***Official Political Discussion Thread***

I answered. Most Senators voted to convict.

I also explained that in most (if not all) criminal cases, a unanimous vote from the jury is needed for criminal convictions.

Could you imagine if “most” was all that was required for a criminal conviction?
You used the pronoun "we" when it was really just you talking about votes required to convict. An interesting attempt to sidestep what whywesteppin whywesteppin pointed out.
 
Did I the standards of the Senate? I asked you a straight forward question about the vote. That is it

BTW

Would you have voted to convict?

You brought up the fact that there were different standards. And then asked about how “most” senators voted. I responded and informed you on the general standard for votes in most criminal cases. We both mentioned irrelevant standards, because based on the Senate standards he was acquitted.

I don’t know how I would have voted; I didn’t get a chance to watch the entire trial. I think it would have been difficult for the House managers to meet the Brandenburg test for incitement. But I didn’t watch the entire trial so they may have. I think I heard they didn’t feel it should apply.

With all that said, I think almost everyone in here agrees that Trump’s words were reprehensible. A formal censure, or criminal charges for his actions are still an available remedy. I think they should be pursued if people feel he is guilty of the conduct.
 
I understand the sentiment but nothing the good guys did was going to flip enough senators to get the conviction. I've stayed quiet on this impeachment thing, but I didn't want Trump to get get convicted. These same fools that vote to acquit him will be running in a crowded presidential field in 2024 with Trump or his kids running. These idiots hurt their own future political plans without realizing it. Insurrections are bad for business and big GOP donors don't want any part of that. Think of why most of us are on NT. At one point in time we were huge 👟 heads that love authentic 👟worn by some of our favorite sports stars. Outside of @ninjahood none of us want to rock fakes or Grey markets kicks. The same can be said for politics. Trump fans want him not Grey market versions of him. Let him destroy the Republican party from within. I don't want Joe's positive agenda to get bogged down by talking about a one term loser and the betas that kiss up to him. Time is not on our side to get things done and the sooner we get our agenda passed the better.
Lmao ninja hood rocks UA? :lol: News to me.
 
You brought up the fact that there were different standards. And then asked about how “most” senators voted. I responded and informed you on the general standard for votes in most criminal cases. We both mentioned irrelevant standards, because based on the Senate standards he was acquitted.

I don’t know how I would have voted; I didn’t get a chance to watch the entire trial. I think it would have been difficult for the House managers to meet the Brandenburg test for incitement. But I didn’t watch the entire trial so they may have. I think I heard they didn’t feel it should apply.

With all that said, I think almost everyone in here agrees that Trump’s words were reprehensible. A formal censure, or criminal charges for his actions are still an available remedy. I think they should be pursued if people feel he is guilty of the conduct.

cow·ard·ice
(kou′ər-dĭs)

noun
  1. That **** right there
 
Regardless of Trumps acquittal, being impeached twice in one term is a major stain on his resumé. I personally don’t care about politics but I can recognize something historic. Mad wild that people voted for this guy to lead.
 
Regardless of Trumps acquittal, being impeached twice in one term is a major stain on his resumé. I personally don’t care about politics but I can recognize something historic. Mad wild that people voted for this guy to lead.
I was just about to press reply and you beat me to it.

Acquitted or not. Impeached is impeached and twice impeached is still two **** stain on his Presidency.
 
Brandenburg test for incitement. lolwut

it's a political process not a court of law.

You’re right.

But there were lawyers making arguments. Words like trial, witnesses, conviction, high crime and misdemeanor were used.

But again, you’re right. It’s political and it ended in a political way, with the Senate acquitting Trump a second time.
 
You’re right.

But there were lawyers making arguments. Words like trial, witnesses, conviction, high crime and misdemeanor were used.

lol so???

i told my homie to hedge on the pick and roll when we were playing pick up
that don't mean we in an NBA game.

But again, you’re right. It’s political and it ended in a political way, with the Senate acquitting Trump a second time.

that has nothing to do with rusty's question. :lol:
if you wanna acquit trump just say you would, but this stuff about the brandenburg test is silly.
 
1613258662879.png
 
Back
Top Bottom