The Guy In Pants Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Lol, yup, Cohen went to jail for fun! Five counts of tax fraud, one count of falsifying financial statements, one count of unlawful corporate contributions, and one count of excessive campaign contributions. He said he assisted in the Russia investigation and asked for that to be considered during sentencing. Good thing the Russia investigation wasn’t a complete joke. One might think Cohen wasn’t trying to weasel his way out of anything by telling prosecutors what they wanted to hear. Edited May 10, 2020 by The Guy In Pants 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2020 Author Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Reality Check said: When a lefty has to make their case with specifics, this is how every conversation goes. They get dramatic, and cast aspersions. I ask a simple question of legality, and you hide. Happy Mothers Day by the way. It's a beautiful day outside. No, you are just playing dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 Just now, daz28 said: Does the Constitution say the president can't be charged with a crime? You seem confused. The burden of proof is not up to me, but the prosecution. There is nothing to defend. If you have a case to make, then make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2020 Author Share Posted May 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, The Guy In Pants said: Five counts of tax fraud, one count of falsifying financial statements, one count of unlawful corporate contributions, and one count of excessive campaign contributions. He said he assisted in the Russia investigation and asked for that to be considered during sentencing. Good thing the Russia investigation wasn’t a complete joke. One might think Cohen wasn’t trying to weasel his way out of anything by telling prosecutors what they wanted to hear. He lied to congress about Trump working with the Russians over his hotel he wanted the response—while Russia was hacking our election, and campaign finance fraud, Stormy waves hello. All while working for Trump. Do you think the President should be above investigation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: No, you are just playing dumb. ...and you are being rude and projecting. If you have a case to make, then make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2020 Author Share Posted May 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, Reality Check said: You seem confused. The burden of proof is not up to me, but the prosecution. There is nothing to defend. If you have a case to make, then make it. Then let them prosecute! Don’t say they can’t and then claim nothings been proven, gees Just now, Reality Check said: ...and you are being rude and projecting. If you have a case to make, then make it. Do you support Trump’s claim he is immune from prosection while president? Rude? On PPP, ? What a dope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 Just now, Tiberius said: He lied to congress about Trump working with the Russians over his hotel he wanted the response—while Russia was hacking our election, and campaign finance fraud, Stormy waves hello. All while working for Trump. Do you think the President should be above investigation? In communism, everyone is under constant investigation. You were raised in the wrong country perhaps. Have you ever been to China? You might like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Reality Check said: You seem confused. The burden of proof is not up to me, but the prosecution. There is nothing to defend. If you have a case to make, then make it. I'm not trying to make a case. You said you read the Constitution, and I want to know if you read that a sitting president can't be charged with a crime? Don't confuse your discussion with Tibs with mine Edited May 10, 2020 by daz28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Guy In Pants Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Tiberius said: He lied to congress about Trump working with the Russians over his hotel he wanted the response—while Russia was hacking our election, and campaign finance fraud, Stormy waves hello. All while working for Trump. Do you think the President should be above investigation? How many investigations would you like? How many has there already been? Do you honestly believe that one man can skirt around countless investigations simply because he’s the president while 3/4 of Washington hates him and have tried to find a way to remove him from office? Name one executive order he has made in order to shield himself from prosecution. After you list those; list the crimes he was found guilty of and list it with the corresponding investigation. Edited May 10, 2020 by The Guy In Pants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: Then let them prosecute! Don’t say they can’t and then claim nothings been proven, gees Do you support Trump’s claim he is immune from prosection while president? Rude? On PPP, ? What a dope ...and now it's name calling. The Supreme Court will make its decision. Whatever my opinion is on the subject is not relevant. That is how the legal system works in America. The Supreme Court is the last stop, and the final word. 3 minutes ago, daz28 said: I'm not trying to make a case. You said you read the Constitution, and I want to know if you read that a sitting president can't be charged with a crime? Don't confuse your discussion with Tibs with mine Reread what I said and try to apply it to memory. I never said I read it. I said I heard of it. I believe it was on the last page before this one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, Reality Check said: ...and now it's name calling. The Supreme Court will make its decision. Whatever my opinion is on the subject is not relevant. That is how the legal system works in America. The Supreme Court is the last stop, and the final word. So why do we have a forum if our opinions aren't relevant, and whatever happens happens. What is your opinion on him being charged? Understand I don't take sides. I can totally see how both sides will abuse this no matter which way the cookie crumbles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2020 Author Share Posted May 10, 2020 7 minutes ago, Reality Check said: In communism, everyone is under constant investigation. You were raised in the wrong country perhaps. Have you ever been to China? You might like it. Do you think the president should be immune from prosecution? 