Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
A smaller segment did riot, which I already stated.It was a riot. Did you not see the film?
It was wild.
That has not happened. What man is "on trial" for his son's crimes? The son has been charged only, not convicted. The father hasn't been charged at all (assuming you mean Biden here). Be accurate.Most politicans abuse their power but why put a man on trial for his son's crimes? Especially if that son has not yet been found gulty of a crime
That's the poster to whom I referred actually. Perhaps he supports Trump. I don't know.Unfortunately, that's Trump's republican party.
I was given someone's opinion and yours now as well. I asked for a legitimate source. No one should be posting anything without sourcing it. It could be anyone and posted by anyone, or even an AI image as have been floating around.You were told what that is. That green flag is from a neo-nazi movement (groypers/kekistan). The location is the US Capitol. There is no other time it could have been, but you could try a reverse image search if you don't trust the sourcing.
That seems to be all they have. Apparently, the House Republicans wanted Hunter to testify in secret, while he wanted the testimony to be public. And it's clear why. The last time they did that, their story fell apart as their "star witness" testified that he never saw the Bidens even discuss anything of substance.
After that fiasco, it's not surprising that they want the hearing closed so that they can cover it up, if another such embarrassment develops.
"Well, the president isn't a crook, but we think his son might be. That's all we need! Impeach him!"
The same crime is frequently charged with several different counts even though it is once incident. A lot of laypeople do not understand how this works. For example, a guy and his girlfriend can get into a fight and the police called. Instead of the expected charge or two, 10+ charges can be leveled, in hopes of getting him with something, or at least having lesser charges to drop in order to get a plea deal.A person can commit several similar crimes and if they do they should be charged for each and every crime.
Otherwise if you are going mug one person then you might as well mug 10 people, or perhaps 50 people. If you are only going to be charged for one crime, then it gives you free license to do many similar crimes?
But of course a sensible justice system will charge people for every crime.
I may be mistaken but I was under the impression that "they" are attempting to proceed with impeachment hearings based on his association with his son's alleged crimes.That has not happened. What man is "on trial" for his son's crimes? The son has been charged only, not convicted. The father hasn't been charged at all (assuming you mean Biden here). Be accurate.
That is entirely different If one mugs 10 people, or 50, there are 10 or 50 victims.A person can commit several similar crimes and if they do they should be charged for each and every crime.
Otherwise if you are going mug one person then you might as well mug 10 people, or perhaps 50 people. If you are only going to be charged for one crime, then it gives you free license to do many similar crimes?
But of course a sensible justice system will charge people for every crime.
You are mistaken. There is a lot in the Congressional record if you care to enlighten yourself.I may be mistaken but I was under the impression that "they" are attempting to proceed with impeachment hearings based on his association with his son's alleged crimes.
It's not opinion. It's an image. Is AI the excuse we're going to use to refuse to consider apparent facts in image form now?I was given someone's opinion and yours now as well. I asked for a legitimate source. No one should be posting anything without sourcing it. It could be anyone and posted by anyone, or even an AI image as have been floating around.
I didn't post it, but I did recognize it.I am not doing the work for others. You post something; you defend it if challenged. Or it didn't happen and it should be removed as fake.
It's really not hard to understand; each time one breaks the law,it's a separate crime, for which one may be tried and punished.That is entirely different If one mugs 10 people, or 50, there are 10 or 50 victims.
Why not show us those? If you make the claim, it's up to you to support it. If you don't then don't be surprised if people assume the claim is false.You are mistaken. There is a lot in the Congressional record if you care to enlighten yourself.
Show us where they did that to Trump. You do realize that the same act may violate more than one law, do you not? And there's no "twofer" clause in the law; you can be charged for each crime. Let's see what you have.The same crime is frequently charged with several different counts even though it is once incident.
And if he had simply returned them when asked, he wouldn't have been charged. He got caught hiding them, and lying to the authorities about it.For example, Trump had documents at Mar-a-lago, like virtually every other President and Vice President, who ends up with some documents, or believes they are his personal property - or someone else packs them.
Yes. If you steal more than one thing, you can be charged for each theft. No twofers, remember?Jack Smith went crazy with the charges: Example: "Trump is accused of violating nine federal laws but faces 40 separate charges. Each classified document he is accused of holding on to illegally has led to a separate count.
If two criminals are involved in the crime, they can both be charged. No twofers there, either.Longtime Trump valet Walt Nauta faces eight charges, seven of which are also lodged against Trump.
Yes. Each theft is a separate crime. The more stuff one steals, the more charges.Trump is accused of violating nine federal laws but faces 40 separate charges. Each classified document he is accused of holding on to illegally has led to a separate count.
Unsupported claims are valid, though, as a “debate tool”.Why not show us those? If you make the claim, it's up to you to support it. If you don't then don't be surprised if people assume the claim is false.
Lemme get this straight, you’re more concerned that President Trump has been charged with multiple counts of (alleged) crimes, rather than the fact that he (allegedly), knew that what he was doing was illegal and kept doing it?Trump is accused of violating nine federal laws but faces 40 separate charges. Each classified document he is accused of holding on to illegally has led to a separate count. In addition, his alleged efforts to hide classified information from federal investigators is charged in several ways. Longtime Trump valet Walt Nauta faces eight charges, seven of which are also lodged against Trump. And Carlos De Oliveira — the second Trump employee charged in the case — faces four charges related to his alleged involvement in efforts to keep classified government materials from federal investigators."
Lets say they mug the same person 50 times, over the space of a year?That is entirely different If one mugs 10 people, or 50, there are 10 or 50 victims.
Most of us know the real story here although others keep harping on about the mere fact of just having the documents.For example, Trump had documents at Mar-a-lago, like virtually every other President and Vice President, who ends up with some documents, or believes they are his personal property - or someone else packs them.
It feels to me that each document is an offence in its own right. It feels that Trump should be charged for each document, for each lie, for each concealment.Jack Smith went crazy with the charges: Example: "Trump is accused of violating nine federal laws but faces 40 separate charges. Each classified document he is accused of holding on to illegally has led to a separate count.
The same crime is frequently charged with several different counts even though it is once incident.
Jack Smith went crazy with the charges: Example: "Trump is accused of violating nine federal laws but faces 40 separate charges. Each classified document he is accused of holding on to illegally has led to a separate count.
Maybe you can enlighten me. Otherwise, feel free to go with the Conservative Party line like most Rightwingers do. That's your right if you are on the Right. However, is there any legitimate evidence to support toting the party line tjat is sexist, racisy, and homophobic? Doobt otYou are mistaken. There is a lot in the Congressional record if you care to enlighten yourself.
The same crime is frequently charged with several different counts even though it is once incident.
I was unaware that people didn't know that was a neo-nazi group. But since it's been documented to you, now you know. Did you think Antifa was going to assault the Capitol to overthrow the election and install Trump as Caudillo or whatever he had in mind?I was given someone's opinion and yours now as well. I asked for a legitimate source. No one should be posting anything without sourcing it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?