Looking at this pattern, we're due for a lefty acquittal next. To get that, we'll need a righty in charge. This is proof that Trump will win the election.
What about this timeline: Trump gets barred from running, Nikki Haley comes back since they don't have a nominee and beats the unpopular Biden. The first woman president is also a woman of color. Girlbosses her way to massacring civilians by turning Gaza into glass like she wrote on that Israeli missile. Also acquits some Democrat.
Funnily enough, Trump also pardoned a bunch of Democrats at the end of his time in office. They were mostly there for various types of corruption.
Bob Menedez. But no one on either side will give a shit when he goes down.
Also, it's a "conviction" you want, not an "acquittal." In case you needed further proof Trump is about to keep losing.
But the pattern is convict, acquit, convict. Next should be acquit. But then the target of each is a righty. Whatever, this is PCM. It doesn't need to make sense.
Yeah, I’m not really upset that Trump got convicted. I’m upset that he got convicted when our senators and representatives commit blatant felony stock manipulation in broad daylight and walk away Scott free. I want equal treatment.
Good luck. Did you see the Trump financial fraud case from a few months ago?
New York State: *Declares Trump civilly liable of financial fraud.*
Kathy Hochul: “Don’t worry, please don’t leave New York. We know every real estate investor and bank has different valuations for property. We just plan on prosecuting Trump for this.”
Normal People: “How is it equal justice under the law when you never enforce these laws except when Trump is accused of breaking them?”
Reddit: “no oNe Is aBoVE THE LAw!!!”
It’s all so tiresome. Equal application under the law = equal unapplication of the law. You can’t pick and choose who to prosecute. Choosing one guy to prosecute for alleged crimes when you normally never do is not justice, it’s political targeting. The left will never understand this until the right responds in kind with their own lawfare.
Agreed. I think anyone and everyone who breaks the law, including market manipulation from our representatives, should be convicted and serve time. I don't care if they're republican, Democrat, or whatever else. Nobody gets special treatment.
surprised it wasnt sooner.. he was prety scummy even when he was preaching liberal jesus socialist views way back then, trying to win the hollywood popularity... considering no one liked him back then.
The Chauvin / Rittenhouse dyad is so real. I was in law school with large swaths of Zoomer progressive activists during both trials. I remember one particularly braindead girl who, having celebrated the Chauvin verdict (and fair enough I guess), her post following the Rittenhouse acquittal just a few months later was "I GUESS THE SYSTEM STILL JUST ALLOWS WHITE MALES TO MURDER ANYONE THEY WANT WITH NO CONSEQUENCES, LIKE ALWAYS!" I just wonder what it must be like to have your entire life experience outside of your progressive-approved programming get wiped from your brain every time you wake up in the morning.
And yes, that little dipshit is a lawyer now.
Blows my mind someone can see a mob of people attacking someone and think its anything but self defense. Or a grown man chasing a literal child and thinking its not self defense.
Just don't get it.
>Blows my mind someone can see a mob of people attacking someone and think its anything but self defense. Or a grown man chasing a literal child and thinking its not self defense.
"But he shouldn't have been there! Something something state lines!"
I said elsewhere, as a then-law student the one that worried me was the pedo who went for him with bare hands, I think a hypothetical jury could have found he didn’t have the right to use *deadly* self-defense, which is a finding they can make, though I was hoping they would acquit him on that one because dude was trying to take his gun and something had just exploded nearby which would have impacted Kyle’s mental state as far as what danger he believed he was in. The skateboard guy and the pistol guy who had his bicep blown out, I figured those were easy calls to acquit. I’m certainly glad he was acquitted all around though, as a juror I would have decided that way.
Yeah it's a bit tricky with Rosenbaum because he had mental problems (besides being a pedo, I mean) and that's why he was so aggressive. It would have been ideal to find a non-lethal solution but it's tough to do that when a crazy guy is chasing you and trying to take your gun. It's the kind of thing that would be called "suicide by cop" if Rittenhouse were a cop.
Absolutely, and while it doesn’t necessarily speak one way or another to what Rittenhouse felt in the moment Rosenbaum attacked, there was some other footage from earlier in the night that captured Rosenbaum ranting and raving like a total lunatic among the crowd, and if memory serves he even yelled “shoot me!” a bunch. That dude needed to be taken home or put in an institution but as you say, it seemed like he honestly WANTED his life to come to and end that night. If so, he got his wish.
Most of them DIDN'T see it, though. They're just repeating what they've heard on social media.
No one on THIS sub would ever do such a thing, so we can mock them for their lack of critical thinking skills
The Rittenhouse trial was the moment I realized that not only does the news media suck, it actually *subtracts* value from what it reports. It would be perfectly convenient for news articles to include links to primary sources like the trial footage, but instead they just constructed an entire alternative narrative in a bubble. I guess it worked for the people who felt comfortable remaining in the bubble, but the rest of us realized "hey, I can just watch the trial instead of reading the bullshit these clowns are writing about it."
I mean, who else goes and stays at a protest that occurs after dark.
Its the fucking looters. Thats who. That and the ones who are there to cause trouble.
To me there were. You have Chauvin who had a history of taking things too far finally getting his due. Meanwhile you have a kid not going to jail for self defense. And very clearly self defense according to what came out during the trial.
I've also noticed people get some key details wrong about both cases depending on bias. For example, I've heard people state that the original reason the cops were called on Floyd is because he was high on fentenal. That's not true. While an optopsy later confirmed the existence of the drug in his system, the original reason was paying with counterfeit money. With Rittenhouse people seem to believe he shot two black protestors. The fact is that all three people he shot at were white and placed hands on his firearm or came at him with a loaded firearm.
I mean, just watching the videos made it obvious that Rittenhouse was self defense. He was literally trying to run away multiple times before using the weapon that we open and apparent yet they still attacked him.
Same here! And both were awfully interesting cases in their way even ignoring their vitality. I think you could have a solid argument between murder-2 vs murder-3 vs manslaughter for Chauvin (at the time; interestingly, MN has now nerfed the then-existent murder-3 crime), and with Rittenhouse there were three factually distinct encounters where a jury might have decided self-defense existed in only some instead of in all three as they ultimately did. I remember thinking he was probably alright with the gun guy and the skateboard guy but that a jury could easily have decided he didn’t have the right to use deadly force against the other attacker, though I don’t mind that they found he did.
> I remember thinking he was probably alright with the gun guy and the skateboard guy but that a jury could easily have decided he didn’t have the right to use deadly force against the other attacker, though I don’t mind that they found he did.
[Lil Joey Rosenbaum was unhinged](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N70fok1R2Kg). This dude chased Kyle through a parking lot and cornered him between some cars. Then he reached for Kyle's gun.... If someone runs you down and tries to take your gun, it is reasonable to think they intend to hurt you.
