User Tag List

Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    444
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    444
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    *no longer NOT a Precedent.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,625
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Has Grandpa thrown his toys out the pram yet?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,639
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Most innocent man ever! So unfair.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Manhattan NY
    Posts
    1,629
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Can you do a thumbs up on a mug shot? Asking for a friend from Queens

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Meriden CT
    Posts
    1,663
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Remember; they couldn't nail Capone for his illegal activities; he was sent to jail for not paying taxes on his illegal gains.

    This indictment will be the avenue to expose all the other unsavory and illegal acts committed by you know who.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Khen-Tuck-ee, USA
    Posts
    2,289
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Quote Originally Posted by Mabouya View Post
    Most innocent man ever! So unfair.
    The man will do anything to get re-elected, including the perp walk.
    He has courage of the un-convicted.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    3,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Wasn't it Russia initially then classified documents most recently. I'm calling nothingburger .. this will fizzle out. Or if it doesn't it will get DJT's base out of their double wides and he'll win the election after which Dems will go full Masada.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    6,932
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    I like this development. History has shown us that the full range of characters, and lack of character, can be found in any office at any altitude. Accountability needs to apply to everyone. Sometimes what “the history books” will say is not enough.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Meriden CT
    Posts
    1,663
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Presume there's a trial rather than a plea deal.

    The catch will come when, during court testimony, something is revealed that uncovers other misdeeds.

    I wonder whether Michael Cohen will meet an "accidental" death before trial.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,617
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Grant did it first. Horse buggy speeding repeat offender.


    https://www.npr.org/2023/03/31/11673...ed-trump-grant

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,639
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    SO unfair !!!


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Northwest AZ
    Posts
    6,053
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    I'm waiting to see what the indictments say on Tuesday. I'm not sure what will be accomplished by a district attorney pursuing charges in a federal matter past the statute of limitations. The other cases pending against Trump have more meat. This seems like a distraction.
    Retired Sailor, Marine dad, semi-professional cyclist, fly fisherman, and Indian School STEM teacher.
    Assistant Operating Officer at Farm Soap homemade soaps. www.farmsoap.com

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    444
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Quote Originally Posted by AngryScientist View Post
    Grant did it first. Horse buggy speeding repeat offender.


    https://www.npr.org/2023/03/31/11673...ed-trump-grant
    Ah man, you ruined it. haha Good find!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Hillsdale NY
    Posts
    25,528
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    74 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Quote Originally Posted by vertical_doug View Post
    There is unfortunately there is zero chance of the current republican party doing anything about guns.

    The press is working overtime flooding the newscycle with misinformation and wild speculation.

    I think we can assume Bragg is not a dope, so the indictment will probably be less to do with Stormy and more to do with a pattern of activity. (Hence, David Pecker as a witness)

    If anything, I'm afraid this energizes the base in Wisconsin to come out for the Supreme Justice election on Tuesday. This has huge importance nationally when you look at what has been happening in Wisconsin.
    A lot of people working hard to make Israel politics look like a test drive.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Western MA
    Posts
    4,439
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    I am horrified by T Carlson advocating violence. For money. For ratings. Fomenting riot. Sowing the wind.
    Jay Dwight

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,836
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    So I prompted chatGPT to critique Alan Dershowitz response to Trump indictment from the War Room.

    Quote

    Sure, I can provide a legal analysis of the statements made by Alan Dershowitz regarding the indictment of Donald Trump.

    First, regarding Dershowitz's statement that the charges could be dismissed by any objective judge, it is important to note that this is a matter for the court to decide based on the evidence presented. While Dershowitz is entitled to his opinion, it is not accurate to suggest that the charges are so weak that they would be dismissed outright by any objective judge. The charges against Trump are serious and involve alleged violations of campaign finance laws and possible obstruction of justice.

    Second, Dershowitz suggests that the charges against Trump are minor and not worthy of prosecution, comparing them to actions taken by thousands of people every year. However, the fact that others may engage in similar conduct does not absolve Trump of potential criminal liability. The charges against him are based on specific actions he allegedly took to conceal payments to women who claimed to have had affairs with him, in violation of campaign finance laws. Moreover, the fact that other people may commit similar offenses does not diminish the seriousness of the alleged conduct.

    Third, Dershowitz suggests that Michael Cohen, the prosecution's key witness, is not a credible source of information. While it is true that Cohen has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, his cooperation with prosecutors could still be valuable in proving the charges against Trump. The court will consider the evidence presented by both sides, including any testimony from Cohen and other witnesses, in determining whether or not Trump is guilty of the charges against him.

    In summary, while Dershowitz is entitled to his opinion on the charges against Trump, it is important to remember that the case will ultimately be decided by the court based on the evidence presented. The charges against Trump are serious and involve alleged violations of campaign finance laws and possible obstruction of justice. The court will consider all the evidence presented, including any testimony from witnesses like Michael Cohen, in determining whether or not Trump is guilty of the charges against him.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Manhattan NY
    Posts
    1,629
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Third, Dershowitz suggests that Michael Cohen, the prosecution's key witness, is not a credible source of information. While it is true that Cohen has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress, his cooperation with prosecutors could still be valuable in proving the charges against Trump. The court will consider the evidence presented by both sides, including any testimony from Cohen and other witnesses, in determining whether or not Trump is guilty of the charges against him



    Trump picked Cohen , not Bragg. If only honest people could be fact witnesses we'd never take down mafia figures and all witnesses would be nuns and girl scouts. Only thing that matters is whether the grand jury believes Cohen is truthful now and whether his account is corroborated by other testimony and is supported by documentary evidence

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    921
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: There is no longer precedent for indicting a former US President!

    Trump reporting to court.

    (Sorry, I had to do it.)
    Attached Images Attached Images

Similar Threads

  1. Kanye for president
    By Chik in forum The OT
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-22-2020, 11:35 PM
  2. Kony for President 2012- The Worst
    By ZenNMotion in forum The OT
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-29-2012, 03:35 PM
  3. Mr. President
    By chasea in forum Reviews
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-18-2011, 08:39 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •