Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

List of Trump's crimes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
    If there is a defence that an act that might superficially look like a criminal act, but is not, then obviously, that act is not a criminal act. I am referring to real criminal acts.

    We have had this discussion before; that once a suspect is charged and gets to court he is entitled to a fair trial, which means that the prosecutor has to prove his case to a defined standard, and importantly, that the accused does not have to prove his innocence. The shorthand for this is innocent until proven guilty. It applies only to an accused person on trial.
    we will never know if there is a defense Adam Schiff refuses to let hte defense bring any witnesses. Again what is Adam Schiff trying to hide hmm?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by RumTumTugger View Post
      No it will only show what a sham this impeachment is since Adam Schiff refuses to let the defense bring out any of it's witnesses. which brings out hte questions what is Adam Schiff will be found out by the American people?
      I think in this next phase, defense witnesses are allowed. If there is to be an impeachment vote, I hear it is likely to happen before the Christmas break. I think they have decided that Nunes is too stupid to ask any more questions.
      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
      “not all there” - you know who you are

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
        I think you are missing the point.
        And I think you are.

        Crime is a matter of law, not justice.
        I think that's rather simplistic. But, using your definition, only the law can determine the guilt, therefore, the "criminal" status.

        Murder is a crime not because a jury thinks so, but because the Law says so.
        Killing is not necessarily murder - that's what the law will decide. Some killing is justifiable.

        A murderer might conceivably be insensible to his crime and have no witnesses or evidence against him; no one but God calls him criminal.
        God would call him a sinner.

        A criminal who leaves court not convicted and “without a stain on his character” is still a criminal.
        If he was falsely accused, or otherwise justified in the killing, he was never a criminal to begin with.

        This is not a contradiction, but a description of a state of knowledge. It stems from the fact that people tell lies.
        Again, you're making this FAR too simple. Crimes come with definitions, which often have a number of requirements that have to be met in order for the offense to be considered a crime.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #49
          ff, let's cut to the chase.

          I would agree that somebody who actually committed an actual crime, meeting all the elements of the statute which defines the crime, is, for all intents and purposes, a criminal whether found guilty in a court of law or not.

          HOWEVER, there is no way for you to know who is and who is not a criminal apart from that person having been tried and found guilty of the offense for which he is charged.

          Are we there, yet?
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            And I think you are.



            I think that's rather simplistic. But, using your definition, only the law can determine the guilt, therefore, the "criminal" status.



            Killing is not necessarily murder - that's what the law will decide. Some killing is justifiable.



            God would call him a sinner.



            If he was falsely accused, or otherwise justified in the killing, he was never a criminal to begin with.



            Again, you're making this FAR too simple. Crimes come with definitions, which often have a number of requirements that have to be met in order for the offense to be considered a crime.
            By ‘criminal’ I mean a person who satisfies all the possible criteria relevant to criminality in his case. It is intentionally simple for the purpose of explaining what a criminal is. I fully appreciate that there can be circumstances where the law is unclear and therefore the degree of innocence or guilt is less certain.
            “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
            “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
            “not all there” - you know who you are

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              ff, let's cut to the chase.

              I would agree that somebody who actually committed an actual crime, meeting all the elements of the statute which defines the crime, is, for all intents and purposes, a criminal whether found guilty in a court of law or not.

              HOWEVER, there is no way for you to know who is and who is not a criminal apart from that person having been tried and found guilty of the offense for which he is charged.

              Are we there, yet?
              I agree. ‘Twas you, I contend, that went off on a tangent; not that I mind. I have the patience of a saint, if not actual sainthood yet.
              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
              “not all there” - you know who you are

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                I agree. ‘Twas you, I contend, that went off on a tangent; not that I mind. I have the patience of a saint, if not actual sainthood yet.
                OK, still not knowing what's your point. What good is it "knowing" that somebody who committed a crime is a criminal, if we don't know for sure that the person committed the crime?
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  OK, still not knowing what's your point. What good is it "knowing" that somebody who committed a crime is a criminal, if we don't know for sure that the person committed the crime?
                  I was making an argument against MM’s position at #35 that a person not charged or convicted is, by definition, innocent.
                  “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                  “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                  “not all there” - you know who you are

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                    I was making an argument against MM’s position at #35 that a person not charged or convicted is, by definition, innocent.
                    That doesn't change the fact that Christmas falls on the 25th of December again this year, ff.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      HOWEVER, there is no way for you to know who is and who is not a criminal apart from that person having been tried and found guilty of the offense for which he is charged.
                      Eh? What about in cases where we know the evidence and can use our own brains?

                      Sometimes we even say "I think the jury/judge/court got it wrong" when they render a verdict that is at serious odds with what we know to be the evidence.
                      "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                      "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                      "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                        Eh? What about in cases where we know the evidence and can use our own brains?
                        Heck, then why do we need judges and juries?

                        Sometimes we even say "I think the jury/judge/court got it wrong" when they render a verdict that is at serious odds with what we know to be the evidence.
                        And that matters, why? You think you can't make an error, or be subject to bias?
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          You appear to be desperate to make an obviously-guilty Trump be innocent. And you appear to be very very creatively reinterpreting the concepts of innocence, evidence, and crimes, turning basic concepts upside down in order to accomplish the goal of making Trump look slightly less guilty. You appear to prefer to give up on the entire concept of justice rather than admit Trump committed crimes. That's kinda sad and pathetic.

                          I guess Hillary and her emails are totally exonerated by your new standards. No court has judged her guilty, so she's Totally Innocent Folks!
                          "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                          "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                          "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                            You appear to be desperate to make an obviously-guilty Trump be innocent.
                            Assuming you're talking to me (having failed to address this to anybody in particular, but posting right after me) you got that WAY wrong. I mentioned absolutely nothing about Trump.

                            And you appear to be very very creatively reinterpreting the concepts of innocence, evidence, and crimes, turning basic concepts upside down in order to accomplish the goal of making Trump look slightly less guilty. You appear to prefer to give up on the entire concept of justice rather than admit Trump committed crimes. That's kinda sad and pathetic.

                            I guess Hillary and her emails are totally exonerated by your new standards. No court has judged her guilty, so she's Totally Innocent Folks!
                            You appear to be talking out your six, Star. But that's not surprising at all.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by dirtfloor View Post
                              I was making an argument against MM’s position at #35 that a person not charged or convicted is, by definition, innocent.
                              Until we have good reason to think that Trump committed any crimes (and even Mueller, as dirty as he was, was reluctant to pull that trigger), we must necessarily consider Trump innocent.
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                                I think in this next phase, defense witnesses are allowed. If there is to be an impeachment vote, I hear it is likely to happen before the Christmas break. I think they have decided that Nunes is too stupid to ask any more questions.
                                Adam Schiff has already denied the witnesses the Republicans requested FF and the one witness they had in teh closed hearings that showed the defense he didn't call. he is going to make sure that only his false narrative is the one heard.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                155 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X