If Trump is found to have commited crimes in office how will Dems react?

[Younigue]

When it comes to justice I disagree. From what I've seen I believe the Dems will likely hurry and sweep Trump's criminality it the dustbin of "it doesn't really matter", becoming self-congratulatory and taking the same attitude as was done with the Iraq War and giving the same message- "You can do whatever you want".

We'll hear about how we need to heal wounds, how we need to focus on undoing Trump's actions and then the Apologists will come around and defend a complete lack of calls for justice as always.

Some excuse will be found.

No politician wants justice if it might apply to them one day. No partisan wants the potential of his or her parting held accountable with penalties they themselves might face in a court.

Not entirely true. Republicans vote in legislation/policy to stick it to Dems without ever thinking about how it will impact them at a future date in my opinion.

 

[pcgeek11]

Trump beat ISIS?

lolololololol

That isn't what I said. LOL

 

[brycejones]

Trump beat ISIS?

lolololololol

That isn't what I said. LOL

He has beaten back the ISIS Caliphate to a mere shadow.

You know your words are still here for people to read right?

 

[mikeymikec]

You know your words are still here for people to read right?

Does that matter to Trump? Therefore should it matter to a Trump supporter?

I wonder in the Trump era whether the book 'Animal Farm' carries new relevance or it's just the same old shit over and over again and yet some people still fall for it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That's a ridiculous demand to make of Dems, pointless posturing. Let's face it- Trump can pardon the lot of them & be pardoned by Pence after impeachment & conviction before any of that can happen. That assumes the special counsel finds grounds for impeachment prior to the election of 2020. If the special counsel is still investigating should Trump be there to lose that election the above scenario still applies because Trump can resign & Pence can be Prez for a day.

You are already playing apologist by inventing scenarios with "President for a day", none of which has anything with letting the American people know what side they stand for. Pointless posturing? Not for the citizens who aren't sure if anyone has a spine or can be trusted.

Standing for principles matters in those we elect. If Dems can't do this in the case of criminality that's discovered by this administration then we'd be better off without Reps and them.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Not entirely true. Republicans vote in legislation/policy to stick it to Dems without ever thinking about how it will impact them at a future date in my opinion.

I didn't bother to bring up Republicans in all this because we know what they are. I'm beginning to realize that in some things the Dems might sadly be the same at least if their apologists are any indication.

 

[Jhhnn]

You are already playing apologist by inventing scenarios with "President for a day", none of which has anything with letting the American people know what side they stand for. Pointless posturing? Not for the citizens who aren't sure if anyone has a spine or can be trusted.

Standing for principles matters in those we elect. If Dems can't do this in the case of criminality that's discovered by this administration then we'd be better off without Reps and them.

Prosecution of Trump is the original invented scenario here, isn't it? There's insufficient proof he's done anything for which he can be prosecuted. But let's promise to throw him in jail just for the sake of greater polarization. For that good old Fuck Your Feelings! feeling.

Nice bit of concern trolling on your part, however.

 

[Thebobo]

They had to get people on process crimes. Nothing related to collusion.

On the other hand Hillary and Bill are as dirty as the day is long, collecting billions in pay for play from those seeking influence in Washington, Obama and the Secretary of State.

Billions of dollars from Russians, Arabs, Americans, etc. Yet did she or anyone else get charged? Fuck no. Its Hillary. And Democrats always "get away with it."

Such bullchit.

Have any supporting documents from a reputable source to prove your accusations?

let me try what you just did.

On the other hand Trump and ilk are as dirty as the day is long, collecting billions in pay for play from those seeking influence in Washington, Trump and professor pay for play, Cohen.

Billions of dollars from Russians, Arabs, Americans, etc. Yet did they or anyone else get charged? YES. Its Trump. And conservatives won't "get away with it."

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Prosecution of Trump is the original invented scenario here, isn't it? There's insufficient proof he's done anything for which he can be prosecuted. But let's promise to throw him in jail just for the sake of greater polarization. For that good old Fuck Your Feelings! feeling.

Nice bit of concern trolling on your part, however.

This is all predicated that crimes occurred and that the DOJ has determined that criminal prosecutions are warranted, so "promising to throw him in jail" isn't part of the discussion. It's a simple statement after Trump being removed from office that they support any current prosecution wherever it leads up to and including prosecution for crimes that come out of investigations. So you don't have an "invented" scenario because there is an ongoing investigation which may reveal criminality, indeed some criminality has come out of this. Whether it extends to Trump personally? That remains to be seen, but it's is a definite possibility.

Everything else on your part doesn't deal with the issues. You are already diverting with "promising to throw him in jail just for the sake... " and "concern trolling".

So far you're looking like a Trump supporter as far as this goes.

