SoCal Deek Posted November 3, 2022 Share Posted November 3, 2022 4 hours ago, Chef Jim said: Please define the "truly innocent" who have not yet stood trial. Huh? What’s complicated about it. Truly innocent are those that did not commit the crime. As opposed to those who may have committed a crime but were not proven guilty or got off on a technicality. Make sense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 7 hours ago, Tiberius said: Stop pretending you care if he was f'n the country over for personal gain. You could care less if he helping Putin and the rest of the scum bag dictators. You want him to hurt our country Laughter through tears for the republic haters I don't pretend well i just don't trust ANY ONE in the US gov't there were lies told prior to Trump getting into the presidency which no one has had to answer directly for there were lies told as far as the fake/paid for dossier which no one has had to answer or pay for the consequences to this point . So why should so much trust be put into this agency to tell the truth out right & what would it hurt to bring in a Non Biased person with the correct clearance to look at the documents & tell others through a unbiased set of glasses if they are or are not classified & something that would endanger the US in any way . Then when it is done if he is guilty then don't do what they did to the others & let them continue to walk around and suffer no consequences for their actions but arrest his ass & throw him in jail as it should be for all that have done something of a illegal fashion weather it be a politician or a "Undocumented immigrant" treat all as equal under the law no special treatment just because they are politicians as has been in the recent past !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said: Huh? What’s complicated about it. Truly innocent are those that did not commit the crime. As opposed to those who may have committed a crime but were not proven guilty or got off on a technicality. Make sense? How do you know if they have not committed a crime if they have not gone to trial. Their guilt or innocence is determined by a jury of their peers not before. We are talking the current bail system that proceeds the trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted November 4, 2022 Share Posted November 4, 2022 Presidential veto. Congress won’t get anything done for the next two years so we they’ll probably just impeach Joe a couple times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted November 5, 2022 Share Posted November 5, 2022 On 11/3/2022 at 1:38 PM, ChiGoose said: I'm not saying to have blind faith in how the legal system works. I'm saying that we should probably know how it's supposed to work before making wild accusations. There is no criminal indictment or action against Donald Trump. Once there is, he can file motions to view the documents or exclude evidence as privileged or overly prejudicial. If the Feds decide not to charge him, they will have to return his stuff at that time. If they delay for a long time (roughly a year), Trump can file a Bivens motion to get his stuff back. This all may be completely accurate, I have no idea. I’m just a citizen watching what’s happening and not inclined to assume everything that happens in these proceedings starts from a place of good faith, or that there isn’t political animus involved. I also believe that for every decision made, there is a choice made not to pursue a different course of action. The fact that we are “here” doesn’t necessarily mean we should be. That goes for Trump (and I feel the documents in his home was an unforced error on his part), and the DOJ. On 11/3/2022 at 1:38 PM, ChiGoose said: He also has no possessory right to documents from the White House once he is no longer president. This is part of why the DoJ opposed the Special Master: a traditional filter team would be sufficient in this case. Additionally, a special master sets a precedent that others will (and already have) seek to have for basically any case. This is one of those choices referenced above. The judge involved apparently disagreed, the DOJ simply could have pushed forward and allowed the system to play out. @SectionC3 suggested the request for a Special Master was a delay tactic. You have your opinions. Just applying common sense, I really can’t imagine many folks who were the target of this sort of action would sit back and be fine with the DOJ stating “Don’t worry, we got this, trust us.”. On 11/3/2022 at 1:38 PM, ChiGoose said: All of this concern about talk and perception are irrelevant to legal proceedings. If you want to talk about media criticism, I think we'd probably agree on a lot about how poorly these things are handled. Generally the DoJ tries to keep ongoing investigations under wraps as much as possible, but ended up going public about this one because Trump wouldn't shut up about it. Glad to find some common ground on the media. That’s something. Sure, the DOJ would prefer to work in a cone of silence and under a cloak of secrecy. That makes perfect sense for the department and when the system is fair, just, impartial and blind, there is nothing to worry about. When not acting in good faith, it’s a significant point of contention. The target of the investigation, of course, may not benefit from this approach and specifically in this case, Trump has ample reason to be concerned about the motive(s) of the DOJ. On 11/3/2022 at 1:38 PM, ChiGoose said: If the DoJ charges Trump, he'll get additional rights and duties that will give him access to the information the DoJ collected and plans to use against him. He will be able to see what they have. He will be able to challenge to say that things shouldn't be admissible in the trial. The things that he is trying to do now (that he has little chance of succeeding on) are things he will be able to do once he's actually charged. If the DoJ doesn't charge Trump, they have to return his stuff to him. If he’s charged, his decision to go public with his complaints hasn’t hurt him in the least. If he isn’t charged, it’s evidence of political malfeasance. In the interim, the optics of a swarm of armed agents laying siege to his home and taking all sorts of documents unrelated to the probe sends exactly the sort of message to his supporters that he wants to send. On 11/3/2022 at 1:38 PM, ChiGoose said: But as I said, in either case, the White House documents are not his and will not be returned to him. This is all standard practice and serves to both protect the person being searched (we wouldn't know about this if Trump didn't talk about it), as well as the investigation (if the target knows everything the investigation has before they charge, they can work to get rid of other evidence or tamper with potential witnesses). tl;dr: This is all normal stuff except that Trump has terrible attorneys who don't seem to understand what law is. Again, you might be right on the quality of his representation. I would disagree that anything about this is “standard”, storming the home of a former president/political enemy of the DOJ happens because of choices that are made along the way. Some were most definitely made by Trump. Some were obviously made by Garland and the WH. In the end, messages are being sent. How they are being received is up to interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 14, 2022 Share Posted November 14, 2022 Man busted with 20,000 fentanyl pills set free: police sources. After all, it’s not like the perp presents a danger to society, right? /s https://nypost.com/2022/11/13/man-arrested-with-20000-fentanyl-pills-set-free/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts