Doc Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 3 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: And his defense will be: ”Do you think the Vice President of the United States packs up his own office? Of course not. He has movers pack everything up. In this case, the movers just grabbed everything from his office and put it in boxes indiscriminately. Those boxes sat in Biden’s properties without him knowing that there were things in there that shouldn’t have been. The moment he learned about this, he called the authorities and cooperated fully with the investigation, turning over every document that was wrongfully placed in his possession.” Now tell me, do you still think you’d get 12 jurors to convict? I’m not sure you’d even get to that point as you likely wouldn’t survive a motion to dismiss with the evidence that’s currently public. Some material would need to have been taken from a secure location, by these movers who had no business handling it. Then there is the issue of having the material in his garage near his car and there being no way he could not know it was there far earlier than it was surrendered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted June 11, 2023 Author Share Posted June 11, 2023 4 minutes ago, aristocrat said: you elected a guy who’s biggest accomplishment was passing the drug and crime bills in the 80s. This resulted in millions upon millions of minorities imprisoned for low level possession drug crimes. Consequences being minorities set back generations as kids grew up without parents and the violence from that is seen daily on the streets of cities like Chicago. Did trump ever cause problems such as that? Or do you support imprisoning minorities? Still playing the whatabout game. Regale us with tales of the freedoms enjoyed by North Koreans, again. You stepped in that one didn't you? The editorial board for the conservative National Review: “It is impossible to read the indictment against Trump in the Mar-a-Lago documents case and not be appalled at the way he handled classified documents as an ex-president, and responded to the attempt by federal authorities to reclaim them.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 1 minute ago, Kemp said: Still playing the whatabout game. Regale us with tales of the freedoms enjoyed by North Koreans, again. You stepped in that one didn't you? The editorial board for the conservative National Review: “It is impossible to read the indictment against Trump in the Mar-a-Lago documents case and not be appalled at the way he handled classified documents as an ex-president, and responded to the attempt by federal authorities to reclaim them.” North Korea? What about that? Face it. You elected a guy who’s done more damage to the country than trump could ever dream of. Just a man absolute fact you can not argue around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 And the cult wonders why they lose all the time with "leaders" like Gym Jordan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Doc said: Some material would need to have been taken from a secure location, by these movers who had no business handling it. Then there is the issue of having the material in his garage near his car and there being no way he could not know it was there far earlier than it was surrendered. Seems like you have some gaps in your case there. You still need hard evidence that he knew and facilitated the taking. Here, let me help you by providing some types of evidence that might prove Biden took them intentionally: -He says so publicly -He refuses to return them when asked (you can ask the jury to infer that if he had them accidentally he would have turned them over the second he was asked). -He returned some and lied by saying he had returned them all -He personally held the documents and showed them to people and you have either their testimony under oath or a recording of this happening. Any of those would really help your case. If you had them all (which probably isn’t possible because who could possibly so stupid?) you’d have a slam dunk of a case. Edited June 11, 2023 by ChiGoose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 Another example of liberals we were against it before we loved it? No way! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, L Ron Burgundy said: It was always just a facade for many on the right. the entire movement is a facade imo. Many want authoritarianism. That's what "the most important election ever" is about. They know the demographics are ever worsening for them and left unchecked by an authoritarian, they lose most elections from here on out....and the reason violence is likely. history repeats but hopefully with a different outcome. Edited June 11, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 17 minutes ago, Kemp said: You have no idea if he's guilty? You haven't been following any of this stuff, I suppose. Did you have any idea if OJ was guilty before the trial? Why are you asking questions I’ve answered twice in great detail? Your OJ question is quite astute, too. Is it your contention that every case in the country, is free from bias, hostile prosecution, evidence tampering, police misconduct and political bias? Other than the OJ case though, the one Kemp outlier. Is that your claim here? You should read more, Kemp. To answer your question—because that’s what I do, unlike some here—I believe OJ murdered Nicole and Goldman. I think you stumbled onto a good analogy here though, in that the jury apparently saw and considered a flawed and broken justice system, considered evidence presented about the bias of the LAPD and its detectives and rejected the claims made. I also think a fair percentage of posters here, you included, would side with the jury today. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Seems like you have some gaps in your case there. You still need hard evidence that he knew and facilitated the taking. Here, let me help you by providing some types of evidence that might prove Biden took them intentionally: -He says so publicly -He refuses to return them when asked (you can ask the jury to infer that if he had them accidentally he would have turned them over the second he was asked). -He returned some and lied by saying he had returned them all -He personally held the documents and showed them to people and you have either their testimony under oath or a recording of this happening. Any of those would really help your case. If you had them all (which probably isn’t possible because who could possibly so stupid?) you’d have a slam dunk of a case. As a Senator, he isn't allowed to possess any classified material. So to have any means he would have had to take it or direct someone who didn't have clearance to take it from a secured area. And no one would believe that he didn't know he had classified material next to his car in his garage. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: in that the jury apparently saw and considered a flawed and broken justice system, considered evidence presented about the bias of the LAPD and its detectives and rejected the claims made. and justice was not served. Isn't that the desired result of the justice system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 4 minutes ago, Doc said: As a Senator, he isn't allowed to possess any classified material. So to have any means he would have had to take it or direct someone who didn't have clearance to take it from a secured area. And no one would believe that he didn't know he had classified material next to his car in his garage. That’s simply not enough to sustain a charge. It just isn’t. You need hard evidence that he knew he was taking it. He can just point to the government docs that ended up everywhere like with Pence and state that accidental spillage is very common. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: That’s simply not enough to sustain a charge. It just isn’t. You need hard evidence that he knew he was taking it. He can just point to the government docs that ended up everywhere like with Pence and state that accidental spillage is very common. If he didn't have any in his garage next to his car, that might have flown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 4 minutes ago, Doc said: If he didn't have any in his garage next to his car, that might have flown. Buddy, I’m sorry, but you’re just wrong. No prosecutor would bring a case with that as the evidence of intent because there’s about a zero percent chance of securing a conviction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 1 minute ago, ChiGoose said: Buddy, I’m sorry, but you’re just wrong. No prosecutor would bring a case with that as the evidence of intent because there’s about a zero percent chance of securing a conviction. Maybe. Again as mentioned above, OJ got off. Juries are comprised of people who couldn't get out of jury duty. But the point is it's a laughable argument to claim he didn't know they were there in his garage next to his car. For years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: That’s simply not enough to sustain a charge. It just isn’t. You need hard evidence that he knew he was taking it. He can just point to the government docs that ended up everywhere like with Pence and state that accidental spillage is very common. I just love how you twist like a pretzel to defend your guy. You’re not a serious ( or mentally competent) person. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 Just now, Doc said: Maybe. Again as mentioned above, OJ got off. Juries are comprised of people who couldn't get out of jury duty. But the point is it's a laughable argument to claim he didn't know they were there in his garage next to his car. For years. Do you know every single thing that’s on your garage? Have you ever moved and not finished unpacking all the boxes? Even a MAGA jury wouldn’t convict on this. You would think that if he knew they were there, you would be able to get someone to testify to that effect. Find a hooker who will testify under oath that Hunter told her about the documents or showed her. Or a maid who saw them while cleaning. Or literally anybody who can testify that it was known that the documents were there. 1 minute ago, Westside said: I just love how you twist like a pretzel to defend your guy. You’re not a serious ( or mentally competent) person. I love how explaining how the law works is “twisting like a pretzel.” Says a lot about you. If Biden did something wrong, he should face the consequences. But you absolutely cannot sustain a charge based on what we know. There’s no precedent for it and it probably wouldn’t even make it to trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 16 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: and justice was not served. Isn't that the desired result of the justice system? Societally speaking, justice was served. From the perspective of family and friends of the victims, it was not. Sadly, that happens everyday. Absent recognition that it’s an imperfect system and bias, emotion, theatrics, interpretation of law and occasional animus factor into it all, you end up with Kempian logic, where one-sided dialogue rules, you’re worried about nazi’s hidden behind the mail box and the thinking the only case with a poor outcome involved as former Rb for the SF 49ers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 (edited) 11 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Do you know every single thing that’s on your garage? Have you ever moved and not finished unpacking all the boxes? Even a MAGA jury wouldn’t convict on this. You would think that if he knew they were there, you would be able to get someone to testify to that effect. Find a hooker who will testify under oath that Hunter told her about the documents or showed her. Or a maid who saw them while cleaning. Or literally anybody who can testify that it was known that the documents were there. Yeah I do know what's in my garage. It's about the size of his. It's not like it's Jay Leno's garage. And for sure a MAGA would convict him and probably so too would most impartial juries. But again, a jury isn't the most intelligent or impartial group of people as evidenced by the OJ (and others) outcome. So I care less about the results of a trial than what I know, which is he took material he was never supposed to possess and kept it despite knowing it was in his garage for years. What I don't know is who else saw the material and what was done with it. Now do I want him jailed over this? No (unless we find out he did something with it). I just want equal treatment. Edited June 11, 2023 by Doc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 @ChiGoose is bloviating and hand waving again? In other breaking news water is wet. Anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 I love the simps for Biden that are like yeah we know Biden has passed some of the most destructive policies in us history, took bribes, corrupt, mentally unfit for office but trump took some docs that had no real significance. Realize where we are 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts