• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trump's Conviction and the 6th Amendment.

Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Subduction Zone said:
Why? Why should there be a a not guilty verdict when all of the evidence points towards Trump's guilt. You are sounding like a creationist who complains that all of the evidence supports evolution.
Click to expand...
All it takes is to compare this with other cases with a long list of accusations, and see if it is typical of getting across the board verdicts.

It's not quite the way your putting it here.
 
Laniakea

Laniakea

Not of this world
Evangelicalhumanist said:
I am 100% convinced that if that jury unanimously decided on "not guilty," you wouldn't question it for a moment. The only suspect judgements are the ones you don't like, is that it?
Click to expand...

As if we wouldn't be hearing, "Trump just proved he's above the law!" if he had been found not guilty.
Oh, and of course you'd also be saying, "Not guilty doesn't mean innocent!"

Yep, we've heard all that garbage before. Nothing changes.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Laniakea said:
Now you are making the case that he was incompetent to stand trial.
Not a good look after you just got through laying out how you believe all the facts of the case fit together.
Click to expand...
No, mentally retard people are tried quite often. It takes a whole 'nother level of crazy to be declared "not guilt due to mental incapacity". Trump is bad, but not that bad.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Twilight Hue said:
All it takes is to compare this with other cases with a long list of accusations, and see if it is typical of getting across the board verdicts.

It's not quite the way your putting it here.
Click to expand...
How would you know if the evidence was as clear for Trump's guilt. You either did not follow the trial or only heard from extremely biased sources. Even Trump's own witness helped the prosecution and not Trump. It was a slam dunk. I was not the only one thinking that an irrational MAGA had gotten on to the jury, instead the jury went over every case point by point and voted "guilty" on all counts because Trump was guilty.

Can you think of any of the claims where Trump was possibly not guilty? You could help his appeal if that was the case.
 
Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Subduction Zone said:
How would you know if the evidence was as clear for Trump's guilt. You either did not follow the trial or only heard from extremely biased sources. Even Trump's own witness helped the prosecution and not Trump. It was a slam dunk. I was not the only one thinking that an irrational MAGA had gotten on to the jury, instead the jury went over every case point by point and voted "guilty" on all counts because Trump was guilty.

Can you think of any of the claims where Trump was possibly not guilty? You could help his appeal if that was the case.
Click to expand...
I wasn't present at the trial no more than you were.

All we get is our information from outside new sources, so that's why I say I'm going to be patient and wait to see what the Appellate Court says on the matter.
 
Laniakea

Laniakea

Not of this world
Twilight Hue said:
I wasn't present at the trial no more than you were.

All we get is our information from outside new sources, so that's why I say I'm going to be patient and wait to see what the Appellate Court says on the matter.
Click to expand...
When the verdict is overturned, the libs here will trot out their talking points. "Trump's SCOTUS" and all that. So predictable.
 
Evangelicalhumanist

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Laniakea said:
As if we wouldn't be hearing, "Trump just proved he's above the law!" if he had been found not guilty.
Oh, and of course you'd also be saying, "Not guilty doesn't mean innocent!"

Yep, we've heard all that garbage before. Nothing changes.
Click to expand...
You may think as you like, but I respect the jury system. Nothin of human design is perfect, nor can be, but as it's the best we've got, I abide by the decisions made by juries.
 
Pogo

Pogo

Well-Known Member
Twilight Hue said:
Maybe, but to not see a single not guilty found anywhere in such a long list is arguably red flag territory, that everyone speaking in unison and with one voice, doesn't come across as being atypical when compared to other cases with a considerably long list of levied charges against a defendant.
Click to expand...

And if we all agree that the sun will come up tomorrow, would that be evidence to you of a conspiracy?
 
Copernicus

Copernicus

Industrial Strength Linguist
Subduction Zone said:
New York State has different nomenclature than other states. It is not "weird" because in other states Merchan would have a title that matched the nomenclature used there. In my state he would be a District Court Judge. You should not let such a minor matter throw you. In New York State the "Court of Appeals" would be the equivalent of my states "State Supreme Court". Just different terms for the same jobs.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that. It's one of the many oddities that is unique about the legal system in New York. It's not that it threw me so much as the fact that most people outside of New York don't know that the "Court of Appeals" corresponds to the "Supreme Court" in most other states. Calling the Court of Appeals an "appellate court" therefore leaves people outside of New York with the impression that Trump can further delay proceedings with an appeal to the New York State Supreme Court.

Trump could still try to get his friends on the Supreme Court to help him, and I think they would jump at a chance to do that. So they will probably try to use some excuse to get it up there, just like they did manage to get the goofy "absolute immunity of Presidents" defense. That effectively sidelined Trump's criminal trial for federal election interference, because the Supreme Court has sat on a decision for so long that it will likely have to wait until after the election.

I'm not sure that Trump will need to do an end run around New York state via the Supreme Court, because he may not get any prison time at all for the felonies he was convicted of. My guess is that he is likely to get probation and some other restrictions or fines. So, if he wins, he will break another record--the first serving US president who is a convicted felon.
 
Kathryn

Kathryn

It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Pogo said:
Yeah, I can't remember all the verses without my Google memory enhancement, but why would you want a watch by your side?
Or was it possibly wore?[ QUOTE]

Like I said, ask the person who wrote the poem. I don't know - l learned it the way I stated it.
Click to expand...
 
Laniakea

Laniakea

Not of this world
Pogo said:
Yeah, I can't remember all the verses without my Google memory enhancement, but why would you want a watch by your side?
Or was it possibly wore?
Click to expand...

Here's the poem:
If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. If turnips were watches, I'd wear one by my side. If "ifs" and "ands" were pots and pans, There'd be no work for tinkers' hands.

There are also different versions: If wishes were horses, beggars would ride - Wikipedia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top