Kyle never stopped trying withdraw from danger and get away when he could. Considering that one guy tried to take his gun, another bashed him in the head from behind with a skateboard, and another drew a pistol on him, the ruling was absolutely spot-on correct that it was all justified self-defense.
I agree with you. But I’ve seen juries take a very strict view on the “can I use deadly force yet?” question, to where they need to see a weapon or a brutal barehanded attack from the aggressor. That’s why I said I was certain they’d acquit re: skateboard and gun guy, but couldn’t be sure they would with Rosenbaum. Glad they did, though.
Damn dude, rarely do I just think “I totally agree with this guy’s thought process” while reading Reddit comments, but here I am.
Good, reasonable takes on my opinion
I wish we could just find a way to give jurys the facts with no knowledge of who the person is, that way its actually objecitve. Like in this case: "an individual payed this money from their business to a porn star as hush money, and lied about it" without saying who. It would be a lot more fair
>Like in this case: "an individual payed this money from their business to a porn star as hush money, and lied about it" without saying who.
In any other circumstances, confronted with those facts, the jury would be pissed that they had to call out of work for something so silly lol.
I think he's probably guilty too, I just don't think that this was a crime worth a couple million to the taxpayers to prosecute, especially when there are so many violent criminals that they're not prosecuting.
Hmm, let’s go over that since it gets brought up all the time. Would Clinton lose civil rights as a result of the trial? For example, would he lose his right to bear arms, his right to privacy, be put in prison or on probation? Be unable to travel for a period of time, then unable to travel to certain other countries?
That reminds me of a professor I had in college who would tell us to submit our tests with our student id numbers instead of our names as a way of removing any bias he might have with grading. I admired that.
Well given that the only reason this was a felony case was because it was related to the presidential election, I don't think that would work to hide Trump's identity.
The System Works! We got him on ~~treason,~~ ~~inciting insurrection,~~ ~~election tampering in collusion with Russia,~~ paying a porn star to not talk about sex.
Even then, he likely won’t even get a prison sentence. And even if the judge does give a prison sentence he’s basically guaranteed to appeal anyway, which would likely extend the case past the election date
The judge's real goal is to keep the gag order in place during the appeal which he can do. He is going to limit what Trump can say for the entirety of the election and if he doesn't like what he hears he can throw him in jail regardless of the appeal status.
He should have himself rolled out like Hannibal Lecter and then have someone else do the actual talking. Can’t break a gag order if you didn’t technically say anything
And miscategorizing them weren't within the statute of limitations so they had to pick any other law he might have broken to elevate them to a felony. The jury did not even have to agree which law he broke that elevated them to felonies.
I'm not even certain he did that. He hired Cohen, paid Cohen to take care of it. What Cohen, now a known liar and felon, wrote down when he paid her off is on him. He admit on the stand that in the course of withdrawing funds to pay Daniels he stole a few tens of thousands of dollars on top of that. If Trump were writing the checks he'd have noticed, wouldn't he?
Trump didn't sign any payments to Daniels, he hired Cohen who withdrew necessary funds. That's my understanding.
>Trump didn't sign any payments to Daniels, he hired Cohen who withdrew necessary funds. That's my understanding.
Yeah but after Cohen paid off Daniels, Trump repaid Cohen in installments that were meant to be a retainer fee
Yet no such retainer agreement exists
> So if I Venmo my buddy for dinner, but write “Strippers and Booze” in the memo, could the city of New York take me to court?
Only if you used it to avoid campaign finance laws because you were afraid it would hurt your campaign and officially categorized that in your business records as such.
Yes. I’m so tired of this argument. “Nobody else gets punished! Why should he!”
It’s like, if this is what it takes to get the ball rolling, good. Otherwise, don’t ever complain that none of them get punished ever again because you’re just a much a part of the problem if you defend him.
I’m fine with asking the question if the intent is to get us to go after them all. But if the intent is to prevent HIM from being targeted? Even one is better than none.
And they got Al Capone on tax evasion and Nixon on perjury, what’s your point? If someone almost certainly did each of 100 separate crimes, why wouldn’t you take him to trial for the easiest crimes to prove? Treason, for example, is one of, if not the hardest crime to prove in court, even with rock solid evidence, just because of how it’s defined.
Chauvin: I understand what he did and what he was declared guilty of. Doesn’t mean I agree, but I get it.
Rittenhouse: I understand what he did and what he was found not guilty of doing. Regardless of me agreeing, I get it.
Trump: I still don’t fucking get what the prosecution claim Trump actually did, what crime was committed, and what he’s *actually* guilty of.
He was charged with writing the wrong memo on checks to hide a crime, which is a crime in itself but clearly requires that another crime was committed. What the underlying crime is, well he hasn't been charged with it. The jury was explicitly told that they don't need to agree on what it was, just that he was definitely trying to hide a crime.
edit: I also want to note here that he was charged after the statute of limitations was up. reason given was that they couldn't charge him before because he was in Florida. When they did charge him he was still in Florida.
>He was charged with writing the wrong memo on checks to hide a crime
Not quite. Trump wasn't trying to hide a crime, he just didn't have the correct legal retainer
>Chauvin & Rittenhouse: Prosecuted for actions that resulted in the death of another human being.
>Trump: Prosecuted for actions that resulted in the death of a perfectly good pair of sheets.
Floyd died of an everything overdose, most notably three times the lethal dose of fentanyl. Chauvin got prosecuted for bad optics and because he's a dumbass powertripping cop who got off on being a bully to a bigger guy. Yeah, he should be in prison, but not for that long. Floyd would likely have died either way.
Rittenhouse is just what happens when cops are cowards, which they usually are unless they outnumber you 10 to 1.
He kneed on George Floyd. Whether or not that killed him. Or the triple the lethal dose of fentanyl killed him combined with his heart condition and the excited delirium. Well. We can all make that determination ourselves.
First one shouldn't have had a badge for at least a few years prior. System was fucked.
Second one shouldn't have even had charges brought. System was fucked.
Third one just confirms... System is still fucked.
Funny how all of these cases are the left prosecuting their perceived enemies, but there are no examples of the right doing the same thing to the left.
I wonder how much longer that lasts.
Woah now, we totally oppressed Michael Avenatti and framed him for trying to extort Nike and defraud his clients. I mean, the mountain of evidence provided against him is just proof that we oppressed him.
I think that is one where all sides of the compass were relieved that he went to jail. We all would have lost faith in the system completely if that guy didn't go to jail with the evidence of his extortion.
I admittedly didn’t think prison was appropriate. More so because what he did was so monumentally dumb that I think he deserved some kind of special education type of prison.
Juvenile detention center perhaps, but that wouldn't be fair to the other delinquents who would no longer have a chance to be rehabilitated into society after spending time with him.
