Should Donald Trump be Sentenced to Jail for 34 Felonies?

[Pogo]

I've no class....in mind, that is.

Or no mind in class?

 

[Revoltingest]

Or no mind in class?

That too.

 

[Pogo]

Absolutely brilliant!

I blame it on the beer for getting through a whole post without getting little blue or red squiggles to confuse me.

 

[We Never Know]

So we will set him to hand counting ballots as one of three counters to determine whether there ever was evidence in one of the many wasted recounts that he inspired. Three because when doing this, you accept the majority count unless you can demonstrate fault.
Inconvenience to the Schutzstaffel is really an irrelevant consideration.

Let him do CS in DC. He could do janitorial detail in the white house.(wouldn't that be a kick in the butt)
SS detail, being in a protective environment, etc would all be covered and normal.

 

[Pogo]

I once was working on a steam engine at a Miami FL museum.
A kid was sentenced to community service for something.
He did some time at the museum.
He had to help me for an hour.
He was useless, so I spent the time training him, eg, safety.
I wouldn't want to train Trump.

And so the kid learned something which was ultimately the objective. Kudos

 

[We Never Know]

Oh my how the floods gates have opened!

Yet not one drop flowed from you. I just can't phathom that you couldn't think of any.

 

[Pogo]

Let him do CS in DC. He could do janitorial detail in the white house.(wouldn't that be a kick in the butt)
SS detail, being in a protective environment, etc would all be covered and normal.

Now you are getting it.
Of course this is predicated on his having a reason to be in the White House, I am not sure as a felon he would be eligible for such duty though exceptions might be made for persons not otherwise eligible for entrance.

 

[McBell]

Yet not one drop flowed from you. I just can't phathom that you couldn't think of any.

It was not my claim to support.

 

[We Never Know]

Now you are getting it.
Of course this is predicated on his having a reason to be in the White House, I am not sure as a felon he would be eligible for such duty though exceptions might be made for persons not otherwise eligible for entrance.

I've always got it. Too many here didn't get it.
Like it or not Trump isn't a normal citizen. Neither is Obama, Bush jr, Clinton, etc.
Different circumstances are involved when it comes to them but that doesn't mean any of them should be above the laws.

 

[We Never Know]

It was not my claim to support.

Lol.. Mine wasn't a claim. It was fact..

One thing you need to remember... Where ever you want him to go, the SS goes with him.

You however couldn't even figure out why that mattered.

Why should the SS even factor into sentencing?

 

[Pogo]

I've always got it. Too many here didn't get it.
Like it or not Trump isn't a normal citizen. Neither is Obama, Bush jr, Clinton, etc.
Different circumstances are involved when it comes to them but that doesn't mean any of them should be above the laws.

Yes and as he said, "if they can do this to me, they can do it to anyone" He may be an unusual case, but the law is not different for him than "anyone"

 

[Subduction Zone]

Jail for contempt of court would be appropriate especially considering the lack of value of monetary penalties, but as restitution for the 34 felonies, it would be unusual and I think inappropriate. Community service would remind him that he is not special but part of a community.

It would clearly be only part of his punishment. It would underscore the fact that Trump is not above the law.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes and as he said, "if they can do this to me, they can do it to anyone" He may be an unusual case, but the law is not different for him than "anyone"

Yep, anyone that runs for President, has affairs with a porn star and a nude model and them pays them off and tries to hide those payments can expect the same as Trump got. You have been warned!!

 

[Laniakea]

Relevance?

It related to what you said in your post.
Did you already forget again?

 

[Laniakea]

And what?

You tell me. You're the one pretending to make a point.
Did you forget again?

 

[McBell]

You tell me. You're the one pretending to make a point.
Did you forget again?

I was?
When did that happen?

Seems you think to highly of your polls.
Which is evidenced by your playing silly games to draw attention from it.

Great entertainment though.
Keep up the good work!

 

[Laniakea]

I was?
When did that happen?

Seems you think to highly of your polls.
Which is evidenced by your playing silly games to draw attention from it.

Great entertainment though.
Keep up the good work!

Thank you for giving me the attention you think I'm trying to draw from it.
Keep up the good work!

 

[F1fan]

The polls keep showing otherwise. The more the liberals tighten their grip, the more support for biden will slip through their fingers.

You have no argument to make so you have to rip off princess Leah. She was certainly more of a bad *** than you.

 

[Laniakea]

You have no argument to make so you have to rip off princess Leah. She was certainly more of a bad *** than you.

I don't need to argue. If I felt I owed it to you, I would. But this is simply entertaining to me.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You might wish to remember that voters don't always answer the same way in the polling booth that they do when answering pollsters.

Agreed. The polls are generally misleading in Trump's favor. The last several elections since the 2020 presidential elections failed to predict the results, which were Democratic victories. The polls misjudged the 2020 House outcome, expecting a red wave that never came.

I don't know why that is. Are people usually alone when surveyed or are their answers usually overheard by friends or family members? I know that will slant outcomes toward the Republicans. How many women in Republican households who will vote pro-choice will say so in front of a husband, for example.

And where are they done? At homes? In malls? If the latter, the poll will be biased in favor of affluence.

And the most alarming results will be pushed the hardest by the media to improve readership or viewership. Recently, several polls were fairly similar, but one outlier from the NY Times showing bigger leads for Trump was the one that hit the news the most. This citation (source) refers to a similar NYT poll from last November, but it's the same complaint:

"More sordid details are leaking out about that New York Times poll released over the weekend, and these details are alarming, to say the least. I want to focus on one particular article written by nwprogressive.org. In it, they point to the problems with this particular poll — starting with the samples of respondents.

Republicans appear to have been oversampled. To quote from the article: “Republican voters were oversampled in these polls.” NW Progressive says the word “oversampled” is nowhere to be found in the WRITEUP of the poll, but “if you open the actual dataset, look through it and read the endnotes,” you will see for yourself they ADMIT to this Republican oversampling.

NW Progessive writes that it is “irresponsible” of the New York Times not to have TOLD readers this immediately. “This is an important design choice and ought to be explained,” they write. Now, readers if you do venture into the dataset, you will find it — hidden away — likely not seen by the majority of readers."​

Whatever the explanation, it's probably an advantage to Democrats to falsely report Republican leads. Let the Republican voters feel complacent and the urgency for the Democrats be magnified.

Republicans are slightly more willing to call the trial unfair (86 percent) than call the verdict wrong (82 percent). Only 14 percent say the trial was fair, and 18 percent say the verdict was right.

Think about what those numbers say. 86% of Republicans thought the trial unfair but only 82% thought the verdict was wrong? That suggests that 4 out of a hundred (1 in 25) Republicans thought the trial was unfair but agreed with the guilty verdict. It just shows that these numbers shouldn't be trusted too much whether because of problems with methodology or with an electorate whose answers aren't reliable.