ChiGoose

Your insistence on getting the facts and the law wrong is impressive. No matter how many times it’s explained to you, you continue to ignore reality and repeat the same wrong and/or irrelevant points. Biden, Pence, and Hillary cooperated with law enforcement. Trump obstructed law enforcement. That’s it. That’s the difference. That’s why Trump will be charged and Biden won’t. Just like Hillary wasn’t. Just like Pence won’t be either. And I don’t know how many times you have to be told that the GOP reaction is irrelevant, but I’ll say it again: what the GOP does in retaliation for the law being enforced is irrelevant.

Just ignore him. He’s really in his feels tonight. Poor guy.

I’ll take “Things That Are Never Going to Happen” for $2,000, Ken

I honestly wonder if the people there still mainly view guns as tools instead of fetishizing them.

You’re conflating notifying the authorities with notifying the public. Biden’s team immediately alerted law enforcement and began cooperating with them from the start. Originally that took the form of an internal investigation but when they found additional documents, they changed it and had law enforcement take over the searches. At no point that we are aware of did the Biden team refuse to do what they were asked by law enforcement. Unlike the Trump investigation, there were no court filings between law enforcement and Biden’s team because they were cooperating. There was no need for a raid because Biden was working with law enforcement, not against them like Trump. Despite your incorrect claim, there is no evidence to support an obstruction charge. And from what is known publicly, they case would never make it to trial. It’d be dismissed before it ever got to that point. It is very fair to criticize Biden for concealing this from the public as long as he did, but you’re just factually wrong when you say that he concealed it from law enforcement. You’re entire argument is based on that mistake and falls apart once the real facts are applied.

Mere possession of the documents is almost never prosecuted. All the defense would have to do is establish a shred of doubt that the defendant specifically knew the documents were there. Cases that are successfully prosecuted involve the defendant knowing they had the documents and refusing to comply with the law. Hillary was not charged because, even though the FBI found her to be reckless, they did not believe they could prove she intentionally put the classified documents on her server. Likewise, both Biden and Pence could successfully argue that neither of them personally packed away the documents and there isn’t sufficient evidence to show that they knew that the documents were in their homes and/or were classified. I know you’ll scoff at this, but this is a pretty easy case for a defense attorney to make. What makes Trump’s case different is what he did once the documents were discovered. Instead of cooperating with authorities, he obstructed and lied. He even went so far as to send them a letter they he had returned them all when he had not. In addition to that, it’s been reported that some of the documents were stored in his office desk drawer intermixed with documents dated post-presidency. All of this is damning evidence that shows Trump knew he had the documents and accessed them post-presidency. It would be difficult for a defense to overcome. Additionally, it also supports at least one additional charge of obstruction of justice in addition to the documents charge. And I cannot stress this enough: what the GOP does to Biden is irrelevant to all of the above.

You have both the facts and the law wrong. And also whether the GOP will impeach Biden is irrelevant to Trump’s potential guilt. People whose conduct was bad but would likely win in court: Hillary, Biden, Pence. People whose conduct was so bad that they would likely lose in court: Trump

Irrelevant. 1. Biden’s case is more like Pence’s and Hillary’s than Trump’s. Trump’s actions post-discovery of the documents are classic obstruction of justice and even the most junior prosecutor could prove it with their eyes closed. 2. The GOP is going to do what the GOP is going to do. They don’t need a pretense for impeaching Biden because he wore the wrong color tie or whatever else they want. 3. Whether or not someone is guilty of a crime shouldn’t be decided by whether or not some other person is guilty of a crime.

An anecdote that, while great, doesn’t represent the typical outcome. The epidemiology of self-defense gun use: evidence from the National Crime Victimization Surveys 2007-2011 “Results: Of over 14,000 incidents in which the victim was present, 127 (0.9%) involved a SDGU [self-defense gun use]. SDGU was more common among males, in rural areas, away from home, against male offenders and against offenders with a gun. After any protective action, 4.2% of victims were injured; after SDGU, 4.1% of victims were injured. In property crimes, 55.9% of victims who took protective action lost property, 38.5 of SDGU victims lost property, and 34.9% of victims who used a weapon other than a gun lost property. Conclusions: Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that SDGU is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.”