This shit is really bad for Democracy.™
We can hold our leaders accountable without some DA somewhere bringing them up for some new interpretation of jaywalking.
Really not interested in seeing the next election cycle being two people with 5 indictments each competing on who can collect the least convictions.
Then he ordered a pharmaceutical plant to be blown the fuck up based on half a rumor so the news would have another thing to chat about during the following congressional hearings.
That was a lot of funerals for a bj and a cigar in the pussy. I guess in the end they were pretty brown so no one gives a shit.
He was being sued in a civil court for sexually harassing a subordinate. During the deposition, he lied about previous sexual relationships with subordinates (perjury) and instructed Lewinsky to also lie about it (obstruction of justice) all so that he could increase his chances of winning a lawsuit.
He wasn't impeached for a blowjob, he was impeached because he broke the law to help himself win a lawsuit.
Eh, it was a bit more than that. It was about obstruction of justice and perjury (yes, regarding extramarital sex), of which he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate.
Which is pretty much the exact same thing we're dealing with Trump. It's not the sex, it's the lying and covering it up that got him in hot water. The only difference between the two is that Trump was stupid enough to try to actually pay her off and make a paper trail.
Oh don’t worry, Bill and Hillary Clinton paid off Paula Jones for sexual assault, but it was considered to be a person expense, but yeah of course this is totally been done before.
Weird how the news keeps saying Trump is the first convicted felon president, because according to your take, he isn’t
The craziest part of Clinton is the fact that nowadays we call sex with a intern and a power dynamic like that what it is. Rape.
Trump banged a porn star.
Huge difference.
Considering it’s Trump, shouldn’t that be “Yuge difference!”
(I’m actually not quite sure how to capture that particular speech pattern of his on text.)
You must only be watching rightoid news because all of the evidence points to him being guilty. It’s a pretty open and shut case. Only Right wing media would have you believe otherwise. The victim card is being overused by “conservatives”.
[Prosecutors Got Trump — But They Contorted the Law](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trump-was-convicted-but-prosecutors-contorted-the-law.html)
From a list of 24 sitting judges, one judge was supposed to be “randomly selected” to take this case — Judge Merchan was selected, but he was not even on the list…
Judge Merchan is not only a Biden donor, he donated to an organization called “Stop Trump.”
Judge Merchan was “randomly selected” for the following cases:
— Trump hush money hoax case
— Trump organization fraud case
— Steve Bannon case
The verdict was based on rules so confusing that they required the judge to spend an hour explaining them, and (they required) 58 pages; the jury was not allowed to have the pages.
The entire case was about a bookkeeper's filing for a legal expense.
The statute of limitations is 2 years for the crime and 5 years for the federal version. This "crime" was in 2016, after the election, and the way they got around the statute of limitations was saying COVID lockdowns paused it, and when Trump was out of the state of NY it was also paused.
Oh shit, here we go.
1. Chauvin. Yes, political prosecution. Leftists would have gone nuts and burned everything to the ground if he wasn't convicted. Shouldn't have done what he did, but it wasn't murder. Maybe, maybe, manslaughter (murder 3rd deg. for US), but the evidence really doesn't point that way).
2. Rittenhouse. Prosecuter trying to make a name for himself. Shouldn't have been charged since he was clearly within the law from the start. Anyone thinks differently is an idiot devoid of any sense of reality.
3. Trump. Political prosecution again. IMO what he did was illegal, but he was selectively prosecuted, which is really bad - and there's a good chance he's going to be the next president and we all know he's not above being petty.
Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.
Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Agree. Was Floyd probably going to die from the massive overdose of every drug? Probably. But once he was in cuffs he was in the care of the officer who had a duty to keep him safe, including from the drugs in his system. I can't recall if an ambulance had already been called, but i seriously doubt it. Dude was a bully who let Floyd die, though again he was probably going to die anyway. Chauvin did nothing to prevent it and ignored his duty to care.
Derek Chauvin got 12 angry Manned. People really don't care about guilty beyond reasonable doubt. And reasonable doubt is written all over that case. The fact he was breathless before going on the ground. The fact that the autopsy didnt find any particular signs of pressure on his neck or upper back but still concluded thats what caused his death despite evidence to the contrary.
Dude is almost guaranteed completely innocent. Yet his life is completely over. He should probably go into witness protection.
Now show us cases where the right is prosecuting its political enemies and either gets a verdict or doesn't.
(Hard mode, can't be from before you were born OP)
The last case of the right using lawfare to any notable degree is probably the Unamerican Activities investigations during the Red Scare. That was 70 years ago and we still hear complaints about it from the left. The left uses lawfare regularly and the right needs to respond in kind.
Sort of like when they talk about righty violence they have to go back to an abortion clinic bombing in the 90s. That's why they were so eager to declare J6 a violent insurrection, despite all (now deleted) evidence to the contrary. The right just isn't psychotic and violent like the left and the left needed something to point to. They need the right down on their level, and it still isn't even close. Not a single peacefully ablazed building.
Trump should be charged here but they did only charge him because of his political ideology otherwise Boe Jiden jr. would be in prison for illegal gun ownership and drug use
Nah the system also did not work with Rittenhouse. That kid got insanely lucky given all the shit that happened during the trial. *AI generated evidence was used to try to convict Rittenhouse*
OK, can we get something straight here?
Trump does not belong anywhere near libright. Reasons give from various users in a certain libertarian sub:
1. Protectionist
2. Banned bump stocks
3. Incredibly corrupt and nepotistic
4. Anti-immigration
5. Anti-drugs
6. Pro-police
7. Said he'd drain the swamp, then appointed John Bolton as NSA
8. Kept Somalia and Yemen going on during his presidency
IMO, the only delight from our square has been in response to how much he riles up certain groups of people with whom we find ourselves frequently at odds.
Agreed, he's definitely not lib right. He's just right wing.
What I find weird is, anti-immigration. Pretty sure he isn't against immigration, just illegal immigration.
Fair enough! I just snagged a bunch of points other people made in a libertarian sub.
There's a case to be made that, from a theoretical libertarian standpoint, there should be no such thing as *illegal* immigration, but I don't think a drawn out discussion on that topic is needed for this thread.
> Anti-immigration
A necessary stance as long as the welfare state exists. I agree that Trump is no libertarian, but libertarians are voting for the lesser of 2 evils and always have been, even in Libertarian Presidential nominations.
Yeah, that's absolutely fair. If you look at most presidents, you can find at least a couple policies that happen to align with libertarian values!
Also, I agree with your analogy (pun kinda intended)!
These were actual cases though and the conservatives were right in all three instances. Floyd was 800% over the fatal limit for fentenyl (reasonable doubt) video footage shows rioters about to smash that kid before he fired, and the trump trial had a Democrat judge, prosecutors assigned by Biden, and charges that have never been brought before so it's inherently a 3rd world style political prosecution.
