Trump 2024 ???

[LeftyGunner]

Edited for clarity

Lol...projection much?

Only one of us is arguing for any level of accountability at all...

You‘re the one twisting yourself in knots to get your sacred cows off the slaughterhouse floor, bug…I want to see the grinder turn.

 

[BugI02]

I notice you didn't offer to give up the Bidens

 

[LeftyGunner]

I notice you didn't offer to give up the Bidens

For **** sake…take them!

Edit: I really should have included Biden in that post, but I honestly forgot he even exists while I was typing it.

 

[Super Bee]

.

 

[Ingomike]

Why do you suspect that?

Has Hillary been indicted for anything? Obama? Bush?

You seem to be judging the sincerity of my position on a factual situation by comparing it to what you expect my position to be in a hypothetical situation.

You won’t get a peep from me in argument if Clinton, Obama, or Bush get indicted for their behavior in office. I actually want to see powerful people held accountable…not just the ones opposite the political divide from me.

Proof of blatant hypocrisy. Just will not admit we have a two tiered justice system, one for dems and RINO’s and one for anyone challenging the corruption in DC.

We did not get any significant indictments of corruption in the past, that is a fact, now you are all good with throwing the book at a political enemy.

 

[Magyars]

 

[LeftyGunner]

Proof of blatant hypocrisy.

You keep using that word…I don’t think it means what you think it means.

Just will not admit we have a two tiered justice system, one for dems and RINO’s and one for anyone challenging the corruption in DC.

You are correct, I will not admit that. The two-tiered system of your description is pure fantasy…a trumpist fever dream.

The factual two tiers of the criminal justice system fall on either side of one distinction: the defendants that can afford to hire their own attorneys, and those who cannot.

The system isn‘t rigged agsinst guys like Trump, it’s rigged for them…Trump is just too stupid to capitalize on his built-in advantage here.

No real surprise there…he is an imbecile, after all.

We did not get any significant indictments of corruption in the past, that is a fact, now you are all good with throwing the book at a political enemy.

You are absolutely right…the Trump administration should have done far more to address corruption in prior administrations, it was a definite failure on his part…another good reason not to vote for him again, he never had real control of the Federal apparatus…like you point out yourself here, he was a feckless and ineffectual manager at every level.

 

[LeftyGunner]

Alleged fraudulent electors scheme. There’s a lot more to it than, he’s guilty because it’s Trump. I don’t believe the legal theory holds water that Trump’s lawyer were pushing.

Alleged? Okay, if you say so…I’ll go with that for purposes of this discussion.

Lawyers can commit crimes too. In this case their “legal theory” itself was a crime, as was the conspiracy to formulate it…

…allegedly.

That doesn’t make it fraud.

I disagree…in fact, I think you are flat-out wrong on this point.

There is no legitimate mechanism for the selection and slating of ”alternate” electors…those electors are, by definition not alternate, but fraudulent.

They’ll need to prove that Trump knew he had lost legitimately, and then did this to try to stay in office.

That is a really weak position, I don’t see why they would need to do any such thing.

Ill use one of your previous examples here:

Finding money missing from my bank account does not give be the right to intimidate or force a teller at that bank into giving me the missing sum…that’s bank robbery whether I was owed the money by the bank or not.

Questions of election integrity, tampering, or fraud are for the judicial branch to address, not an excuse for unilateral executive action. He had four years to shore up election security and no one to blame but himself for failing to utilize this office to ensure that the election that was happening under his own administration was anything but secure and transparent.

I don’t buy for a second that Trump actually believes he won the 2020 election…I think it is far more likely that he started banging the “rigged election” drum months before any votes were cast precisely because he knew he wasn’t going to win and was desperate to stay in power.

If he really does believe the elections were rigged against him he needs to address it in court, not by fraudulent use of executive authority.

 

[LeftyGunner]

So Hillary should be charged for saying the 2016 election was stolen? I kinda think that falls within protected free speech.

No…Hillary has shown to act in bad faith in national elections, and should be barred from participating in them.

As far as charges go…she should be charged with witchcraft and have a surprise house dropped on her…but I don’t control such things.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

You are absolutely right…the Trump administration should have done far more to address corruption in prior administrations, it was a definite failure on his part…another good reason not to vote for him again, he never had real control of the Federal apparatus…like you point out yourself here, he was a feckless and ineffectual manager at every level.

When the people that supposedly worked for him say things like, "Well, Hillary didn't mean to break the law, so we're not going to charge her.", what is he supposed to do? It's clear who they were really working for.

 

[LeftyGunner]

When the people that supposedly worked for him say things like, "Well, Hillary didn't mean to break the law, so we're not going to charge her.", what is he supposed to do? It's clear who they were really working for.

Comey declined to file charges, so that means Hillary isn‘t protected under double jeopardy and it would have been perfectly appropriate for the Trump administration to review the Clinton investigation for undue political interference and, if appropriate, continue on a course toward criminal prosecution.

The fact that charges were never filed either means Trump lacked the political and managerial sophistication to properly motivate his own DOJ…or the case was just a double handful of ****, and no prosecuter was willing to put their law license on the line to shovel it.

Effective politicians and effective managers have the same talent: to get people to do what they ask whether they like that person or not.

