NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 13 minutes ago, homersapien said: Man, you are a trip. "highlight the prematurity of inferences" ??? What "inferences"? It's ******* evidence. The legal system only cares about admissible evidence, which will be ruled on if the suit proceeds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 12 minutes ago, homersapien said: This discussion is not about process - or at least it wasn't until you tried to make it so. It's about hard facts that have been publicly revealed. This discussion is about a petition that was filed, and what it contains. It's part of a legal proceeding. You butted into it. It started with me directing a question to someone else. Do not start labeling me or I will cite the rules of the sacred forum :). Keep it civil or do not engage me. 13 minutes ago, homersapien said: If the facts aren't on your side, argue the law. That's exactly what you are doing. Wrong. The law sets out the ultimate facts that make a difference in the outcome of the case. The law will come from the judge in most instances. The primary focus of legal proceedings is to determine the facts, all of which we don't have at this moment. The law establishes the rule and the case depends on how the facts relate to the rule. The facts must be in full. 16 minutes ago, homersapien said: And doing so in context of this forum discussion borders on a weaseling. Again, if you cannot address me in a civil manner, please refrain from addressing me at all. If you would like to act like a grown-up, then we can proceed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 14 minutes ago, homersapien said: But you are implying that evidence of wrongdoing is meaningless until it's been admitted in a court of law In this context, it is meaningless for the prosecuting attorney if it is not admitted. 16 minutes ago, homersapien said: one can assume that you feel Hillary is absolutely innocent since she was never even indicted No, they can't because I am not expressing an opinion about anyone. It's the rule of law. One can "assume" that if a claim was filed against Hillary, my position would be the same. Your assumption is much more tenuous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said: The legal system only cares about admissible evidence, which will be ruled on if the suit proceeds. I understand that. So what? Like I said, no one on here is trying to litigate the trial, well except you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said: In this context, it is meaningless for the prosecuting attorney if it is not admitted. No, they can't because I am not expressing an opinion about anyone. It's the rule of law. One can "assume" that if a claim was filed against Hillary, my position would be the same. Your assumption is much more tenuous. So do you feel Hillary is innocent or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said: The legal system only cares about admissible evidence, which will be ruled on if the suit proceeds. Well, since we don't know if it's admissible is it OK for us to speculate on the significance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 16 minutes ago, homersapien said: I understand that. So what? Like I said, no one on here is trying to litigate the trial, well except you. My point is quite clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 15 minutes ago, homersapien said: So do you feel Hillary is innocent or not? What crime was she formally alleged of? I’m happy to answer your question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 12 minutes ago, homersapien said: Well, since we don't know if it's admissible is it OK for us to speculate on the significance? Sure. Speculate. But at least be open to the possibility that other happenings can have significant impact. We haven’t heard the others side’s response and really don’t know what the process might surface. I should’ve chosen some of my wording more carefully. Maybe no one has made an explicit conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 6 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said: Sure. Speculate. But at least be open to the possibility that other happenings can have significant impact. We haven’t heard the others side’s response and really don’t know what the process might surface. I should’ve chosen some of my wording more carefully. Maybe no one has made an explicit conclusion. I am always open to the idea that legal guilt depends on the outcome of a trial. I remember OJ Simpson's trial (for example). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 Hey dub, it's OK for us to speculate - no need to delete the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 2 minutes ago, homersapien said: I am always open to the idea that legal guilt depends on the outcome of a trial. I remember OJ Simpson's trial (for example). But is the logic here “he did it, even if he’s not legally culpable?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 15, 2018 Share Posted June 15, 2018 4 minutes ago, homersapien said: Hey dub, it's OK for us to speculate - no need to delete the thread. Yes. I will allow the thread to stand lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 8 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said: But is the logic here “he did it, even if he’s not legally culpable?” That's certainly my thinking. As I am sure you know, juries can be capricious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,393 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 35 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said: What crime was she formally alleged of? I’m happy to answer your question. Not as far as I know. I am referring to the "speculation" (a huge understatement) by the 'great unwashed' - not to mention our current president. Treason is a fairly common one. Or at least criminal negligence. "Lock her up, lock her up..." Remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 19 minutes ago, homersapien said: That's certainly my thinking. As I am sure you know, juries can be capricious. I think this would be a bench trial though. But they certainly can. Again, If this goes to trial I highly doubt, based off of what prosecution seeks, it will be in front of a jury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 16 minutes ago, homersapien said: Not as far as I know. I am referring to the "speculation" (a huge understatement) by the 'great unwashed' - not to mention our current president. Treason is a fairly common one. Or at least criminal negligence. "Lock her up, lock her up..." Remember? I’m specifically speaking to formal allegations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
augolf1716 21,221 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 Trump is going down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 1 hour ago, augolf1716 said: Trump is going down Is he stopping by Winter Park on the way to West Palm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexava 6,973 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 11 hours ago, augolf1716 said: Trump is going down On who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
creed 1,641 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 20 hours ago, homersapien said: More irony. We shouldn't even discuss this because it hasn't yet passed an evidentiary ruling in a court of law. Yeah right, that's how politics - and political forums - work. Let me summarize. Republican... "All Democratic politicians are crooks and should be locked up". Democrat... "All Republican politicians are crooks and should be locked up". Is that about right? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
augolf1716 21,221 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 1 hour ago, alexava said: On who? So much I could say but then I would have to ban myself..... but that did make me laugh alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 This thread is getting gay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
augolf1716 21,221 Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 Actually it more like XXX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFAN78 3,911 Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 12 hours ago, creed said: Let me summarize. Republican... "All Democratic politicians are crooks and should be locked up". Democrat... "All Republican politicians are crooks and should be locked up". Is that about right? ? Yes. Facts be damned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.