Trump found guilty on all 34 counts

[ozso]

Why would you come to that conclusion? Biden has said nothing about the trial as far as I know.

It has been Trump who has made that claim over and over again, even after the Guilty verdict. Why do you believe it?

I said the Biden campaign. As in those who are part of the campaign who issue statements.

What I believe isn't important. I'm not talking about myself. I'm talking about zillions of people and how this could come across to them as election interference. Especially if/when the Biden campaign and supporters milk it to no end.

 

[Stephen3141]

The curious thing about many Trump followers, is that they seem to
think that if they vote him into the presidency again, then THAT will
prove that he was innocent of the criminal felony charges.

This is a flawed argument.

Regardless of how many Americans vote that someone is guilty or
innocent of crimes, the determination of guilt or innocence is made
in due process, under our fair rule of law. The only opinions that
matter, are the final votes of the jury.

The idea that if Trump followers vote him into the presidency, then
Trump will be vindicated, is a mistaken view.

It is also a fallacious argument that all jurors have personal biases,
therefore there cannot be a fair rule of law. A fair rule of law is
based on sound definitions of crimes, a sound definition of what
relevant evidence is, and reasoning about this relevant evidence
as applied to a specific criminal charge. Personal biases, are not
involved in this process.

(That Trump could not come up with sound evidence that the 2020
election was stolen through fraud, and that Trump could not come up with
evidence that he had NOT committed fraud with regard to his campaign
finances, is a serious problem for Trump. That the prosecution had 20 witnesses
testifying about the matter of Trump being involved in fraud regarding
trying to deceive voters in the Stormy Daniels affair, is a real problem for
Trump. This is not a matter of personal biases. It's a matter of relevant
evidence, and the rule of law.)

---------- ----------

Also, the strange view by Trump that, if he wins (in a presidential vote,
or in a court of law), then the system works perfectly, but if he loses,
then the system is horrendously corrupt, is incoherent.

If Trump really believed this, then he would be running for president on
a platform of establishing a NEW rule of law in America, and a NEW
way of voting in America. But he isn't.
---------- ----------

Christians in America, and especially Republicans, should have ditched Trump
a couple years ago.

Reaching for more and more ridiculous conspiracy theories, in order to try to justify
the claims of Trump, is a disaster supported by mere gossip. Christians should not
be involved in this sort of conspiracy theory gossip.

 

[Pommer]

I said the Biden campaign. As in those who are part of the campaign who issue statements.

Okay. To what statement(s) by the Biden campaign (or members thereof) are you referring?

What I believe isn't important. I'm not talking about myself. I'm talking about zillions of people and how this could come across to them as election interference. Especially if/when the Biden campaign and supporters milk it to no end.

Ibid

 

[Landon Caeli]

I kind of wondered the same thing. What does this poster think should happen people like this? Should polarizing people just get away with crime? Are they just supposed to be immune? Seems like a good argument for everyone to just start treating everyone else like garbage so if they ever have to face charges they can plead "innocent by polarization" and walk.

I typically think it's bad practice to investigate people's lives looking for things that they can be charged for. By the logic on display here though, our cell phones ought to relay every stop sign we don't make complete stops for. Everything we do, and have done in the past must be accounted for until we are perfect within the law. Each and every one of us should be investigated for possible crimes from the past.

 

[Whyayeman]

I agree with everything here (#42). In a sane Republican Party these sentiments would be powerful enough to unseat him as candidate for office.

However, I think Republicans - Christian or not - knew enough about the man's character to have ditched him many years ago.

Christians in America, and especially Republicans, should have ditched Trump
a couple years ago.

There is still time to restore sanity to the Republican Party. Another candidate could be found, somebody untainted by by fealty to a convicted felon.

 

[Whyayeman]

I typically think it's bad practice to investigate people's lives looking for things that they can be charged for. By the logic on display here, our cell phones ought to relay every stop sign we don't make complete stops for. Everything we do must be accounted for until we are perfect within the law. Each and every one of us.

That is not what happened here. A legitimate investigation led to a conviction.

America is not a police state.

 

[Landon Caeli]

That is not what happened here. A legitimate investigation led to a conviction.

America is not a police state.

Make no mistake. That *is* what happened.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

I typically think it's bad practice to investigate people's lives looking for things that they can be charged for. By the logic on display here though, our cell phones ought to relay every stop sign we don't make complete stops for. Everything we do, and have done in the past must be accounted for until we are perfect within the law. Each and every one of us should be investigated for possible crimes from the past.

Do you, though?

 

[Landon Caeli]

Do you, though?

I do. I was originally against going after Hunter in the same way. This is a bad trend.

 

[ozso]

Okay. To what statement(s) by the Biden campaign (or members thereof) are you referring?