7 minutes ago, The Guy In Pants said: How many investigations would you like? How many has there already been? Do you honestly believe that one man can skirt around countless investigations simply because he’s the president while 3/4 of Washington hates him and have tried to find a way to remove him from office? Name one executive order he has made in order to shield himself from prosecution. After you list those; list the crimes he was found guilty of and list it with the corresponding investigation. As many crimes as this crook commits. Criminals don’t have limits on the number of crimes they can be investigated for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, daz28 said: So why do we have a forum if our opinions aren't relevant, and whatever happens happens. What is your opinion on him being charged? Understand I don't take sides. I can totally see how both sides will abuse this no matter which way the cookie crumbles. ...again, I never said OUR opinions aren't relevant. You seem argumentative about a situation that will end quite predictably, whether I agree or not. I have the right not to share any opinion that I don't feel like sharing. We don't live in East Germany yet, but give it time. Maybe you can interrogate me in the future.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 (edited) 1 minute ago, Reality Check said: ...again, I never said OUR opinions aren't relevant. You seem argumentative about a situation that will end quite predictably, whether I agree or not. I have the right not to share any opinion that I don't feel like sharing. We don't live in East Germany yet, but give it time. Maybe you can interrogate me in the future.? That's fair, I just fail to understand why you choose not to share, and why I'm East Germany for asking? Asking a question isn't argumentative Edited May 10, 2020 by daz28 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Guy In Pants Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Do you think the president should be immune from prosecution? As many crimes as this crook commits. Criminals don’t have limits on the number of crimes they can be investigated for. No one should be immune to criminal prosecution of crimes were committed and they were tried and found guilty of them. I’m not asking you for a generic, bumper sticker answer. Obviously; you have made a lot of claims and should be able to substantiate them. I have asked for 3 simple things: What was he investigated for? What was he found guilty of in those investigations/trials? What did he do to evade prosecution from those crimes he was found guilty of committing? If you can answer those three things; then you have adequately proven your claims. Edited May 10, 2020 by The Guy In Pants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reality Check Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, daz28 said: That's fair, I just fail to understand why you choose not to share, and why I'm East Germany for asking? Asking a question isn't argumentative That is three times you misrepresent what I said. I never said you were East Germany. I simply stated that we don't live there. Well, this has been educational. Movie time. See you guys in a few hours. Go Bills! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 10, 2020 Author Share Posted May 10, 2020 4 minutes ago, The Guy In Pants said: No one should be immune to criminal prosecution of crimes were committed and they were tried and found guilty of them. This makes no sense. No, should he be allowed to be investigated, prosecuted, for alleged crimes? Big difference. I see what you tried doing there, though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Reality Check said: That is three times you misrepresent what I said. I never said you were East Germany. I simply stated that we don't live there. You: "We don't live in East Germany yet, but give it time. Maybe you can interrogate me in the future.?" Me: "That's fair, I just fail to understand why you choose not to share, and why I'm East Germany for asking?" Or maybe you did, and maybe it's you misrepresenting. Name one other time you mistakenly thought I misrepresented you? 9 minutes ago, The Guy In Pants said: No one should be immune to criminal prosecution of crimes were committed and they were tried and found guilty of them. What does this mean??? Are you saying you should be able to be charged after you're tried and found guilty?? All I see here is Covfefe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Guy In Pants Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: This makes no sense. No, should he be allowed to be investigated, prosecuted, for alleged crimes? Big difference. I see what you tried doing there, though He’s been investigated........over and over and over again. What do you want to see him investigated for now? Touching all the produce at Wegmans? Perhaps he doesn’t wear the proper color socks with tan slacks? I am going to assume now; that your reason for completely ignoring my questions is because you cannot answer them. I will consider this a waste of my time. At least we didn’t resort to name calling and an argument. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday. Edited May 10, 2020 by The Guy In Pants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 10, 2020 Share Posted May 10, 2020 Just now, The Guy In Pants said: He’s been investigated........over and over and over again. What do you want to see him investigated for now? Touching all the produce at Wegmans? Perhaps he doesn’t wear the proper color socks with tan slacks? I'm not picking on Trump, I'm talking about this from a legal standpoint perspective. You're right, how many times can they investigate before it becomes harassment is another good question, but that's not what we're discussing here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts