registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 10:49:32 GMT
Post by registerme on Jun 2, 2024 10:49:32 GMT
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 4,382
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 11:53:17 GMT
Post by agent69 on Jun 2, 2024 11:53:17 GMT
Putting a former president on trial in front of a free jury is not an 'undermining of democracy'. On the contrary it is a reinforcement and one could even say a celebration of democracy: it demonstrates the critical principal that no-one is above the law, whoever or whatever they are.
Google "Bill Clinton" *
* - You will find it hard to explain unless you accept the "law" in the US does not apply to everyone.
Are you refereing to Monika, the Whitewater Development Corporation, or something else?
I think that the laws in USA apply to everyone, but that doesn't mean that everyone who has commited a crime gets punished. Clearly having money and influence helps, as we saw in the cases of O J Simpson and Michael Jackson.
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 1,250
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 11:54:49 GMT
Post by james100 on Jun 2, 2024 11:54:49 GMT
Putting a former president on trial in front of a free jury is not an 'undermining of democracy'. On the contrary it is a reinforcement and one could even say a celebration of democracy: it demonstrates the critical principal that no-one is above the law, whoever or whatever they are.
Google "Bill Clinton" *
* - You will find it hard to explain unless you accept the "law" in the US does not apply to everyone.
Are you referring to 1999 senate impeachment trial?
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 2, 2024 12:43:07 GMT
Google "Bill Clinton" *
* - You will find it hard to explain unless you accept the "law" in the US does not apply to everyone.
Are you referring to 1999 senate impeachment trial?who knows. Maybe he just thinks we are too young or too stupid to know who Bill (presumably) Clinton was and his time in and outside of office. I wish I were too young, but I'm certainly not too stupid. Or maybe he is referring to "but that email server....". Or maybe in the deep recesses of conspiracy world, amongst the chem trails, Chelsea has got up to something she shouldn't have done and her father/mother/rich husband/the deep state are protecting her.
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Back and to the left..
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 719
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Jun 2, 2024 13:03:51 GMT
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 1,250
|
Post by james100 on Jun 2, 2024 14:27:18 GMT
Thanks. I am aware of almost all these allegations and I thought they were common knowledge. My personal opinion is that both Clinton and Trump are probably guilty of the vast majority of sexual assault and misconduct allegations levied against them. There are good reasons why women would not chose to subject themselves to a court (or any official) process having seen the way previous victims have suffered be that through extended legal process or vilification/retraumatization by defense or general public. Not sure I understand the relevance to current case of falsification business records, though.
|
|
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 14:43:26 GMT
Post by overthehill on Jun 2, 2024 14:43:26 GMT
The only bulges in Trump's trouser fronts are paid-for corrupt judges in his pockets so he would get an appeal if he was convicted of murdering someone on live TV. That's why the POS has been to court more than 3500 times.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,422
Likes: 2,893
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 2, 2024 14:58:45 GMT
Are you referring to 1999 senate impeachment trial? who knows. Maybe he just thinks we are too young or too stupid to know who Bill (presumably) Clinton was and his time in and outside of office. I wish I were too young, but I'm certainly not too stupid. Or maybe he is referring to "but that email server....". Or maybe in the deep recesses of conspiracy world, amongst the chem trails, Chelsea has got up to something she shouldn't have done and her father/mother/rich husband/the deep state are protecting her. In everything you've said that I've read in this and the last post or two (the very long one I didn't quite make to the bottom), I think you're missing the fact that this is how many 3rd world developing countries with authoritarian regimes have behaved. i.e. You get into power and you incarcerate the bloke that came before you. If he'd been accused of serious crime and there was an obvious case against him that would be a different matter. This is clearly something small dragged up by the party that opposes him in exactly the same fashion as some of those regimes. I think you need to rise above which of the parties or presidents you like and consider the electoral system itself. Very few on either side are doing that which could lead to something pretty dangerous happening.
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Back and to the left..
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 719
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 15:09:20 GMT
Post by angrysaveruk on Jun 2, 2024 15:09:20 GMT
Thanks. I am aware of almost all these allegations and I thought they were common knowledge. My personal opinion is that both Clinton and Trump are probably guilty of the vast majority of sexual assault and misconduct allegations levied against them. There are good reasons why women would not chose to subject themselves to a court (or any official) process having seen the way previous victims have suffered be that through extended legal process or vilification/retraumatization by defense or general public. Not sure I understand the relevance to current case of falsification business records, though. If Donald Trump (or anyone else who is not part of the above the law deep state elite) had been accused of a fraction of what Bill Clinton has been accused of by a large number of people he very likely would be behind bars for decades. If you look at the extent of the allegations against Bill Clinton it is actually staggering, see if you can find the interview with the Arkansas police chief . The fact the only thing they could get him on was some questionable accounting suggests to me he is pretty clean.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 2, 2024 15:55:12 GMT
who knows. Maybe he just thinks we are too young or too stupid to know who Bill (presumably) Clinton was and his time in and outside of office. I wish I were too young, but I'm certainly not too stupid. Or maybe he is referring to "but that email server....". Or maybe in the deep recesses of conspiracy world, amongst the chem trails, Chelsea has got up to something she shouldn't have done and her father/mother/rich husband/the deep state are protecting her. .... I think you need to rise above which of the parties or presidents you like and consider the electoral system itself. Very few on either side are doing that which could lead to something pretty dangerous happening. I am, and have. You are just failing to see that. Perhaps you need to consider that the the 'not rising above' fault may in fact lie with yourself, and your comment is an unconscious act of projection. You'll note that I specifically mentioned open trial decided by a free jury on evidence which is not manufactured (I just added that bit in, but it was taken as read). And just to make the rather obvious point that in this case these are not even federal charges, so they weren't laid by the DoJ, let alone by Biden. As I said, I think it is the weakest of the cases laid at this door, but nonetheless the decision that there was a case to answer was not the DAs: it was subject first to a Grand Jury decision. And then a jury found him guilty. And he has the right to ask to appeal (edit: although I see that quite a lot of professionals are saying that he has no meaningful grounds for an appeal). The point you are making is one of false equivalence. If it were not so, trust me I'd be at the front of the Q decrying it, no matter how much I loathe the individual. Do you think that Sarkozy should not have been charged and tried ? Do you think that all past political figures should be above the law in case of the risk of the claim of sham trials ?
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 1,250
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 16:10:44 GMT
Post by james100 on Jun 2, 2024 16:10:44 GMT
Thanks. I am aware of almost all these allegations and I thought they were common knowledge. My personal opinion is that both Clinton and Trump are probably guilty of the vast majority of sexual assault and misconduct allegations levied against them. There are good reasons why women would not chose to subject themselves to a court (or any official) process having seen the way previous victims have suffered be that through extended legal process or vilification/retraumatization by defense or general public. Not sure I understand the relevance to current case of falsification business records, though. If Donald Trump (or anyone else who is not part of the above the law deep state elite) had been accused of a fraction of what Bill Clinton has been accused of by a large number of people he very likely would be behind bars for decades. If you look at the extent of the allegations against Bill Clinton it is actually staggering, see if you can find the interview with the Arkansas police chief . The fact the only thing they could get him on was some questionable accounting suggests to me he is pretty clean. With respect to sexual misconduct they have both been accused of similar crimes and neither of them are behind bars as a result of it. Not for days, never mind decades. If you can post a link to whichever specific interview you're referring to than I will be interested to view it. Trump was found guilty of falsifying business records, repeatedly. The case (this one's) relevance is he used deceptive and illegal means to subvert a prescribed democratic process for personal gain. If you think that's 'pretty clean' I'm genuinely not sure what 'unfit for public office' looks like. Anyway, roll on the next 3 criminal trials...
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Back and to the left..