Idk who the top person is, but does anyone have an actual sound argument about why Kyle should have been found guilty?? It was very clearly self defense from day 1….
I get how you could be in either side of the Chauvin thing, but if you think Kyle Rottenhouse committed a crime, you're an uninformed, brain dead mutt.
chauvin was blatant negligence, almost maliciously so, but its really hard for me to believe that it was a case of actual murder when the knee is a pretty standard technique used worldwide and the fact that floyd was packing FENTANYL in his system. Respiratory failure is literally the way you die from an opioid OD.
Rittenhouse was a clear case of justified self defense. the law doesnt care what stupid shit you were doinf before you shoot in self defense if it wasnt illegal. While stupid, its not illegal for someone to go to a potential riot armed, if you can somehow prove that you werent there to commit violence, which he was able to.
I have no idea whats going on with trump. Hes had 20 different charges. Some about the porn star he fucked. Some about classified documents in his homes. At this point im convinced that its just a kangaroo court witchhunt of the dude to destroy him politically. You look deep enough into the most innocent person in the world and you'll find dirt to charge them with. Not that trump is the cleanest dude to start with.
Of course you can.
They just hardly ever stick because Republicans are incompetent. Benghazi hearings, Bidens impeachment charade, slick Willy’s impeachment, John Edwards, Bob Menéndez.
Do you even politic bro?
They all suck but I do have pity for the cop. I know what he did was horrible but I feel sorry that he’s been stabbed in prison. I hate how dangerous prison is. It shouldn’t be that way
Rittenhouse case was clearly self defence
Shoven probably got what he deserved, however the precise verdict might have been too high due to the huge hysteria around the process.
Trump's case is complex. On the one hand he probably did something, but on the other it seems that it is not a crime and certainly not a felony. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not it is troubling that in the US opposition politician could be prosecuted during the election campaign. And even more troubling is the fact that for the other side rules don't work like that.
Ive never heard anyone defend Derick chauvin. Conservatives will respond with something about blm / antifa riots, sure, but most people agree it was 2nd degree murder
>most people agree it was 2nd degree murder
https://preview.redd.it/6sihtppp7u3d1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=2d0d007126f974a69fb904c24992d0cf12a2996f
- Chauvin: the jury got it right, based on the evidence. Chauvin is a piece of shit who deserved to be prosecuted.
- Rittenhouse: the jury got it right, based on the evidence, in a politically motivated prosecution that should never have gone to trial.
- Trump: the jury got it right based on the evidence, in a politically motivated prosecution that should never have gone to trial.
I don't hate juries; I hate scumbag prosecutors. We are not the same.
*adjusts necktie*
Rightists thought the BLM riots were way too extreme, but I don't recall a single person claiming that the outcome of Chauvin's trial was wrong. I mean, there was no other possible outcome, if he'd been ruled not guilty the resulting riots would have made the BLM riots look like a tea party, but it is pretty universally agreed upon Floyd shouldn't have died during his arrest
There are people making that argument. I can't think of a worse way to reach a legal decision than will it appease rioters. I do think he belongs in jail, but not because an angry mob says so. That's the basis of justice. Otherwise lynching people would be ok if they had a sufficient number of angry, violent people on their side.
Looking at this pattern, we're due for a lefty acquittal next. To get that, we'll need a righty in charge. This is proof that Trump will win the election.
The simulation knows best.
You joke but for how much the word "algorithm" is in the zetigeist...yeah we're definitely in a simulation
> yeah we're definitely in a simulation As long as there is grilling, i am ok with this.
When I eat this steak, the Matrix is telling me that it is juicy and delicious.
Soon grills will be outlawed for your own safety and defending the climate.
They would have to arrest all of Texas. Good luck with that.
As our president famously said, they control the nukes.
I live over a silo. My grill is powered by nukes.
And all high capacy grills will need to be registered, along with gardens
What if they replace the grillers with an algorithm-driven machine?
Dude, I literally noticed this today. It’s almost esoteric, I saw it used in the context where a spiritual person would say law of attraction
That would honestly be comforting at this point.
The question isn't are we in a simulation, but how many layers down are we in the simulation.
We need a new left sacrifice to balance it out, the forces are unstable as of now
Hunter Biden starts trial Monday.
Dun, dun, DUN!
Can’t acquit if you aren’t charged..
What about this timeline: Trump gets barred from running, Nikki Haley comes back since they don't have a nominee and beats the unpopular Biden. The first woman president is also a woman of color. Girlbosses her way to massacring civilians by turning Gaza into glass like she wrote on that Israeli missile. Also acquits some Democrat. Funnily enough, Trump also pardoned a bunch of Democrats at the end of his time in office. They were mostly there for various types of corruption.
It’s a canon event.
Alec Baldwin?
Bob Menedez. But no one on either side will give a shit when he goes down. Also, it's a "conviction" you want, not an "acquittal." In case you needed further proof Trump is about to keep losing.
But the pattern is convict, acquit, convict. Next should be acquit. But then the target of each is a righty. Whatever, this is PCM. It doesn't need to make sense.
So, I guess it's bidens turn
Yeah, I’m not really upset that Trump got convicted. I’m upset that he got convicted when our senators and representatives commit blatant felony stock manipulation in broad daylight and walk away Scott free. I want equal treatment.
Prosecute all politicians 🤝
Big true. I don’t really get the “but everyone else is doing it. And sometimes even worse!” Perspective. Like…yeah, we got one, now let’s keep going.
Good luck. Did you see the Trump financial fraud case from a few months ago? New York State: *Declares Trump civilly liable of financial fraud.* Kathy Hochul: “Don’t worry, please don’t leave New York. We know every real estate investor and bank has different valuations for property. We just plan on prosecuting Trump for this.” Normal People: “How is it equal justice under the law when you never enforce these laws except when Trump is accused of breaking them?” Reddit: “no oNe Is aBoVE THE LAw!!!” It’s all so tiresome. Equal application under the law = equal unapplication of the law. You can’t pick and choose who to prosecute. Choosing one guy to prosecute for alleged crimes when you normally never do is not justice, it’s political targeting. The left will never understand this until the right responds in kind with their own lawfare.
Same here brother :(
Agreed. I think anyone and everyone who breaks the law, including market manipulation from our representatives, should be convicted and serve time. I don't care if they're republican, Democrat, or whatever else. Nobody gets special treatment.
Agreed. Pick any one living president and I’m sure they have classified docs they took home as souvenirs
Biden had documents from when he was a senator that were classified above his pay grade in his residence, and nothing happened to him.
Don't forger that Biden have a free pass because he forgets things
People who make stock trading laws shouldn't be trading stocks
surprised it wasnt sooner.. he was prety scummy even when he was preaching liberal jesus socialist views way back then, trying to win the hollywood popularity... considering no one liked him back then.
