• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Will Trump finally be indicted in Georgia?

Nah, they're about one person, not repercussions.

Unless the repercussion is to tell members of the Donor class that they're not actually permitted to join the Political class without a proper invite.

All living presidents have so much they could be indicted for, but it's never going to happen for all but one.
 
if the indictments are to get him out of the race
The indictments are not "to get him out of the race".

If they happen to have that side effect, well and good; But that's not their purpose.

And suggesting, no matter how obliquely, that it might be, is defaming the character and professionalism of those who have brought these indictments.
 
The goal of the indictments is to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his actions and to show future candidates that there serious repercussions for such behavior. If the goals are met, one would certainly hope that a secondary result is that Mr. Trump is ineligible to serve as POTUS.
Totally agree. We must do this or we're just setting the example of how to overthrow our government in the future. I actually think that dems would be in a better position if we didn't hold Trump accountable. Having Trump in the race will at least help us regain the house and senate as he drives up dem turnout.
 
if the indictments are to get him out of the race
The indictments are not "to get him out of the race".

If they happen to have that side effect, well and good; But that's not their purpose.

And suggesting, no matter how obliquely, that it might be, is defaming the character and professionalism of those who have brought these indictments.
But defaming the character and professionalism of those who have brought these indictments is the self-assigned task of the dedicated libberpublican.
These folk are not fans of democratic processes; democratic processes leave the proud, fiercely independent, self reliant libberpublican under the thumb of the tyrannical majority. They’d rather their house and family burn, than suffer the indignity of being rescued by firefighting public servants. (Figurative speech.)
 
if the indictments are to get him out of the race
The indictments are not "to get him out of the race".

If they happen to have that side effect, well and good; But that's not their purpose.

And suggesting, no matter how obliquely, that it might be, is defaming the character and professionalism of those who have brought these indictments.
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
 
if the indictments are to get him out of the race
The indictments are not "to get him out of the race".

If they happen to have that side effect, well and good; But that's not their purpose.

And suggesting, no matter how obliquely, that it might be, is defaming the character and professionalism of those who have brought these indictments.
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
Is it your view that tampering with an election should never be prosecuted; or only prosecuted if committed by democrats? Or what?
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.

Nor is Jack Smith a professional politico. He has never run for public office. Willis and others have won elections to become prosecutors, but that is true of a lot of prosecutors around the country. Running for public office does not make one unqualified to do the job they were elected to do, although, as we found out with Trump, it also doesn't qualify them. Nor does running for public office mean that the person has no character or professionalism to defame, but Trump has played on anti-politician biases such as that expressed by Jason to defame everyone who has brought charges against him. Jason just forgot that the main federal prosecutor was appointed and had a reputation for prosecuting both Republicans and Democrats.
 
if the indictments are to get him out of the race
The indictments are not "to get him out of the race".

If they happen to have that side effect, well and good; But that's not their purpose.

And suggesting, no matter how obliquely, that it might be, is defaming the character and professionalism of those who have brought these indictments.
The people who brought these are also professional politicos,
No, they aren't.
so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
Politicians, regardless of your insane opinions about them, are people.

Your prejudicial defamation of an entire group of people says nothing about them, but says a great deal about you, and little of it flattering.

Particularly as your definition of the group "politicos" appears to be so open ended as to be almost indistinguishable from "people whose jobs Jason doesn't think should exist".

We even have members here on this board who are, or have been, employed as elected representatives of their communities. Do you seriously think that they lack either character or professionalism?

I suspect not - I think your comment here is a knee jerk response to the mention of politicians with virtuous qualities, the denigration of which concept is an expected and lauded response in your small and idiosyncratic community of people who deny the very existence of community.

I have worked in environments in which any mention of Manchester United Football Club would invoke a chorus of insults and invective, none of which had anything to do with the game of football, or the players skills, professionalism, or character, and all of which was pure tribalism.

I see you responding in exactly the same completely conditioned and thoughtless manner to those you have mindlessly dismissed as "politicos".

Many of whom are no more "politicos" than you are yourself.
 
.
The goal of the indictments is to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his actions and to show future candidates that there serious repercussions for such behavior. If the goals are met, one would certainly hope that a secondary result is that Mr. Trump is ineligible to serve as POTUS.
Totally agree. We must do this or we're just setting the example of how to overthrow our government in the future. I actually think that dems would be in a better position if we didn't hold Trump accountable. Having Trump in the race will at least help us regain the house and senate as he drives up dem turnout.
What we're probably giving them is a "lessons learned" for how to do it better the next time.
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.
I thought you blocked me because I dared ask you to support a statement you made.
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.
I thought you blocked me because I dared ask you to support a statement you made.

Dude, that's an incredibly weak dodge.
Tom
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.
I thought you blocked me because I dared ask you to support a statement you made.

Dude, that's an incredibly weak dodge.
Tom
Are you saying he didn't block me?
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.
I thought you blocked me because I dared ask you to support a statement you made.

Dude, that's an incredibly weak dodge.
Tom
Are you saying he didn't block me?

I don't know nor do I care.

You made a demonstrably false claim. You got called on it. You dodged.

And you're continuing to do so.
That's what I'm saying.
Tom
 
I thought you blocked me because I dared ask you to support a statement you made.
No, I blocked you for failure to be an honest broker in discussion. Why do you hate honest Americans Jason?

Hint: the main benefit of blocking most people is to reduce many lines of irrelevance down to one line of irrelevance. It doesn’t mean you can’t see things if you want.
 
The people who brought these are also professional politicos, so they have no character and professionalism to defame.
The grand jurors then. Ordinary citizens who actually saw the evidence. Having seen the truth makes them Politicos now, according to RW Trumpsucking extremists.
I thought you blocked me because I dared ask you to support a statement you made.

Dude, that's an incredibly weak dodge.
Tom
Are you saying he didn't block me?

I don't know nor do I care.

Yet you comment anyway.
 
  • Sympathy
Reactions: jab
Back
Top Bottom