 

[Jhhnn]

This is all predicated that crimes occurred and that the DOJ has determined that criminal prosecutions are warranted, so "promising to throw him in jail" isn't part of the discussion. It's a simple statement after Trump being removed from office that they support any current prosecution wherever it leads up to and including prosecution for crimes that come out of investigations. So you don't have an "invented" scenario because there is an ongoing investigation which may reveal criminality, indeed some criminality has come out of this. Whether it extends to Trump personally? That remains to be seen, but it's is a definite possibility.

Everything else on your part doesn't deal with the issues. You are already diverting with "promising to throw him in jail just for the sake... " and "concern trolling".

So far you're looking like a Trump supporter as far as this goes.

Your whole argument is an attempt to put words in Dems' mouths & condemn them for resisting. Over something that likely won't happen, one way or another.

It merely reinforces the view that Dems are on a witch hunt, at least in the minds of the Trump faithful. We don't need the specter & spectacle of a Trump prosecution to sow further divisiveness in this country. I'm not willing to make that look like the desired outcome, which is what you're doing.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Your whole argument is an attempt to put words in Dems' mouths & condemn them for resisting. Over something that likely won't happen, one way or another.

It merely reinforces the view that Dems are on a witch hunt, at least in the minds of the Trump faithful. We don't need the specter & spectacle of a Trump prosecution to sow further divisiveness in this country. I'm not willing to make that look like the desired outcome, which is what you're doing.

So in order to protect your party, you'll defend a lack of proper condemnation and support for the rule of law because you are worried that the Trump Faithful will continue to do what they'll do anyway.

Looks like Trump will make 2020 after all. Don't want to make the Dems look bad to Trump supporters by impeachment. You aren't willing to make that look like the desired outcome.

The rule of law? What a joke.

 

[Noah Abrams]

Looks like Trump will make 2020 after all. Don't want to make the Dems look bad to Trump supporters by impeachment. You aren't willing to make that look like the desired outcome.

The rule of law? What a joke.

I wouldn't have thought so and would have considered it crazy, but lately looking like it may well be possible. Even the mid term election, until not too long ago it was looking like Rs would lose the House. But lately, even that isn't looking so sure. As always, the Dem wave is always in the future, just around the corner.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I wouldn't have thought so and would have considered it crazy, but lately looking like it may well be possible. Even the mid term election, until not too long ago it was looking like Rs would lose the House. But lately, even that isn't looking so sure. As always, the Dem wave is always in the future, just around the corner.

Even if the Dems do win, the apologists have laid the groundwork for inaction as political pragmatism. Certainly, a support for tolerance of evil is a given on the part of some has already been presented. The Rule of Law isn't only about the DOJ, it's about standing for it and condemning its violation in no uncertain terms. It requires a stand for the Rule of Law to be more than an afterthought. It requires moral, ethical leadership and a spine, things I'm not sure exists except as a rare curiosity.

 

[Younigue]

I didn't bother to bring up Republicans in all this because we know what they are. I'm beginning to realize that in some things the Dems might sadly be the same at least if their apologists are any indication.

More similarities then left leaning citizens want to admit but unlike so many right leaning buffoons we admit it about our own party. Or that's what I see any way.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

More similarities then left leaning citizens want to admit but unlike so many right leaning buffoons we admit it about our own party. Or that's what I see any way.

There's little you can say about the right I'd likely find wrong but that provides a certain advantage in knowing that they will not stand for what is right and proper and pronouncing it as a core value.

Unfortunately, I've seen enough here and elsewhere that we won't see that from the opposition party and their constituents. Already some have laid the groundwork for circling the wagons.

There are several participants in the playing out of the rule of law. As a hypothetical it is the black victim who is wounded upon entering a KKK bar corresponding to our nation, the KKK deplorables, this Administration, Justice- that is the legal process of investigation, applicable prosecution, a trial, and legal consequences. Then we come to the onlookers, the citizens. Some will say that justice needs to be done and cry out if that is not supported, and those who pay lip service to the entire event so as to not take a stand and say "this is wrong and cannot go unpunished nor repeated".

There's too many gearing up who aren't Republicans for that last approach of partei über alles.

 

[Jhhnn]

So in order to protect your party, you'll defend a lack of proper condemnation and support for the rule of law because you are worried that the Trump Faithful will continue to do what they'll do anyway.

Looks like Trump will make 2020 after all. Don't want to make the Dems look bad to Trump supporters by impeachment. You aren't willing to make that look like the desired outcome.

The rule of law? What a joke.

Shifting the goalposts from prosecution to impeachment, huh? Your concerns are oh-so duly noted. You're just trying to discourage people from turning out to vote for Dems in November. There are plenty of reasons to vote against the GOP aside from Trump.

