Don’t blame democrats for Trump

[I_M4_AU 7,850]

41 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

I wasn't asking our court system. I was asking you.

I can’t publicallly call him a murder if the courts said he was not.  It would be an uneducated opinion.  What’s your point?

[Leftfield 2,604]

8 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I can’t publicallly call him a murder if the courts said he was not.  It would be an uneducated opinion.  What’s your point?

Certainly you can. You just won't. I will. I watched the trial and there was no doubt in my mind he did it, but the defense team, aided by the prosecution's blunder with the gloves, planted just enough doubt in the jurors' minds to not convict. It's difficult enough to find someone guilty of murder, knowing how their lives are going to be affected, and that much more when it's a celebrity that everyone loved up to that point, so planting a seed of doubt is not that difficult.

In general I trust our legal system, but mistakes are sometimes made. This was one of them.

Regardless of whether you believe OJ did it, the bar for criminal conviction is very high, and for good reason:  we don't want to send innocent people to jail. However, OJ was found liable for Nicole Simpson's and Ron Goldman's deaths in civil court, where the bar is lower. Technically that's not murder, but it's a distinction without a difference.

Which brings us to Trump. The prosecutors have a choice: 1) bring an Insurrection charge, which carries complications and technical difficulties in court for a number of reasons, to make a political point, or 2) bring charges that are effectively the same, but have a greater chance of conviction. The downside being that, even if he's found guilty, Trump defenders can say he technically wasn't guilty of insurrection - which would be as useful as sitting in the snow next to your tent and warming yourself by the fire you started with the wood from your house.

So, feel free to say it wasn't an insurrection since the charge wasn't brought, and instead say it was conspiracy and obstruction. It's a distinction without a difference.

[CoffeeTiger 5,111]

30 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

I can’t publicallly call him a murder if the courts said he was not.  It would be an uneducated opinion.  What’s your point?

If you want to get technical here, being found 'not guilty' by the courts is not the same thing as the courts saying you didn't do the crime. 

'not guilty' means the prosecution didn't prove that you did it beyond a reasonable doubt, and that you cant be held accountable by the government for the alleged crime, not that the court is declaring that you absolutely did not do the crime. 

 

OJ was also found liable for the death by a jury in a civil trial. 

[I_M4_AU 7,850]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

In general I trust our legal system, but mistakes are sometimes made. This was one of them.

You miss a lot of nuance in this trail.  The venue was in LA and just 3 years earlier the Rodney King riot happened in that venue.  Whether mistakes were made by the prosecution or not they were not going to convict. All the jury needed was one thing to hang their hat on and that happened to be the gloves. 

This is the same thing Jack Smith is going after in his Jan 6th case in DC.  No matter what evidence is presented the verdict is already in.  Interesting that only 3 years separate each trial.

Would you convict Obama for the 5 police officers killed in DFW after what he said about Ferguson and BLM?  Would you convict Sanders after the DC baseball game when one of his supporters shot up the place?  Inciting language is not easily defined or prosecuted.

Here is Michael Brown’s stepfather pleading the protesters to burn Ferguson down after the grand jury acquitted the cops:

You don’t get better evidence than this and as you know he was not arrested for inciting a riot.

The bottom line is Trump didn’t incite the protest that turned into a riot on Jan 6th as there is no real evidence of this.  If Michael Brown’s stepfather was not charged why should Trump be?  Will Trump be convicted?  You bet.  Will the trail be before Election Day? Who knows?  If it is up to Smith, it will be, but the right to a speedy trail is for the defendant, not the prosecution.

This is what the Dems what badly, but it doesn’t mean justice is served.

 

[I_M4_AU 7,850]

2 hours ago, CoffeeTiger said:

If you want to get technical here, being found 'not guilty' by the courts is not the same thing as the courts saying you didn't do the crime. 

'not guilty' means the prosecution didn't prove that you did it beyond a reasonable doubt, and that you cant be held accountable by the government for the alleged crime, not that the court is declaring that you absolutely did not do the crime. 

 

OJ was also found liable for the death by a jury in a civil trial. 

No shock.  And as you know the liable case has a lot lower bar for conviction and doesn’t require a unanimous decision by the jury.

Trump was acquitted of rape in the E Jean Carroll case, but was still liable.

[CoffeeTiger 5,111]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

No shock.  And as you know the liable case has a lot lower bar for conviction and doesn’t require a unanimous decision by the jury.

 

True, but in the OJ Civil trial the jury decision holding him liable was still unanimous even if it didn't have to be. 

There was also some additional evidence presented against OJ that was allowed in the civil trial that wasn't presented or didn't exist for the criminal one. 

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Trump was acquitted of rape in the E Jean Carroll case, but was still liable.

The jury didn't find Trump raped her, but they did find that Trump sexually abused Carroll and held Trump liable for that,. 

[cole256 17,084]

3 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

No shock.  And as you know the liable case has a lot lower bar for conviction and doesn’t require a unanimous decision by the jury.

Trump was acquitted of rape in the E Jean Carroll case, but was still liable.

Lol

[Leftfield 2,604]

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

You miss a lot of nuance in this trail.  The venue was in LA and just 3 years earlier the Rodney King riot happened in that venue.  Whether mistakes were made by the prosecution or not they were not going to convict. All the jury needed was one thing to hang their hat on and that happened to be the gloves. 

