So don't prosecute former presidents...? Is that what you are saying? Being president is the monopoly get out of jail free card. Yeah that's a big no for me dawg.
Trump 2024 Run Thread
- Thread starter Polds4OSU
- Start date
What precedent are you even talking about?
Show me the legal precedent of NOT prosecuting former Presidents for crimes committed before taking office or while in office.
It doesn’t exist.
Candidates for office….hell, holders of office….have been charged and even convicted and jailed for crimes they committed. What is so special legally (since we are talking about precedence) about the single office of President that make him immune from facing justice?
Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
I’m starting to think you don’t even know what legal precedent is. Just because it hasn’t happened before doesn’t mean there is “hundreds of years of precedent”. There isn’t. He is the President….a public servant…bound by the same laws of those he serves. He’s not a king.
It has absolutely nothing…ZERO…ZIP…ZILCH…to do with not liking a candidate.
Like them, don’t like them, that’s completely irrelevant.
Reasonable suspicion to investigate.
Probable cause to charge.
Beyond a reasonable doubt to convict.
It’s the same standards FOR EVERYONE.
No matter who it is.
Why Trump?
Because Trump COMMITTED THE FRICKING CRIME.
Why now? Because he committed these crimes in 2016.
I cannot believe you are seriously arguing that a prior President or a candidate shouldn’t be prosecuted for crimes he or she committed while in office simply because they once held office.
Last edited:
Agree with the first 2 sentences... then you lost me. You go after criminals no matter who they are.
Tribalism is very much going to be our downfall... your cult is pushing that.
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
First of all I never said I supported Trump, I’m more libertarian actually. My point is the tribalism that you are feeding into is degrading our country. Your disdain for Trump (who hasn’t done anything more immoral or illegal than any other president) is clouding the impact this politically motivated legal pursuit of Trump is having on our country/judicial system.
Obama ordered the murder of innocent civilians in drone strikes. Should he be prosecuted? Bill Clinton paid hush money to a woman he had an affair with, and lied under oath about getting blow jobs in the Oval Office, should he be prosecuted? Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq with no weapons of mass destruction and thousands of civilians were killed, should he be prosecuted? Biden has knowingly sold his influence when he was VP (and bragged about it) should he be prosecuted?
Again, your disdain for Trump is clouding your eyes to the fact that the Democratic Party has broken a precedent that was there for a reason and now threatens the presidency for generations to come. This has the potential to spiral out of control for any president. Smacks of third world country judicial process. Doesn’t matter how bad you hate Trump it impacts past and future presidents. Will impact presidential decision making and, perhaps impact their decision making when working to protect the interests of our country.
Sad day, in the name of tribalism.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Obama ordered the murder of innocent civilians in drone strikes. Should he be prosecuted? Bill Clinton paid hush money to a woman he had an affair with, and lied under oath about getting blow jobs in the Oval Office, should he be prosecuted? Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq with no weapons of mass destruction and thousands of civilians were killed, should he be prosecuted? Biden has knowingly sold his influence when he was VP (and bragged about it) should he be prosecuted?
Again, your disdain for Trump is clouding your eyes to the fact that the Democratic Party has broken a precedent that was there for a reason and now threatens the presidency for generations to come. This has the potential to spiral out of control for any president. Smacks of third world country judicial process. Doesn’t matter how bad you hate Trump it impacts past and future presidents. Will impact presidential decision making and, perhaps impact their decision making when working to protect the interests of our country.
Sad day, in the name of tribalism.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
I’m in no cult. I never stated I was republican, which is what you assumed. Again, your tribalism impacting your decision making.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
What president has been convicted of a felony years after the fact? After the DOJ and SEC declined to prosecute said crime? And while they are running for office?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep….you don’t understand what legal precedent even means.
Yep…you’re a Magastani cultist just repeating the inane crap your twitterverse capos are putting out there.
Maybe….just maybe….Trumps blatant commission of crimes while in office are what is actually “unprecedented”. DOJ and SEC DON’T EVEN HAVE JURISDICTION TO PROSECUTE VIOLATIONS OF STATE LAW. Declined to prosecute, my arse.
Grifters gonna grift.
Marks gonna mark.
Cultists gonna cult.
NO MAN OR WOMAN IS ABOVE THE LAW.
COMMIT A CRIME. DO YOUR TIME.
GOD BLESS AMERICA.
Last edited:
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
Why the name calling? Why can’t we have a debate without it resulting in name calling? Another problem with our discourse today. We cannot disagree without resorting to name calling and cannot tolerate being questioned.
What about the fact the DOJ and SEC declined to prosecute “ these crimes” previously, but a local DA (who campaigned on this which proves political intent) decides to prosecute?
Again, name a president/former president that has been prosecuted years after the fact? Or while they are running for another term and are being prosecuted by the opposing party?
What about the former presidents I mentioned? Are they open game now?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
PF5
Ranger
ummmm, cuz he broke the law?!
You first…..
Name me a former President that committed crimes, but wasn’t prosecuted because they legally couldn’t be prosecuted.
Then explain to me what is so special about the office of President that makes it different than Congressmen….Cabinet members….or other public officials when it comes to immunity from prosecution.
You can’t.
DOJ and SEC DIDN’T decline to prosecute these violations of state law.
THEY DON’T HAVE JURISDICTION OR AUTHORITY TO PROSECUTE VIOLATIONS OF STATE LAW.
If former Presidents committed crimes and the statute of limitations hasn’t run….get after prosecuting them. If they committed crimes they should do the time. How hard a concept is that to understand.
I acknowledge your opinion, but I am under no compunction to respect it or act like I do. Your argument is one of the most fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic positions I’ve seen someone take. I’m calling that out as the drivel it is.
What happened to equal justice under the law?
I still believe in it. It’s real clear you don’t.
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
What law? The one the dems changed after the fact and then charged him with? Or the ones the DOJ and SEC declined to prosecute?
Why is it OK to prosecute this former president but not others? Do you really think future administrations (or their surrogates) prosecuting former presidents is a good idea? Forget it is Trump, how will it end for the country?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because you are clearly too dense to understand without me emphasizing very simple concepts and facts.
There is not a single, solitary even iota of factual truth to any part of these assertions you keep asserting.
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
The point is they have and they weren’t prosecuted because they understood the impact this would have on future presidents actions and the country. I listed a few presidents in a previous post.
One question for you, do you believe this prosecution was politically motivated?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
Continue with the insults. You are proving my initial point. Tribalism is killing our country. We can disagree and still be civil.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The point is “they have”….assumes facts not in evidence.
Politically motivated?
I do not.
Reasonable suspicion to investigate.
Probable cause to charge.
Beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of your peers to convict.
Now a question for you. I answered yours without dodging. Try to do the same.
Do you agree or disagree with the following proposition?
No man is or should be immune from the administration of justice for the crimes that he or she commits.
It has NOTHING to do with “tribalism”.
I’m not a Biden supporter. I’m not even a Democrat.
I just don’t suffer fools…or criminals….well.
SanditeCowboy
Ranger
And there it is. Not politically motivated, wow. Why has there never been a president/ former president charged? Why is it different with Trump? Why does he deserve it?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
