• 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!

Straining Credulity

shrug...

They can charge Jesus Christ for consorting with the Devil. Doesn't mean a thing unless they:

1. Prove that is a crime.

2. Prove that Jesus is guilty of committing it.

The same is true with this nonsense about Trump.

When was the last time a sitting President, was named in a DOJ document as having committed/complicit in 2 Felonies.
These are not dropped every day now are they?
Are they that common?
 
When was the last time a sitting President, was named in a DOJ document as having committed/complicit in 2 Felonies.
These are not dropped every day now are they?
Are they that common?

That just goes to show you how pathetically political portions of the executive branch has become.

Thanks Barack.
 
(Use ">>")


shrug...

You don't need to convince me. You'll need to convince a judge.

^
Note how profoundly stupid this intended rebuttal is.




His Lordship argues it isn't illegal. His Lordship does not have to convince a judge.

I point out that the judge will tell the jury the relevant campaign finance law and the jury will decide, further that thus his dishonest pretense that this isn't a question of campaign finance law is dishonest. Therefore I have to convince a judge of that, he says.

HAH..... hah?






:failpail:
 
That just goes to show you how pathetically political portions of the executive branch has become.

Thanks Barack.

A Republican is the head Honcho in SDNY, appointed by Trump, as a the Dep AG and the Acting AG.
Man your back must hurt
 
(Use ">>")




^
Note how profoundly stupid this intended rebuttal is.




His Lordship argues it isn't illegal. His Lordship does not have to convince a judge.

I point out that the judge will tell the jury the relevant campaign finance law and the jury will decide, further that thus his dishonest pretense that this isn't a question of campaign finance law is dishonest. Therefore I have to convince a judge of that, he says.

HAH..... hah?






:failpail:

Before it even gets to a jury, it's likely a judge will toss the DOJ out on its ear...and maybe punish them for wasting the court's time.
 
A Republican is the head Honcho in SDNY, appointed by Trump, as a the Dep AG and the Acting AG.
Man your back must hurt

Political corruption doesn't care about Party. Just ask the likes of Comey and McCabe.
 
Before it even gets to a jury, it's likely a judge will toss the DOJ out on its ear...and maybe punish them for wasting the court's time.

We both know that you don't know that at all. Hence the complete lack of cases and hence the complete lack of recognition that you understand we won't have the full relevant picture until the report comes out......or later, after trial...


PS: It is not in the least bit easy to dismiss an indictment. As in, it is the opposite of easy to dismiss an indictment.
 
Back
Top Bottom