Well, apparently you also think our court system makes mistakes.

I understand the circumstances of the trial, but your point makes no difference. For whatever reason, he was found not guilty. What's funny is that you feel free to opine on why he was found not guilty, but won't say whether you think he is. You say you can't make an educated guess as to whether or not he's guilty, yet you're certain of the mindsets of those in the jury.

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

This is the same thing Jack Smith is going after in his Jan 6th case in DC.  No matter what evidence is presented the verdict is already in. 

If the verdict is already in, why would Jack Smith have to "go after" anything? I don't even understand what you're referring to him going after. 

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

 Interesting that only 3 years separate each trial.

Don't understand what you're saying here.

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Would you convict Obama for the 5 police officers killed in DFW after what he said about Ferguson and BLM?

First I've ever heard anyone suggest Obama incited a riot. What comments are you referring to? Didn't Ferguson happen two years before the Dallas murders?

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

 Would you convict Sanders after the DC baseball game when one of his supporters shot up the place? 

Are you saying that Sanders said something that incited the shooter to action? What did he say?

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Here is Michael Brown’s stepfather pleading the protesters to burn Ferguson down after the grand jury acquitted the cops:

You don’t get better evidence than this and as you know he was not arrested for inciting a riot.

Ok? Is your point that because he wasn't charged, Trump shouldn't either? Two wrongs make a right?

There's also another distinct difference - the family's lawyer and others immediately condemned it, and Louis Head later apologized for it. Trump has yet to apologize for anything. 

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

The bottom line is Trump didn’t incite the protest that turned into a riot on Jan 6th as there is no real evidence of this. 

Except there is, but I know I'm not going to convince you of that, so we'll agree to disagree.

 

8 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

This is what the Dems what badly, but it doesn’t mean justice is served.

You asked me earlier if I believe in our court system. I guess we know where you stand.

And by the way, it's not just Democrats. 

 

 

Edited January 26 by Leftfield

[Leftfield 2,604]

On 1/24/2024 at 9:07 AM, PUB78 said:

Their support and endorsement of homosexuals, SSM and the transgender movement. Not to mention their  full support of abortion on demand.

PUB, you really are an enigma. There are times you'll show up with a good take and seem quite reasonable. Then there are times you jump in and say something frothing-mouth bonkers like this.

[AU9377 4,948]

On 1/24/2024 at 12:24 PM, AUFAN78 said:

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and others on who exactly in Washington gives a damn about America?

It isn't as simple as that.  I believe that most elected representatives give a damn about America.  The problem begins with special interest influence in campaign financing and that same problem seeps into every fabric of government.

[I_M4_AU 7,850]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

If the verdict is already in, why would Jack Smith have to "go after" anything? I don't even understand what you're referring to him going after. 

Seriously?  It’s all about the show.  It has to look like a fair trial.

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

Ok? Is your point that because he wasn't charged, Trump shouldn't either? Two wrongs make a right?

No, just apply the law equally.

[AUFAN78 3,910]

1 minute ago, AU9377 said:

It isn't as simple as that.  I believe that most elected representatives give a damn about America.  The problem begins with special interest influence in campaign financing and that same problem seeps into every fabric of government.

I should have stated Americans, as in all Americans. Presumably, the answer should remain the same, but I'm doubtful. Sadly.

Mostly agree with your last statement, but somewhere in there hate and resentment have a home. 

[CoffeeTiger 5,111]

1 hour ago, Leftfield said:

PUB, you really are an enigma. There are times you'll show up with a good take and seem quite reasonable. Then there are times you jump in and say something frothing-mouth bonkers like this.

PUB isn’t just his username, it’s also the place from where most of his posts originate from. 

[Leftfield 2,604]

10 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

No, just apply the law equally.

I perfectly understand the frustration when the law isn't applied equally. I do feel Louis Head should have been disciplined in some form, but I also don't know all the circumstances of the situation. I will freely admit that he might not have been charged because they felt it may have stoked additional anger in the situation, but it's also possible that the rioting broke out independent of what he said.

With that in mind, the Ferguson rioting may very well have happened without Louis Head. January 6 does not happen without Donald Trump.

[I_M4_AU 7,850]

49 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

With that in mind, the Ferguson rioting may very well have happened without Louis Head. January 6 does not happen without Donald Trump.

The protest was due to Donald Trump, the ensuing riot was not.

[Leftfield 2,604]

7 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

The protest was due to Donald Trump, the ensuing riot was not.

[PUB78 1,358]

On 1/24/2024 at 11:00 AM, AuCivilEng1 said:

Arguing about abortion is a waste of your time. He supports abortion like the “demons” do. It took me 10 mins of discussion to get him to admit that he supports abortion. 
 

So pub78 is pro choice. We have that in common.

I don’t think so. 

[PUB78 1,358]

On 1/25/2024 at 8:08 PM, Leftfield said:

PUB, you really are an enigma. There are times you'll show up with a good take and seem quite reasonable. Then there are times you jump in and say something frothing-mouth bonkers like this.

How’s that Lefty?

[Leftfield 2,604]

13 hours ago, PUB78 said:

How’s that Lefty?

Calling someone demonic for supporting gay and transgender people might just be a weeeeee bit extreme.