Posts: 1,213
Likes: 719
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Jun 2, 2024 16:32:41 GMT
who knows. Maybe he just thinks we are too young or too stupid to know who Bill (presumably) Clinton was and his time in and outside of office. I wish I were too young, but I'm certainly not too stupid. Or maybe he is referring to "but that email server....". Or maybe in the deep recesses of conspiracy world, amongst the chem trails, Chelsea has got up to something she shouldn't have done and her father/mother/rich husband/the deep state are protecting her. In everything you've said that I've read in this and the last post or two (the very long one I didn't quite make to the bottom), I think you're missing the fact that this is how many 3rd world developing countries with authoritarian regimes have behaved. i.e. You get into power and you incarcerate the bloke that came before you. If he'd been accused of serious crime and there was an obvious case against him that would be a different matter. This is clearly something small dragged up by the party that opposes him in exactly the same fashion as some of those regimes. I think you need to rise above which of the parties or presidents you like and consider the electoral system itself. Very few on either side are doing that which could lead to something pretty dangerous happening. Exactly. The key point here is Trump is the first president to become criminally indicted and he has been charged with something extremely insignificant. A number of presidents before him have been accused of extremely serious criminal activity and not even come close to a criminal court. The argument that this is an example of Lawfare against a political opponent is something that will hold a lot of weight around the world and damage the US's reputation even further. The comparison to France is not valid since there are other former Presidents who have been tried* and this has always taken place after they have left politics - I doubt very much the French legal system would try a major presidential candidate on a minor charge like this during an election - mainly because they would be worried they would be seen as trying to interfere with the election result. * - they like chopping he heads off their rulers.
|
|
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 16:33:36 GMT
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 2, 2024 16:33:36 GMT
Thanks. I am aware of almost all these allegations and I thought they were common knowledge. My personal opinion is that both Clinton and Trump are probably guilty of the vast majority of sexual assault and misconduct allegations levied against them. There are good reasons why women would not chose to subject themselves to a court (or any official) process having seen the way previous victims have suffered be that through extended legal process or vilification/retraumatization by defense or general public. Not sure I understand the relevance to current case of falsification business records, though. If Donald Trump (or anyone else who is not part of the above the law deep state elite) had been accused of a fraction of what Bill Clinton has been accused of by a large number of people he very likely would be behind bars for decades. If you look at the extent of the allegations against Bill Clinton it is actually staggering, see if you can find the interview with the Arkansas police chief . The fact the only thing they could get him on was some questionable accounting suggests to me he is pretty clean.Umm you seem to have a misunderstanding of the judicial system. Or are employing selective memory. That trial was on a specific thing. It wasn't a 'catch all' trial and "that was the best they could do." He faces a number of other criminal trials. Of course if he wins the election, some of those can be made to go away by virtue of the fact they are federal cases and he will order the DoJ to drop them. But if he doesn't, they are still to come. Oh, and he was of course also found guilty of sexual abuse and rape, and defamation, in the E Jean Carroll case, which was of course a civil case.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,422
Likes: 2,893
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 16:42:37 GMT
Post by michaelc on Jun 2, 2024 16:42:37 GMT
If Donald Trump (or anyone else who is not part of the above the law deep state elite) had been accused of a fraction of what Bill Clinton has been accused of by a large number of people he very likely would be behind bars for decades. If you look at the extent of the allegations against Bill Clinton it is actually staggering, see if you can find the interview with the Arkansas police chief . The fact the only thing they could get him on was some questionable accounting suggests to me he is pretty clean.Umm you seem to have a misunderstanding of the judicial system. Or are employing selective memory. That trial was on a specific thing. It wasn't a 'catch all' trial and "that was the best they could do." He faces a number of other criminal trials. Of course if he wins the election, some of those can be made to go away by virtue of the fact they are federal cases and he will order the DoJ to drop them. But if he doesn't, they are still to come. Oh, and he was of course also found guilty of sexual abuse and rape, and defamation, in the E Jean Carroll case, which was of course a civil case. You do like your adversarial tone don't you? Mr Saver put his points across in a perfectly pleasant way. I don't know how many times I've had to suggest you play the ball not the man.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 4,382
|
Trump
Jun 2, 2024 16:47:40 GMT
Post by agent69 on Jun 2, 2024 16:47:40 GMT
Umm you seem to have a misunderstanding of the judicial system. Or are employing selective memory. That trial was on a specific thing. It wasn't a 'catch all' trial and "that was the best they could do." He faces a number of other criminal trials. Of course if he wins the election, some of those can be made to go away by virtue of the fact they are federal cases and he will order the DoJ to drop them. But if he doesn't, they are still to come. Oh, and he was of course also found guilty of sexual abuse and rape, and defamation, in the E Jean Carroll case, which was of course a civil case. You do like your adversarial tone don't you? Mr Saver put his points across in a perfectly pleasant way. I don't know how many times I've had to suggest you play the ball not the man. Definition of adversarial tone?
Anyone who says something you disagree with?
|
|