Ones in the news both current and likely forthcoming. Do need me to look it up for you?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/05/31/politics/biden-campaign-trump-verdict-strategy

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/biden-campaign-trump-guilty-verdict-00160820

Redirect Notice

https://www.axios.com/2024/05/30/trump-hush-money-verdict-biden-campaign

Pro-tip: Go to Google and type in "Biden campaign Trump verdict".

 

[dogs4thewin]

Do you believe he shouldn't have been put on trial for his crimes then?

that gets tough NOT because I feel that anyone is above the law, but because anyone like Trump would have a very tough time getting people who do not feel oe way or the other about him already. That is why when "regular Joes" get in trouble if it is a high profile case they will often have what is called a change of venue to another district ( county) where the case is less well known.

 

[KCfromNC]

Ones in the news both current and likely forthcoming.

A quick retreat from claims there are issued statements to ones are likely forthcoming. No surprise there.

Do need me to look it up for you?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/05/31/politics/biden-campaign-trump-verdict-strategy

Campaign aides, meanwhile, have been instructed to remain tight-lipped in response to reporters and on social media. ​

Which statements in this article (aside from the part where it talks about the campaign being tight-lipped about the subject) do you find problematic?

 

[ozso]

A quick retreat from claims there are issued statements to ones are likely forthcoming. No surprise there.

Campaign aides, meanwhile, have been instructed to remain tight-lipped in response to reporters and on social media. ​

Which statements in this article (aside from the part where it talks about the campaign being tight-lipped about the subject) do you find problematic?

It's kinda cute how some treat any opinion I have as some claim that must be backed up with extensive evidence. And then start spinning conspiracy theories about why I tend to ignore such nonsense.

If you look to my original statement, I was speaking past tense. As over the last several months preceding the verdict.

I think the biggest problem is the failure of some to follow along properly.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It's kinda cute how some treat any opinion I have as some claim that must be backed up with extensive evidence. And then start spinning conspiracy theories about why I tend to ignore such nonsense.

If you look to my original statement, I was speaking past tense. As over the last several months preceding the verdict.

I think the biggest problem is the failure of some to follow along properly.

oh baloney. You didn't merely state your opinion; you made a positive claim about a past event (i.e. that the Biden campaign has issued statements suggesting that the Trump trial was an attempt at election interference). When asked to expound on that, you, in post 50 got a bit huffy, expecting that the other person should just know what seems obvious to you, and then provided links that didn't, in any way, support your contention.

It's not others' fault that your memory is faulty and that you got out over your skis a bit.

 

[ozso]

oh baloney. You didn't merely state your opinion; you made a positive claim about a past event (i.e. that the Biden campaign has issued statements suggesting that the Trump trial was an attempt at election interference). When asked to expound on that, you, in post 50 got a bit huffy, expecting that the other person should just know what seems obvious to you, and then provided links that didn't, in any way, support your contention.

It's not others' fault that your memory is faulty and that you got out over your skis a bit.

I can't help it if I'm the only one who reads and watches the news, while others seem to have no idea of what I'm talking about regarding what's been in the news. Plus their affinity for misinterpretation.

 

[iluvatar5150]

I can't help it if I'm the only one who reads and watches the news

If you watch and read that much, you ought to be able to find a better source to support your contentions.

, while others seem to have no idea of what I'm talking about regarding what's been in the news.

Perhaps you misunderstood or misremembered what you saw.

Plus their affinity for misinterpretation.

You posted two articles that didn't support your claim and we're the ones who are misinterpreting things?

 

[ozso]

If you watch and read that much, you ought to be able to find a better source to support your contentions.




Perhaps you misunderstood or misremembered what you saw.



You posted two articles that didn't support your claim and we're the ones who are misinterpreting things?

I'm just going to completely ignore this nonsense from now on.

 

[Whyayeman]

Ones in the news both current and likely forthcoming. Do need me to look it up for you?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/05/31/politics/biden-campaign-trump-verdict-strategy

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/30/biden-campaign-trump-guilty-verdict-00160820

Redirect Notice

https://www.axios.com/2024/05/30/trump-hush-money-verdict-biden-campaign

Pro-tip: Go to Google and type in "Biden campaign Trump verdict".

There is a problem for you here. Your examples are not news; they are opinion.

Then, your last example has come after the verdict.

None of these examples support your claim that 'the Biden campaign' has been making capital out of the trials.

 

[rockytopva]

Politically motivated... Whatever happened to the idea of winning elections because you have the more ideal solutions to the issues?

 

[ozso]

There is a problem for you here. Your examples are not news; they are opinion.

Then, your last example has come after the verdict.

None of these examples support your claim that 'the Biden campaign' has been making capital out of the trials.

Like I said, I'm not playing this game anymore.