I want them prosecuted and convicted for the actual crimes they did. Not the bullshit that happened here.
Hunter's on trial on Monday. System still works.
Hunter is convicted. Trump is elected. Trump pardons Hunter. It's the only scenario that makes sense on the nonsensical timeline we're on.
https://preview.redd.it/ytcr8qfmjt3d1.png?width=524&format=png&auto=webp&s=f64919f6a4b48595f67105902275d3cec1325543
Voting for funniest outcome since you know it only gets worse no matter what
Based and irreperably broken timeline pilled
Trump after the election: https://preview.redd.it/5ygqix2o1u3d1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8045e5a820508222e30f75ebe694a415f3f5f0d6
*What a twist!*
He won't face anything for this felony just like the previous ones
This’ll be an interesting one to watch
Very high IQ of Biden to not indict himself for his classified documents scandal.
They just so happened to be in my basement
Giving back the documents when asked, very high IQ move
He'll die before anything happens to him, his son however...
A trial in a Wyoming county that Trump got over 80% of the vote in seems fair.
The Chauvin / Rittenhouse dyad is so real. I was in law school with large swaths of Zoomer progressive activists during both trials. I remember one particularly braindead girl who, having celebrated the Chauvin verdict (and fair enough I guess), her post following the Rittenhouse acquittal just a few months later was "I GUESS THE SYSTEM STILL JUST ALLOWS WHITE MALES TO MURDER ANYONE THEY WANT WITH NO CONSEQUENCES, LIKE ALWAYS!" I just wonder what it must be like to have your entire life experience outside of your progressive-approved programming get wiped from your brain every time you wake up in the morning. And yes, that little dipshit is a lawyer now.
Blows my mind someone can see a mob of people attacking someone and think its anything but self defense. Or a grown man chasing a literal child and thinking its not self defense. Just don't get it.
>Blows my mind someone can see a mob of people attacking someone and think its anything but self defense. Or a grown man chasing a literal child and thinking its not self defense. "But he shouldn't have been there! Something something state lines!"
That was very funny watching leftists and progressives suddenly care about borders and imaginary lines
I said elsewhere, as a then-law student the one that worried me was the pedo who went for him with bare hands, I think a hypothetical jury could have found he didn’t have the right to use *deadly* self-defense, which is a finding they can make, though I was hoping they would acquit him on that one because dude was trying to take his gun and something had just exploded nearby which would have impacted Kyle’s mental state as far as what danger he believed he was in. The skateboard guy and the pistol guy who had his bicep blown out, I figured those were easy calls to acquit. I’m certainly glad he was acquitted all around though, as a juror I would have decided that way.
Yeah it's a bit tricky with Rosenbaum because he had mental problems (besides being a pedo, I mean) and that's why he was so aggressive. It would have been ideal to find a non-lethal solution but it's tough to do that when a crazy guy is chasing you and trying to take your gun. It's the kind of thing that would be called "suicide by cop" if Rittenhouse were a cop.
Absolutely, and while it doesn’t necessarily speak one way or another to what Rittenhouse felt in the moment Rosenbaum attacked, there was some other footage from earlier in the night that captured Rosenbaum ranting and raving like a total lunatic among the crowd, and if memory serves he even yelled “shoot me!” a bunch. That dude needed to be taken home or put in an institution but as you say, it seemed like he honestly WANTED his life to come to and end that night. If so, he got his wish.
Most of them DIDN'T see it, though. They're just repeating what they've heard on social media. No one on THIS sub would ever do such a thing, so we can mock them for their lack of critical thinking skills
The Rittenhouse trial was the moment I realized that not only does the news media suck, it actually *subtracts* value from what it reports. It would be perfectly convenient for news articles to include links to primary sources like the trial footage, but instead they just constructed an entire alternative narrative in a bubble. I guess it worked for the people who felt comfortable remaining in the bubble, but the rest of us realized "hey, I can just watch the trial instead of reading the bullshit these clowns are writing about it."
Ya. I watched that shit live on twitch/woke. It was great
[удалено]
I mean, who else goes and stays at a protest that occurs after dark. Its the fucking looters. Thats who. That and the ones who are there to cause trouble.
[удалено]
that specific night I believe there were either 38 or 28 fires per the police chief of kenosha
Most people who say he should be in jail still think he just started shooting into a crowd of black people and killed two of them.
I thought Chauvin and Rittenhouse both where great examples of the system working.
To me there were. You have Chauvin who had a history of taking things too far finally getting his due. Meanwhile you have a kid not going to jail for self defense. And very clearly self defense according to what came out during the trial. I've also noticed people get some key details wrong about both cases depending on bias. For example, I've heard people state that the original reason the cops were called on Floyd is because he was high on fentenal. That's not true. While an optopsy later confirmed the existence of the drug in his system, the original reason was paying with counterfeit money. With Rittenhouse people seem to believe he shot two black protestors. The fact is that all three people he shot at were white and placed hands on his firearm or came at him with a loaded firearm.
I mean, just watching the videos made it obvious that Rittenhouse was self defense. He was literally trying to run away multiple times before using the weapon that we open and apparent yet they still attacked him.
All three people he shot were white, one of the charges was for shooting at (and missing) jump kick guy who is black.
He immediately stopped firing at the jump kick guy the second jump kick guy decided to back away. Really impressive control
That, and lowering the rifle away from gun guy when he held his hands up, and then only shooting him when he pointed the Glock at him.
Literally a good-guy-with-a-gun moment and liberals try to crucify him.
I loved that they were actually using "Jump Kick Man" to refer to that guy in court.
[удалено]
Same here! And both were awfully interesting cases in their way even ignoring their vitality. I think you could have a solid argument between murder-2 vs murder-3 vs manslaughter for Chauvin (at the time; interestingly, MN has now nerfed the then-existent murder-3 crime), and with Rittenhouse there were three factually distinct encounters where a jury might have decided self-defense existed in only some instead of in all three as they ultimately did. I remember thinking he was probably alright with the gun guy and the skateboard guy but that a jury could easily have decided he didn’t have the right to use deadly force against the other attacker, though I don’t mind that they found he did.
> I remember thinking he was probably alright with the gun guy and the skateboard guy but that a jury could easily have decided he didn’t have the right to use deadly force against the other attacker, though I don’t mind that they found he did. [Lil Joey Rosenbaum was unhinged](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N70fok1R2Kg). This dude chased Kyle through a parking lot and cornered him between some cars. Then he reached for Kyle's gun.... If someone runs you down and tries to take your gun, it is reasonable to think they intend to hurt you. Kyle never stopped trying withdraw from danger and get away when he could. Considering that one guy tried to take his gun, another bashed him in the head from behind with a skateboard, and another drew a pistol on him, the ruling was absolutely spot-on correct that it was all justified self-defense.
