in Nixon v. Fitzgerald (1982) that the president has absolute immunity from civil damages actions regarding conduct within the "outer perimeter" of their duties.

what about them? They're completely meaningless because first off, he was president and he has immunity. and then, there's the entire first amendment thingy getting in the way!!!!!!

But again, you can't justify anything.

Civil immunity, perhaps, but once out of office, if he has not been pardoned, he is not immunized for crimes committed while President. Otherwise, he really could shoot someone with immunity.