Trump Indicted. To be Arrested in Days.

[Secret Chief]

Faked image shown on foreign TV. Guess which country.

 

[Revoltingest]

Good. Then we are clear that when you said "No collusion was shown", you also mean, "nor was it shown it he didn't". Simply leaving it hanging there as was said, can easily be read as "he was cleared".

How can something not said be "easily read"?
The rest of that post is just spinning donuts on well trodden ground.

 

[Jose Fly]

Anyone ever before see conviction & prison from that?
And it pales in comparison to Clinton's aforementioned
crimes....& Obama's selling of pardons too.
Why is Trump the only one to be prosecuted?
Politics is the best explanation.

What th....? You really think Trump is the first politician to be charged with campaign finance crimes?

 

[Jose Fly]

What's unusual is that Presidents have traditionally
been above the law for such crimes. John Edwards
was never one of the big fish. The little people are
always subject to prosecution for such crimes &
even far far less.

What th....? John Edwards was among the leading Democratic candidates for President. His affair and cover up completely ruined his political career. Of course Trump doing the same thing has had the opposite effect among Republican voters, which doesn't speak well of the GOP base, does it?

 

[Revoltingest]

What th....? You really think Trump is the first politician to be charged with campaign finance crimes?

I speak of Presidents.
I've been trying to make it clear that they're above
underlings & lesser politicians. They've long had
impunity denied the rest of us. I want more than
just 1 President indicted, prosecuted, & imprisoned.
I keep failing to get that point across.
Perhaps this is due to apologists for Democratic
Presidents taking offense at including theirs?

 

[Revoltingest]

What th....? John Edwards was among the leading Democratic candidates for President. His affair and cover up completely ruined his political career. Of course Trump doing the same thing has had the opposite effect among Republican voters, which doesn't speak well of the GOP base, does it?

Many become candidates.
But not all become Presidents.
That last rare step is the one conferring impunity.
This is a most difficult concept to get across.

 

[Heyo]

An incestuous system it is.
High ranking officials ensure that only
subordinates fall on their sword.

How apt to use a medieval allegory for a medieval system. "Judged by a jury of peers" is why politicians usually not get indicted or convicted. "Jury of peers" means that only royalty can judge royalty. But Trump isn't royalty or at least not "old" royalty. And if he ever was, he is shunned now.

 

[fantome profane]

I want more than
just 1 President indicted, prosecuted, & imprisoned.

It has to start somewhere. This seems like a good place.

 

[Jose Fly]

I speak of Presidents.
I've been trying to make it clear that they're above
underlings & lesser politicians. They've long had
impunity denied the rest of us. I want more than
just 1 President indicted, prosecuted, & imprisoned.
I keep failing to get that point across.
Perhaps this is due to apologists for Democratic
Presidents taking offense at including theirs?

Oh I see what you're doing; it's the same thing I've seen you do for years. Whenever some damning news comes out about a Republican, you run interference by playing the "whataboutism" game.

 

[Revoltingest]

It has to start somewhere. This seems like a good place.

I agree.
Let's hope that Trump's conviction sends
an effective message to future Presidents.

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh I see what you're doing; it's the same thing I've seen you do for years. Whenever some damning news comes out about a Republican, you run interference by playing the "whataboutism" game.

And I see your trick...
You entirely ignore my calling for Trump
to be prosecuted for several severe crimes,
eg, insurrection, sedition, subversion.
To call for prosecuting Democrats to is
unacceptable to partisan apologists.
Your beloved Obama, Clinton, etc are
off limits.
And so you trot out your old tu quoque.

Your avatar really needs to calm down.

 

[Jose Fly]

And I see your trick...
You entirely ignore my calling for Trump
to be prosecuted for several severe crimes,
eg, insurrection, sedition, subversion.
To call for prosecuting Democrats to is
unacceptable to partisan apologists.
Your beloved Obama, Clinton, etc are
off limits.
And so you trot out your old tu quoque.

Your avatar really needs to calm down.

So then tell me, what exactly is your intent? Are you arguing that Trump shouldn't be indicted unless other former Presidents are first?

 

[Revoltingest]

So then tell me, what exactly is your intent?

If you'd read my posts, instead of just fulminating at them.....
- Indict Trump for crimes he committed.
- Indict other Presidents for crimes they committed.

 

[Jose Fly]

If you'd read my posts, instead of just fulminating at them.....
- Indict Trump for crimes he committed.
- Indict other Presidents for crimes they committed.

Are you expecting folks here to do that or something? Maybe instead of posting anonymously on an obscure religious message board to people who can't do anything to fulfill your wishes, you'd be more effective making your case to someone who can actually do something about it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Are you expecting folks here to do that or something?

No.
Do you oppose prosecuting Presidents other than Trump?

 

[F1fan]

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I guess it's kind of same logic of going after Al Capone. He was a criminal, murderer, and a menace to society - yet they couldn't pin anything on him except for tax evasion. It's like some kind of consolation prize, where they can't let him get away scot-free, and this would be better than nothing.

I seem to recall that Republicans thought Clinton was a threat to the nation and national security, although they couldn't really pin anything on him, so they also went for the consolation prize - and lost.

I have observed that perceptions of national security have gotten highly polarized, although it seems that bringing it up at all puts the public in a "nationalistic" frame of mind that might have some unintended consequences.

Great example of Capone being a known criminal but there being little evidence against him. It’s similar to anyone in the mob. That’s why RICO was established as a crime, and why there was talk about it being applied to Trump aids so they would testify.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It did happen. It is now a fact that a grand jury voted indict him.

That's not a conviction.

 

[Jose Fly]

No.

Then you're just kind of shouting into the wind to no avail, aren't you?

Do you oppose prosecuting Presidents other than Trump?

Nope.

I wonder if you appreciate though how, whether you realize it or not, your behavior in these threads follows the whataboutism/distract/run interference playbook almost perfectly. Maybe that isn't your intent, but you're following the script regardless.

Trump indicted​

​

You: What about Obama and Clinton?!?!?​

​

Repeat ad infinitum​

That is quite literally the whataboutism script.

 

[Revoltingest]

I want to see handcuffs.
Treat him like the rest of us.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Faked image shown on foreign TV. Guess which country.


View attachment 74064

We need Hillary in that scrum.