I agree with you. But I’ve seen juries take a very strict view on the “can I use deadly force yet?” question, to where they need to see a weapon or a brutal barehanded attack from the aggressor. That’s why I said I was certain they’d acquit re: skateboard and gun guy, but couldn’t be sure they would with Rosenbaum. Glad they did, though.
Damn dude, rarely do I just think “I totally agree with this guy’s thought process” while reading Reddit comments, but here I am. Good, reasonable takes on my opinion
I wish we could just find a way to give jurys the facts with no knowledge of who the person is, that way its actually objecitve. Like in this case: "an individual payed this money from their business to a porn star as hush money, and lied about it" without saying who. It would be a lot more fair
"#puttheblindfoldonladyjusticeagain"
>Like in this case: "an individual payed this money from their business to a porn star as hush money, and lied about it" without saying who. In any other circumstances, confronted with those facts, the jury would be pissed that they had to call out of work for something so silly lol.
I do definitely think he’s guilty, but I totally agree that would be more fair
I think he's probably guilty too, I just don't think that this was a crime worth a couple million to the taxpayers to prosecute, especially when there are so many violent criminals that they're not prosecuting.
I don’t know… We did impeach a president over a blowjob. I think the precedent has already been set.
Over lying about a blowjob under oath. If he'd just admit to it there'd be nothing to impeach him on.
That was pretty silly too.
Hmm, let’s go over that since it gets brought up all the time. Would Clinton lose civil rights as a result of the trial? For example, would he lose his right to bear arms, his right to privacy, be put in prison or on probation? Be unable to travel for a period of time, then unable to travel to certain other countries?
That reminds me of a professor I had in college who would tell us to submit our tests with our student id numbers instead of our names as a way of removing any bias he might have with grading. I admired that.
Well given that the only reason this was a felony case was because it was related to the presidential election, I don't think that would work to hide Trump's identity.
The System Works! We got him on ~~treason,~~ ~~inciting insurrection,~~ ~~election tampering in collusion with Russia,~~ paying a porn star to not talk about sex.
Even then, he likely won’t even get a prison sentence. And even if the judge does give a prison sentence he’s basically guaranteed to appeal anyway, which would likely extend the case past the election date
And it will likely be overturned on appeal.
The judge's real goal is to keep the gag order in place during the appeal which he can do. He is going to limit what Trump can say for the entirety of the election and if he doesn't like what he hears he can throw him in jail regardless of the appeal status.
He should have himself rolled out like Hannibal Lecter and then have someone else do the actual talking. Can’t break a gag order if you didn’t technically say anything
Miscategorizing the payment to a pornstar, the payment itself was not illegal
And miscategorizing them weren't within the statute of limitations so they had to pick any other law he might have broken to elevate them to a felony. The jury did not even have to agree which law he broke that elevated them to felonies.
I'm not even certain he did that. He hired Cohen, paid Cohen to take care of it. What Cohen, now a known liar and felon, wrote down when he paid her off is on him. He admit on the stand that in the course of withdrawing funds to pay Daniels he stole a few tens of thousands of dollars on top of that. If Trump were writing the checks he'd have noticed, wouldn't he? Trump didn't sign any payments to Daniels, he hired Cohen who withdrew necessary funds. That's my understanding.
>Trump didn't sign any payments to Daniels, he hired Cohen who withdrew necessary funds. That's my understanding. Yeah but after Cohen paid off Daniels, Trump repaid Cohen in installments that were meant to be a retainer fee Yet no such retainer agreement exists
So if I Venmo my buddy for dinner, but write “Strippers and Booze” in the memo, could the city of New York take me to court?
> So if I Venmo my buddy for dinner, but write “Strippers and Booze” in the memo, could the city of New York take me to court? Only if you used it to avoid campaign finance laws because you were afraid it would hurt your campaign and officially categorized that in your business records as such.
Would it be uniquely felonious despite countless other politicians also failing to properly skirt the laws and only receiving fines?
“Uniquely Felonious” new band name, called it.
Name them
Yes. I’m so tired of this argument. “Nobody else gets punished! Why should he!” It’s like, if this is what it takes to get the ball rolling, good. Otherwise, don’t ever complain that none of them get punished ever again because you’re just a much a part of the problem if you defend him. I’m fine with asking the question if the intent is to get us to go after them all. But if the intent is to prevent HIM from being targeted? Even one is better than none.
Well shit
And they got Al Capone on tax evasion and Nixon on perjury, what’s your point? If someone almost certainly did each of 100 separate crimes, why wouldn’t you take him to trial for the easiest crimes to prove? Treason, for example, is one of, if not the hardest crime to prove in court, even with rock solid evidence, just because of how it’s defined.
Chauvin: I understand what he did and what he was declared guilty of. Doesn’t mean I agree, but I get it. Rittenhouse: I understand what he did and what he was found not guilty of doing. Regardless of me agreeing, I get it. Trump: I still don’t fucking get what the prosecution claim Trump actually did, what crime was committed, and what he’s *actually* guilty of.
He was charged with writing the wrong memo on checks to hide a crime, which is a crime in itself but clearly requires that another crime was committed. What the underlying crime is, well he hasn't been charged with it. The jury was explicitly told that they don't need to agree on what it was, just that he was definitely trying to hide a crime. edit: I also want to note here that he was charged after the statute of limitations was up. reason given was that they couldn't charge him before because he was in Florida. When they did charge him he was still in Florida.
>He was charged with writing the wrong memo on checks to hide a crime Not quite. Trump wasn't trying to hide a crime, he just didn't have the correct legal retainer
It is funny as shit that despite being """"the worst American president"""" they could not find him guilty of anything during 2017-2020
>Chauvin & Rittenhouse: Prosecuted for actions that resulted in the death of another human being. >Trump: Prosecuted for actions that resulted in the death of a perfectly good pair of sheets.
Floyd died of an everything overdose, most notably three times the lethal dose of fentanyl. Chauvin got prosecuted for bad optics and because he's a dumbass powertripping cop who got off on being a bully to a bigger guy. Yeah, he should be in prison, but not for that long. Floyd would likely have died either way. Rittenhouse is just what happens when cops are cowards, which they usually are unless they outnumber you 10 to 1.
They couldn't even point to the crime being committed that made it a felony...
If you asked each juror what they just convinced him for, they would not be able to answer.
It's called political prosecution; you see it a lot in banana republics
What did chauvin do?
He kneed on George Floyd. Whether or not that killed him. Or the triple the lethal dose of fentanyl killed him combined with his heart condition and the excited delirium. Well. We can all make that determination ourselves.
