• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Poll will trump face criminal charges

Simpletruther

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2019
Messages
19,730
Reaction score
3,733
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Specifically for incitement?


I'm going on record that there is not a snowballs chance in hexxl of him facing charges. There is literally zero evidence in the public domain anyway for charges.

Will you go on record here leftists with your crazy conspiracy theory of incitement?
 
I suspect he will be facing them in New York. I think that the AG there is just waiting for the impeachment trial to end. Tax Fraud is what gets a lot of criminals in the end and I think it will get Trump.
 
I suspect he will be facing them in New York. I think that the AG there is just waiting for the impeachment trial to end. Tax Fraud is what gets a lot of criminals in the end and I think it will get Trump.

Yeah maybe. It looks like they’re already looking into state charges against Bannon. Trump’s pardon will not extend to state charges against him.
 
I suspect he will be facing them in New York. I think that the AG there is just waiting for the impeachment trial to end. Tax Fraud is what gets a lot of criminals in the end and I think it will get Trump.
I said specifically incitment. He may get charges on something else sure.

No way for incitment. Guess why
 
I suspect he will be facing them in New York. I think that the AG there is just waiting for the impeachment trial to end. Tax Fraud is what gets a lot of criminals in the end and I think it will get Trump.

I don't know why he'd do that. It's not like you jump straight from indictment to trial. And there's always statutes of limitation to worry about.
 
Interesting even the crazy left fringe seems shy on this question.
 
No way, all of his crimes were only Dems' talking pts.

P.S. I am not trump supporter,
 
Incitement will not be a criminal charge. It is the underlying action djt took to violate his oath of office, and thus he was impeached. Without a doubt, djt will be facing criminal and civil courtroom appearances over the next several years.
 

Be charged? Possibly. Convicted? No.
 
I think he may be charged, but he won't be convicted. Which is another reason that impeachment is so important.

The standard for acceptable behavior of a president should not be "well they couldn't convict him of inciting a mob to attack our democracy, so it's fine." Even if he can't be convicted, his behavior was obviously dangerous considering the power and influence a president has. The precedent must be set for future presidents that such behavior will not be tolerated. And for those that are intentionally ignoring this behavior, let me remind you:

'We won this election, and we won it by a landslide'
'We will stop the steal'
'We will never give up. We will never concede. It doesn't happen'
'You’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.'
'If you don't fight like hell you're not going to have a country anymore'
'We are going to the Capitol'
- President Donald Trump, shortly before many of the people listening to him went to the capitol to fight like hell because they thought the election was stolen and their country was at risk. I'm sure that's just a coincidence though, and Trump had nothing to do with it.

Oh, and all this happened after a month of the President and his supporters attacking our democracy with violent rhetoric and lies. Obviously, such statements will make people angry and violent
 

The Hill reports, "Lawyers representing former President Trump on Tuesday detailed the defense they’ll lay out at next week’s impeachment trial, arguing that it is unconstitutional to impeach a former president and that Trump’s speech did not directly lead to the deadly siege on the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6.

"The defense brief argues that Trump’s speech before a group of supporters, some of whom later sacked the Capitol, was protected under the First Amendment. And it accuses Democrats of depriving Trump of due process by rushing impeachment through the House."

One has to seriously ask, is that a joke.

“The constitutional provision requires that a person actually hold office to be impeached,” Trump’s lawyers wrote.

That is a lie. It does not say that anywhere in the Constitution. The President is responsible for what he does from his first day in office to his last day in office. The President doesn't get a mulligan for what he does in January.

“It is denied he threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a coequal branch Government," the brief said.

Apparently, Trump's lawyers are unaware of what Trump said on Jan. 6.

“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them, because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

“When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules."

“We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

"Now it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we’re going to walk down, and I’ll be there with you. We are going to try — give our Republicans, the weak ones, because the strong ones don’t need any of our help, we’re try — going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.”
**************************************************************************************************************************President Donald J. Trump

After hours went by watching the mob he had incited attack our capitol Trump declared on video, "This was a fraudulent election but we can't play into the hands of these people. We have to have peace. We love you. You're very special. You see the way others are treated that are so bad and so evil but go home and go home in peace."

Senate Republicans will acquit Trump.

The American people will not.
 

For incitement? No. Incitement convictions are too difficult to attain, especially when the speaker punctuates the words "peacefully" into his diatribe.
 
I don't know why he'd do that. It's not like you jump straight from indictment to trial. And there's always statutes of limitation to worry about.
Intentional tax fraud doesn't really have a statute of limitations.
 


OR

They are aware that subjective readings of the same words result in different meanings.

Which do you think it is, dumb ass attorneys not knowing which way is up , or the subjective word theory?
 
There's a good possibility Trump may faces charges here in Georgia over election interference. The Atlanta AG along with our state AG are looking into it. Election interference is a felony here in Georgia. So time will tell whether or not one or both or none of the AG's brings charges.

 
Last edited:
ok but irrelevant to my thread.
 
Can you state a direct answer to the OP?
 
You will be shown wrong there is zero to base charges on.
 
Intentional tax fraud doesn't really have a statute of limitations.

Tax stuff is not my field, but that doesn't seem to be correct. There is no civil tax fraud SOL, but there are varying ones for criminal tax fraud.

General SOL:



Explanation:


“Tax fraud” is not a specific crime under the United States Criminal Code. Rather, there are a series of crimes, like deliberately underreporting income or claiming deductions to which you are not actually entitled, that are described under the umbrella term of tax fraud. Other tax crimes may be considered tax fraud or may not, depending on who you speak with. In any case, below, we list the statute of limitations for some of the most common tax fraud charges and other tax crimes.

Also:



NY State would have it's own statutes of limitation. Plus, I think they were also looking at bank fraud and other stuff, related to Trump org's over- and under- stating value of assets in different situation depending on how they'd benefit.

Broadly speaking there are statutes of limitations for criminal charges in America. Murder is a common exception.




At any rate, I don't see the impeachment as a reason for a DA to hold back. Get the indictment, lock the date in, and if there really is some kind of scheduling issue because of proceedings in the impeachment they can always be accommodated. It's not like the impeachment trial is going to take so long that prosecutors who started now would run into speedy trial problems.
 
 
You are correct, my post was not well written. I should have said, there is no limit on the amount of time that the IRS can audit if there is civil or criminal fraud found in your tax filings. Thanks, words have meaning.
'No Return or Fraudulent Return. What if you never file a return or file a fraudulent one? The IRS has no time limit if you never file a return or if it can prove civil or criminal fraud. If you file a return, can the IRS ever claim that your return didn’t count so that the statute of limitations never starts to run? The answer is “yes.” If you don’t sign your return, the IRS does not consider it a valid tax return. That means the three years can never start to run.'

IRS Can Audit for Three Years, Six, or Forever: Here’s How to Tell
It pays to be statute savvy. When it comes to your own taxes, you should sigh in relief if the IRS tries to audit you too late. In this area of the tax law, the rules for corporations, partnerships, nonprofit organizations, and individuals are consistent. Author Robert Wood tells you what you...
www.americanbar.org
.
 
ok but irrelevant to my thread.
Irrelevant in what way? You stated there was no way in Hades Trump would face charges. This proves that he might. There is that possibility. But if you choose to ignore what you stated, I guess that's fine. Have a nice day.
 
There is no evidence. None, zero, not a lick. But evidence doesn't mean a thing to democrats, they didn't have it for Collusion, Ukraine, GA SOS call, none of them. Just their wild accusations. Liars, all the time.
 
Irrelevant in what way? You stated there was no way in Hades Trump would face charges. This proves that he might. There is that possibility. But if you choose to ignore what you stated, I guess that's fine. Have a nice day.
I said specifically incitement, maybe you missed that. Sure he might get charged with something.
 
They are aware that subjective readings of the same words result in different meanings.

Really?

“When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules."

“We fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

Is there something in those words you don't understand?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…