Trump couldn’t get his own DOJ to follow through on one of their own investigations…that doesn’t sound like effective leadership to me.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Trump couldn’t get his own DOJ to follow through on one of their own investigations…that doesn’t sound like effective leadership to me.

It sounds like insubordination to me. And that's the problem... "one of their" investigations. Do you think Trump told them to protect Hilary and go easy on her? Because if so, that would be on Trump. I don't think that's what happened, do you?

 

[LeftyGunner]

It sounds like insubordination to me.

Yeah, I don’t disagree…Reagan fired the federal employees who defied him, what Did Trump do?

He became McConnel’s rubber-stamp bitch, that’s what.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Yeah, I don’t disagree…Reagan fired the federal employees who defied him, what Did Trump do?

He became McConnel’s rubber-stamp bitch, that’s what.

He sure got a lot done for just being McConnel's rubber-stamp bitch. It's unfortunate that the Congress didn't codify some of his EOs so that Biden couldn't have undone them on day one of his administration. I put that failure on the R's in Congress (both houses). He was a threat to their gravy train too.

 

[LeftyGunner]

He sure got a lot done for just being McConnel's rubber-stamp bitch. It's unfortunate that the Congress didn't codify some of his EOs so that Biden couldn't have undone them on day one of his administration. I put that failure on the R's in Congress (both houses). He was a threat to their gravy train too.

Solid point, I have to agree.

 

[foszoe]

Plot twist #3

Just waiting for the riot to show up

 

[KLB]

Comey declined to file charges, so that means Hillary isn‘t protected under double jeopardy and it would have been perfectly appropriate for the Trump administration to review the Clinton investigation for undue political interference and, if appropriate, continue on a course toward criminal prosecution.

It isn't the FBIs place to determine if charges should be filed. The Attorney General or one of the US attorneys make that call. That decision was pure circus, with the AG using Comey as an excuse to not look at charging Clinton.

 

[jamil]

Alleged? Okay, if you say so…I’ll go with that for purposes of this discussion.

Lawyers can commit crimes too. In this case their “legal theory” itself was a crime, as was the conspiracy to formulate it…

…allegedly.

What law was broken? While I think it was a stupid idea, and I'm pretty sure the courts would have upheld it, I don't think it was a crime. To prove it was fraud let's see what evidence they have in a fair trial, held in due time. The electors Trump tried to use were not the legitimate electors, in other words, the ones selected by the due process. That's not an issue of crime, that's a issue for courts to either uphold or not.

I disagree…in fact, I think you are flat-out wrong on this point.

There is no legitimate mechanism for the selection and slating of ”alternate” electors…those electors are, by definition not alternate, but fraudulent.

Again, that doesn't make it fraudulent. Fraud is criminal deception. Was it fraud when Democrats certified a different slate of electors from Hawaii? That wasn't exactly the same though. Nixon had won the election on the initial count, and they certified his electors. Democrats certified theirs too and sent theirs to DC. But, it's moot because Kennedy won the recount by 115 votes. And Hawaii wasn't a factor in the election anyway.

Anyway, whether it was criminal deception, that would need to be proven in court. Wanting it to be a crime so doesn't make it a crime.

That is a really weak position, I don’t see why they would need to do any such thing.

It depends which charges we're talking about. But anyway, let's see what we can do with your examples.

Ill use one of your previous examples here:

Finding money missing from my bank account does not give be the right to intimidate or force a teller at that bank into giving me the missing sum…that’s bank robbery whether I was owed the money by the bank or not.

I am not seeing a clear analog of the charges here that serves your point. I think since you think Trump committed fraud, you indeed would need to prove deceit. Fraud: An intentional deception or misrepresentation made by a person with the knowledge that the deception could result in some unauthorized benefit to himself or some other person.

So fraud is lying. To be fraud Trump would have to have believed he lost the election. If he thought he won the election then what the lawyers were telling him would make sense to him.

Questions of election integrity, tampering, or fraud are for the judicial branch to address, not an excuse for unilateral executive action. He had four years to shore up election security and no one to blame but himself for failing to utilize this office to ensure that the election that was happening under his own administration was anything but secure and transparent.

I don't disagree with any of that.

I don’t buy for a second that Trump actually believes he won the 2020 election…I think it is far more likely that he started banging the “rigged election” drum months before any votes were cast precisely because he knew he wasn’t going to win and was desperate to stay in power.

Skepticism is fine. But it's an opinion.

If he really does believe the elections were rigged against him he needs to address it in court, not by fraudulent use of executive authority.

Well, there you go again with that word. I don't think fraud means what you think it means.

 

[jamil]

No…Hillary has shown to act in bad faith in national elections, and should be barred from participating in them.

What she did, according to Comey's press conference, was indeed a crime. It wasn't fraud. And the law did not require intent. But nevertheless, she's too big to prosecute. And somehow Trump isn't. Which is why people believe there is a two-tier DoJ.

As far as charges go…she should be charged with witchcraft and have a surprise house dropped on her…but I don’t control such things.

I don't know about that. I'd just settle for applying blind justice evenly.

 

[Ingomike]

What law was broken?

That question was asked before he fails to give anything but leftist talking points.