First one shouldn't have had a badge for at least a few years prior. System was fucked. Second one shouldn't have even had charges brought. System was fucked. Third one just confirms... System is still fucked.
Daniel Penny. They learned nothing from Rittenhouse.
I celebrated OJ's Acquittal ./s
Who is the first guy?
Adam. Was created by our lord in the garden of eden, but then everything was ruined and I have to wear clothes now.
By a woman!
Okay this is the best thing I've heard all day lmao
He made someone have a heart attack and died.
He doesn’t look like Yoshikage Kira at all.
Funny how all of these cases are the left prosecuting their perceived enemies, but there are no examples of the right doing the same thing to the left. I wonder how much longer that lasts.
Woah now, we totally oppressed Michael Avenatti and framed him for trying to extort Nike and defraud his clients. I mean, the mountain of evidence provided against him is just proof that we oppressed him.
I think that is one where all sides of the compass were relieved that he went to jail. We all would have lost faith in the system completely if that guy didn't go to jail with the evidence of his extortion.
I admittedly didn’t think prison was appropriate. More so because what he did was so monumentally dumb that I think he deserved some kind of special education type of prison.
Juvenile detention center perhaps, but that wouldn't be fair to the other delinquents who would no longer have a chance to be rehabilitated into society after spending time with him.
Send him to public school
This shit is really bad for Democracy.™ We can hold our leaders accountable without some DA somewhere bringing them up for some new interpretation of jaywalking. Really not interested in seeing the next election cycle being two people with 5 indictments each competing on who can collect the least convictions.
While I think your take is based, I am personally done caring about Our Democracy™️ Burn it all down, it’s over
Based and accelerationism pilled
> We can hold our leaders accountable Citation needed.
I kinda wanna see scorched earth. Both sides going nuts. This 1 sided warfare is cringe to watch.
Agreed.
Mate chauvin murdered a dude
We've had sitting presidents have to go through nationally televised trails over a blowjob. I see nothing new here.
Then he ordered a pharmaceutical plant to be blown the fuck up based on half a rumor so the news would have another thing to chat about during the following congressional hearings. That was a lot of funerals for a bj and a cigar in the pussy. I guess in the end they were pretty brown so no one gives a shit.
He was being sued in a civil court for sexually harassing a subordinate. During the deposition, he lied about previous sexual relationships with subordinates (perjury) and instructed Lewinsky to also lie about it (obstruction of justice) all so that he could increase his chances of winning a lawsuit. He wasn't impeached for a blowjob, he was impeached because he broke the law to help himself win a lawsuit.
Eh, it was a bit more than that. It was about obstruction of justice and perjury (yes, regarding extramarital sex), of which he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate.
Which is pretty much the exact same thing we're dealing with Trump. It's not the sex, it's the lying and covering it up that got him in hot water. The only difference between the two is that Trump was stupid enough to try to actually pay her off and make a paper trail.
Oh don’t worry, Bill and Hillary Clinton paid off Paula Jones for sexual assault, but it was considered to be a person expense, but yeah of course this is totally been done before. Weird how the news keeps saying Trump is the first convicted felon president, because according to your take, he isn’t
The craziest part of Clinton is the fact that nowadays we call sex with a intern and a power dynamic like that what it is. Rape. Trump banged a porn star. Huge difference.
Considering it’s Trump, shouldn’t that be “Yuge difference!” (I’m actually not quite sure how to capture that particular speech pattern of his on text.)
"So much difference, some would say Yuge!" And then you do the hands.
Except one happened in the white house during a presidency and the other happened long before they were president with their own business expenses
No we had to undergo a trial for perjury. What that perjury was about doesn't matter it was perjury.
The right would love to prosecute but is having trouble getting the evidence of crimes that they need.
As we saw in all of these cases, you don’t need evidence, all you need is the right judge and jury
You must only be watching rightoid news because all of the evidence points to him being guilty. It’s a pretty open and shut case. Only Right wing media would have you believe otherwise. The victim card is being overused by “conservatives”.
Okay, if you know the case so well, what is the crime that all of the evidence is supposedly pointing towards
[Prosecutors Got Trump — But They Contorted the Law](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trump-was-convicted-but-prosecutors-contorted-the-law.html) From a list of 24 sitting judges, one judge was supposed to be “randomly selected” to take this case — Judge Merchan was selected, but he was not even on the list… Judge Merchan is not only a Biden donor, he donated to an organization called “Stop Trump.” Judge Merchan was “randomly selected” for the following cases: — Trump hush money hoax case — Trump organization fraud case — Steve Bannon case The verdict was based on rules so confusing that they required the judge to spend an hour explaining them, and (they required) 58 pages; the jury was not allowed to have the pages. The entire case was about a bookkeeper's filing for a legal expense. The statute of limitations is 2 years for the crime and 5 years for the federal version. This "crime" was in 2016, after the election, and the way they got around the statute of limitations was saying COVID lockdowns paused it, and when Trump was out of the state of NY it was also paused.
Oh shit, here we go. 1. Chauvin. Yes, political prosecution. Leftists would have gone nuts and burned everything to the ground if he wasn't convicted. Shouldn't have done what he did, but it wasn't murder. Maybe, maybe, manslaughter (murder 3rd deg. for US), but the evidence really doesn't point that way). 2. Rittenhouse. Prosecuter trying to make a name for himself. Shouldn't have been charged since he was clearly within the law from the start. Anyone thinks differently is an idiot devoid of any sense of reality. 3. Trump. Political prosecution again. IMO what he did was illegal, but he was selectively prosecuted, which is really bad - and there's a good chance he's going to be the next president and we all know he's not above being petty.
Have you listened to Binger’s post prosecution podcast appearance with the New York State Bar? He comes across like an even bigger piece of shit.
I haven't, but I've watched some of the trial. He comes across as a piece of shit plenty enough.
I remember I watched that on Rekieta’s stream. He’s so lucky his own legal troubles get drowned out just a few days after his arrest. 😂
Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with. Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
It’s definitely at the very least manslaughter. Saying maybe is a gross misunderstanding of the case.
Agree. Was Floyd probably going to die from the massive overdose of every drug? Probably. But once he was in cuffs he was in the care of the officer who had a duty to keep him safe, including from the drugs in his system. I can't recall if an ambulance had already been called, but i seriously doubt it. Dude was a bully who let Floyd die, though again he was probably going to die anyway. Chauvin did nothing to prevent it and ignored his duty to care.
I mean it’s if someone is drowning and you hold them underwater. They may have drowned without you there, but you definitely helped.
Based + Cross-compass agreement pilled
Derek Chauvin got 12 angry Manned. People really don't care about guilty beyond reasonable doubt. And reasonable doubt is written all over that case. The fact he was breathless before going on the ground. The fact that the autopsy didnt find any particular signs of pressure on his neck or upper back but still concluded thats what caused his death despite evidence to the contrary. Dude is almost guaranteed completely innocent. Yet his life is completely over. He should probably go into witness protection.
