General Election 2024

Quote: SOOPOO

If you can’t convince the 12 jurors that he committed a crime, then by the definition our society puts on it, he did not commit a crime. It is ONLY a crime if a jury of your peers says it is. Amazing how many posting here don’t get this.


Is the time and effort and cost of all the investigations into Trump worth it. No.

It's amazing to me that you could post that.
If he is never called to account for his actions then that means:
That one man is above the law. And that should never be. Here comes dictatorship.

Also, if a jury does not convict a man, that does not mean he is not a criminal.
He cannot be imprisoned.
But somewhere there is the truth that he committed a crime or the the truth that he did not.
Because our justice system cannot find out the truth, that doesn't mean that there isn't a truth to be found.

Truth can be found out outside the justice system, a person just cannot be legally imprisoned because of this.

Our system protects a suspect against double jeopardy.

But it's very possible that new evidence showing the truth could come out after the trial.

And I believe that has happened in the past

Quote: PotPie

Our system protects a suspect against double jeopardy.

Tell that to the cops in the Rodney King case. After being found not guilty Bush41 sent them to federal court. And that happens all the time. Feds do not like the decision so they bring new charges and tell the jury to "get it right this time."

If a mid level employee of the CIA was found to have had Top Secret classified documents in his personal residence that employee would be imprisoned within 5 minutes.

He would be deep down in isolation in some Federal prison and no one other than his lawyer would be allowed to see him.

Will one man be allowed to remain above the law?

Right now it looks like the answer is yes.

Quote: PotPie

If a mid level employee of the CIA was found to have had Top Secret classified documents in his personal residence that employee would be imprisoned within 5 minutes.

He would be deep down in isolation in some Federal prison and no one other than his lawyer would be allowed to see him.

Will one man be allowed to remain above the law?

Right now it looks like the answer is yes.

One woman, Hillary Clinton was. So go you know what with your indignation.

Quote: PotPie

If a mid level employee of the CIA was found to have had Top Secret classified documents in his personal residence that employee would be imprisoned within 5 minutes.

He would be deep down in isolation in some Federal prison and no one other than his lawyer would be allowed to see him.

Will one man be allowed to remain above the law?

Right now it looks like the answer is yes.

Or even the top of the CIA. Look at what General Petraeus Faced (he was the Director of the CIA and a retired four star), for removing a marginal amount of documents (and nothing relating to nuclear weapons, but he still did so for personal gain). Now, to be fair even he got off light with a plea deal worked out, I don't think he had to do any prison time -could be wrong, I don't remember the exact deal-.

The trend tends to be the higher you are, the more you get away with (lower ranks in the military get nailed to the cross for borderline security charges all of the time, I am not saying that they should not, but at least hold the top people to the same standard). You are certainly right in that anyone mid-level or below in the CIA or military did such a thing, they may as well be a murderer because they would never see the outside again. I think Petraeus even got to keep his clearance (which is even more absurd, I mean normal soldiers lose their clearance if their credit gets too bad, or they travel abroad without reporting every country in advanced. There are definitely double standard -more lax- for those at the top).

It's one of those weird things, where everyday people get nailed for violating the security policy all of the time, just because they are doing their job and living their life and not paying attention to their surroundings over some random thing and do some random thing wrong, but people who are highly educated and spend all day staring at (and in some cases writing) the policy, and really their only job is knowing it, break it routinely in an intentional and egregious way, they get a slap on the wrist.

Quote: Gandler

It's one of those weird things, where everyday people get nailed for violating the security policy all of the time, just because they are doing their job and living their life and not paying attention to their surroundings over some random thing and do some random thing wrong, but people who are highly educated and spend all day staring at (and in some cases writing) the policy, and really their only job is knowing it, break it routinely in an intentional and egregious way, they get a slap on the wrist.

We had a POTUS tried to drain this swamp but you whined about his mean tweets.

Quote: AZDuffman

We had a POTUS tried to drain this swamp but you whined about his mean tweets.

Take a shot every time Duffman mentions mean tweets. He’s like a broken record.

Quote: rxwine

From Cornell Law site

Correct. Our criminal justice system sets a high bar to ascertain that someone is a criminal. In no way does not convicting Trump mean he did not do the things he was accused of. It just means that by our society’s rules he is not a criminal. If you are accused of a crime, found not guilty of such, do you want the accused still branded as a criminal? Are you saying being charged, in and of itself, makes you a criminal?

I only call those convicted of crimes criminals.

Quote: SOOPOO

Correct. Our criminal justice system sets a high bar to ascertain that someone is a criminal. In no way does not convicting Trump mean he did not do the things he was accused of. It just means that by our society’s rules he is not a criminal. If you are accused of a crime, found not guilty of such, do you want the accused still branded as a criminal? Are you saying being charged, in and of itself, makes you a criminal?

I only call those convicted of crimes criminals.

What if you outright stole 25 million from a vault? What should happen?

I question paying court and out of court settlements as not any better than unprocessed crimes. Whereas if you outright stole money from someone you get an afternoon in jail and out of bail at the minimum. AND SOON LIKLEY HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD.

Quote:

A federal judge has approved a $25 million settlement deal between President Trump and students who paid for Trump University real estate seminars, bringing lengthy litigation to a close.

The deal, which calls for Trump to reimburse the students who say they were defrauded, was struck in November but needed approval from U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel. He signed off on the settlement Friday in San Diego.

edited, of course not all damage awards are for intentional fraud, theft. So, I'm specifically addressing specific kinds of settlements.

Quote: SOOPOO

Correct. Our criminal justice system sets a high bar to ascertain that someone is a criminal. In no way does not convicting Trump mean he did not do the things he was accused of. It just means that BY OUR SOCIETY'S RULES he is not a criminal. If you are accused of a crime, found not guilty of such, do you want the accused still branded as a criminal? Are you saying being charged, in and of itself, makes you a criminal?

I only call those convicted of crimes criminals.

Our society doesn't have any such rules about who is a criminal or who can be called a criminal.
Those are your rules not society's.
Obviously there are hundreds, more likely thousands of drug dealers out there who have not been convicted but are criminals.
If I know my neighbor is dealing meth but he hasn't been arrested am I wrong to call him a criminal?

If I have closely followed a person's professional career, as I have Trump's and I can feel confident that there is a high probability that he is a criminal then I feel no guilt at all about calling him a criminal.

He took Top Secret classified documents and stored them in his personal residence. That is a crime. I don't need to hear what any lawyers say about it. I worked for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for three and one half years and have handled such documents. I know that is is a criminal act. Trump himself has acknowledged it and has tried to justify it but it can't be justified.

You choose your words very carefully as I choose mine. My words will stand and I will continue to speak them as I choose.



"In 1951 Harry Truman issued those rules in Executive Order 10290 which established the modern classification system. The order fixed the problems the SAB had been concerned about during World War II. It created uniform definitions of secret information and standardized practices for handling that information. And it explicitly tied the new classification system to the previously orphaned sections of the Espionage Act, making it clearly illegal to share classified information with unauthorized persons."