Mike Pence is running for the nomination of the Hang Mike Pence Party. Not sure what he thinks he’s doing but whatever it is, it isn’t getting to the White House.

You’re missing quite a few of the important facts, here. But they do have him dead to rights on both 1 & 2. It’s not even debatable at this point.

Awww, still thinking about me when you go to sleep? So cute! Sorry you’re having such a day, man.

No problem. Sorry you’re having such a rough day, bud. Cheer up! It’s almost the weekend!

(((Globalists))) huh?

Sure, he might get a bounce with the base, but it’ll doom him in the general. The average American is going to see this as a tremendous black mark against his candidacy. Additionally, many Republicans have been looking to move past Trump, hence why DeSantis has been hyped up so much. This will just add fuel to that fire. I wouldn’t get too invested in short term polls this far out from the election. He may go up a bit with the rabid cultists but once the general public starts tuning in, this is going to hurt him significantly

Anyone who thinks this helps Trump in the election has brain worms. 95%+ of American voters are normies who don’t spend their time on online message boards and consuming garbage internet content. They won’t want to vote for a candidate who is indicted. He does know better. He just thinks his supporters are idiots and likes to treat them as marks.

This is likely the weakest case Trump is currently facing. It’s not nothing and we know it’s the kind of thing people get charged with since Cohen already went to jail for it. Off the top of my head, Trump’s legal jeopardy from easiest to secure a conviction to hardest: 1. Mar A Lago documents 2. Georgia Election Fraud 3. Fake Electors / Defrauding the US 4. Stormy Daniels 5. Jan 6 incitement 1 & 2 are slams dunks. He’d already be charged if he was literally anyone else. 3 is very likely. 4 is probable, but not guaranteed. 5 is probably 50/50

Grand Jury Votes to Indict Trump The first, but almost certainly not last.

Active shooter report prompts lockdown at Joint Base Andrews “PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, Md. - A lockdown is in place at Joint Base Andrews (JBA) in Prince George's County over reports of an active shooter near base housing on Thursday. According to a JBA's Facebook page, an armed individual was spotted around 2:50 p.m. near the base's housing area. The post is asking people to stay from base housing. The suspect is described as a white man wearing a purple sweatshirt, black shorts, carrying an AR-15 style rifle with no orange tip.”

That would be great. As I said, I was surprised by what the studies seem to show about SROs.

I get that. And I was a bit surprised at what studies show about SRO's. But an anecdote doesn't override data / studies.

It's counterintuitive and surprising, but the presence of an armed officer in schools doesn't reduce the injuries/deaths from shooters and actually is associated with a slightly increased rate of injuries. Presence of Armed School Officials and Fatal and Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries During Mass School Shootings, United States, 1980-2019 "Based on theory, multivariate models include the presence of an armed guard and control for region, school type (public, nonpublic), and grade level (high school, elementary, other); location (urban, suburban, rural); use of lockdown drills; if the attack was targeted; total number of weapons brought to the scene; number of shooters; and weapon type. Results are presented as incident rate ratios in Table 2 and show armed guards were not associated with significant reduction in rates of injuries; in fact, controlling for the aforementioned factors of location and school characteristics, the rate of deaths was 2.83 times greater in schools with an armed guard present (incidence rate ratio, 2.96; 95% CI = 1.43-6.13; P = .003)."

Please provide evidence of when I said I wanted to get rid of guns. I think you may have been reading what you wanted to read instead of what I actually said.

Red flag laws have it go to a court precisely because it's potentially curtailing someone's rights. Flagged by a mental health professional or someone close to them; adjudicated by a judge. And it can be temporary instead of permanent. When have I said I want to get rid of guns?