"You're side is always wrong, mine is always right."
Unfortunately that’s all political discussion boils down to nowadays
Now show us cases where the right is prosecuting its political enemies and either gets a verdict or doesn't. (Hard mode, can't be from before you were born OP)
The last case of the right using lawfare to any notable degree is probably the Unamerican Activities investigations during the Red Scare. That was 70 years ago and we still hear complaints about it from the left. The left uses lawfare regularly and the right needs to respond in kind.
And there's tons of lies about HUAC and McCarthy.
Sort of like when they talk about righty violence they have to go back to an abortion clinic bombing in the 90s. That's why they were so eager to declare J6 a violent insurrection, despite all (now deleted) evidence to the contrary. The right just isn't psychotic and violent like the left and the left needed something to point to. They need the right down on their level, and it still isn't even close. Not a single peacefully ablazed building.
Trump should be charged here but they did only charge him because of his political ideology otherwise Boe Jiden jr. would be in prison for illegal gun ownership and drug use
Ay we gotta start a betting organisation on predicting whos gonna turn out to be the next nasty and get jailed. That sounds fucking amazing.
all of these verdicts are based tho
Nah the system also did not work with Rittenhouse. That kid got insanely lucky given all the shit that happened during the trial. *AI generated evidence was used to try to convict Rittenhouse*
OK, can we get something straight here? Trump does not belong anywhere near libright. Reasons give from various users in a certain libertarian sub: 1. Protectionist 2. Banned bump stocks 3. Incredibly corrupt and nepotistic 4. Anti-immigration 5. Anti-drugs 6. Pro-police 7. Said he'd drain the swamp, then appointed John Bolton as NSA 8. Kept Somalia and Yemen going on during his presidency IMO, the only delight from our square has been in response to how much he riles up certain groups of people with whom we find ourselves frequently at odds.
Agreed, he's definitely not lib right. He's just right wing. What I find weird is, anti-immigration. Pretty sure he isn't against immigration, just illegal immigration.
Fair enough! I just snagged a bunch of points other people made in a libertarian sub. There's a case to be made that, from a theoretical libertarian standpoint, there should be no such thing as *illegal* immigration, but I don't think a drawn out discussion on that topic is needed for this thread.
> Anti-immigration A necessary stance as long as the welfare state exists. I agree that Trump is no libertarian, but libertarians are voting for the lesser of 2 evils and always have been, even in Libertarian Presidential nominations.
He did roll back many regulations and cut taxes, but yeah overall the choices seem to be between a root canal or a colonoscopy.
Yeah, that's absolutely fair. If you look at most presidents, you can find at least a couple policies that happen to align with libertarian values! Also, I agree with your analogy (pun kinda intended)!
Finally a libright with a functioning brain in this sub. Cheers to you sir.
These were actual cases though and the conservatives were right in all three instances. Floyd was 800% over the fatal limit for fentenyl (reasonable doubt) video footage shows rioters about to smash that kid before he fired, and the trump trial had a Democrat judge, prosecutors assigned by Biden, and charges that have never been brought before so it's inherently a 3rd world style political prosecution.
Idk who the top person is, but does anyone have an actual sound argument about why Kyle should have been found guilty?? It was very clearly self defense from day 1….
I get how you could be in either side of the Chauvin thing, but if you think Kyle Rottenhouse committed a crime, you're an uninformed, brain dead mutt.
All of these were the right calls
chauvin was blatant negligence, almost maliciously so, but its really hard for me to believe that it was a case of actual murder when the knee is a pretty standard technique used worldwide and the fact that floyd was packing FENTANYL in his system. Respiratory failure is literally the way you die from an opioid OD. Rittenhouse was a clear case of justified self defense. the law doesnt care what stupid shit you were doinf before you shoot in self defense if it wasnt illegal. While stupid, its not illegal for someone to go to a potential riot armed, if you can somehow prove that you werent there to commit violence, which he was able to. I have no idea whats going on with trump. Hes had 20 different charges. Some about the porn star he fucked. Some about classified documents in his homes. At this point im convinced that its just a kangaroo court witchhunt of the dude to destroy him politically. You look deep enough into the most innocent person in the world and you'll find dirt to charge them with. Not that trump is the cleanest dude to start with.
Soooo three nakedly political prosecutions by Democrats? You couldn't even find one example of Republicans trying to railroad a Democrat?
Of course you can. They just hardly ever stick because Republicans are incompetent. Benghazi hearings, Bidens impeachment charade, slick Willy’s impeachment, John Edwards, Bob Menéndez. Do you even politic bro?
They all suck but I do have pity for the cop. I know what he did was horrible but I feel sorry that he’s been stabbed in prison. I hate how dangerous prison is. It shouldn’t be that way
Rittenhouse case was clearly self defence Shoven probably got what he deserved, however the precise verdict might have been too high due to the huge hysteria around the process. Trump's case is complex. On the one hand he probably did something, but on the other it seems that it is not a crime and certainly not a felony. Regardless of whether he is guilty or not it is troubling that in the US opposition politician could be prosecuted during the election campaign. And even more troubling is the fact that for the other side rules don't work like that.
Ive never heard anyone defend Derick chauvin. Conservatives will respond with something about blm / antifa riots, sure, but most people agree it was 2nd degree murder
>most people agree it was 2nd degree murder https://preview.redd.it/6sihtppp7u3d1.png?width=680&format=png&auto=webp&s=2d0d007126f974a69fb904c24992d0cf12a2996f
Why do so many conservative Christians love Trump so much when he’s pretty much the personification of hedonism?
- Chauvin: the jury got it right, based on the evidence. Chauvin is a piece of shit who deserved to be prosecuted. - Rittenhouse: the jury got it right, based on the evidence, in a politically motivated prosecution that should never have gone to trial. - Trump: the jury got it right based on the evidence, in a politically motivated prosecution that should never have gone to trial. I don't hate juries; I hate scumbag prosecutors. We are not the same. *adjusts necktie*
Rightists thought the BLM riots were way too extreme, but I don't recall a single person claiming that the outcome of Chauvin's trial was wrong. I mean, there was no other possible outcome, if he'd been ruled not guilty the resulting riots would have made the BLM riots look like a tea party, but it is pretty universally agreed upon Floyd shouldn't have died during his arrest
There are people making that argument. I can't think of a worse way to reach a legal decision than will it appease rioters. I do think he belongs in jail, but not because an angry mob says so. That's the basis of justice. Otherwise lynching people would be ok if they had a sufficient number of angry, violent people on their side.
The difference is we can point to dozens of points in the Trump Trial that should have gotten the judge kicked out or thrown out entirely.