I'll just go with whatever the special counsel's report indicates is the proper course of action. If that's impeachment, we'll start there. I still hold out hope that Trump has the sense to resign & accept a pardon from President Pence before it gets that far. You know, like Nixon. It would moot your bullshit entirely.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Shifting the goalposts from prosecution to impeachment, huh? Your concerns are oh-so duly noted. You're just trying to discourage people from turning out to vote for Dems in November. There are plenty of reasons to vote against the GOP aside from Trump.

I'll just go with whatever the special counsel's report indicates is the proper course of action. If that's impeachment, we'll start there. I still hold out hope that Trump has the sense to resign & accept a pardon from President Pence before it gets that far. You know, like Nixon. It would moot your bullshit entirely.

I had measure, #bothsides #whatboutismist. I hoped I was wrong but if what I suspect happens I just wanted to see if you supported a stand for justice or not, and I mean justice as properly defined. No witch hunt, but an effective prosecution if that's what the PROPER authorities call for and a stand for it on the part of the Democrats, yes a moral line in the sand. But if the Dems didn't call for impeachment for cause? You'd likely find an excuse.

I'll bookmark this thread for future reference to see who has a spine and who is a partisan toady.

What will be we shall see.

 

[hal2kilo]

This is all predicated that crimes occurred and that the DOJ has determined that criminal prosecutions are warranted, so "promising to throw him in jail" isn't part of the discussion. It's a simple statement after Trump being removed from office that they support any current prosecution wherever it leads up to and including prosecution for crimes that come out of investigations. So you don't have an "invented" scenario because there is an ongoing investigation which may reveal criminality, indeed some criminality has come out of this. Whether it extends to Trump personally? That remains to be seen, but it's is a definite possibility.

Everything else on your part doesn't deal with the issues. You are already diverting with "promising to throw him in jail just for the sake... " and "concern trolling".

So far you're looking like a Trump supporter as far as this goes.

The way I see your argument and what you expect from the justice department will only fan the flames of a supposed Deep state conspiracy folks.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The way I see your argument and what you expect from the justice department will only fan the flames of a supposed Deep state conspiracy folks.

The way I see your response is that you see criminal accountability for a KKK murdering a black guy as fanning the flames of anti-black sentiment.

 

[hal2kilo]

The way I see your response is that you see criminal accountability for a KKK murdering a black guy as fanning the flames of anti-black sentiment.

You suck at equivalences.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

You suck at equivalences.

Because criminal acts by the President of the United States and his associates while in office aren't any big deal. Let's do them again sometime.

 

[Jhhnn]

I had measure, #bothsides #whatboutismist. I hoped I was wrong but if what I suspect happens I just wanted to see if you supported a stand for justice or not, and I mean justice as properly defined. No witch hunt, but an effective prosecution if that's what the PROPER authorities call for and a stand for it on the part of the Democrats, yes a moral line in the sand. But if the Dems didn't call for impeachment for cause? You'd likely find an excuse.

I'll bookmark this thread for future reference to see who has a spine and who is a partisan toady.

What will be we shall see.

More goalpost shifting with innuendo, of course. "If the Dems didn't call for impeachment for cause" is just that. Dems would be just as bad as the GOP if they won't commit to your version of justice in advance of the facts. So don't vote for them, right?

You tear down the dirty Democrats like it's your job. Maybe it is for all I know.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

More goalpost shifting with innuendo, of course. "If the Dems didn't call for impeachment for cause" is just that. Dems would be just as bad as the GOP if they won't commit to your version of justice in advance of the facts. So don't vote for them, right?

You tear down the dirty Democrats like it's your job. Maybe it is for all I know.

Yep, just as expected. There's no innuendo. You and other apologists will cover the asses with "so don't vote for them" as if that had anything to do with the issue of taking a stand against Trump's administration even if the DOJ brings a prosecution. You are prepping for that now because. No sense of right and wrong? No problem! Moving goalposts? This thread was never about Republicans, but you and yours.

 

[Jhhnn]

Yep, just as expected. There's no innuendo. You and other apologists will cover the asses with "so don't vote for them" as if that had anything to do with the issue of taking a stand against Trump's administration even if the DOJ brings a prosecution. You are prepping for that now because. No sense of right and wrong? No problem! Moving goalposts? This thread was never about Republicans, but you and yours.

Impeachment would necessarily precede any prosecution & that's dependent on the special counsel's report & the actions of Congress. Meanwhile, you continue to condemn Dems for making choices they may never get.

To what end, other than to discredit them & discourage people from voting for them?

This, btw. is nothing but innuendo-

But if the Dems didn't call for impeachment for cause? You'd likely find an excuse.

Of course Dems will call for impeachment if the special counsel report warrants it. Don't pretend otherwise.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Then why did nothing happen? Why was she not locked up? Republicans have had the power in the government other than the presidency for years, why didn't they lock her up? Is it just one big liberal conspiracy?



Then why is Trump and everyone he knows under investigation and people have already been indicted when the entire government is under Republican control? Still a liberal conspiracy?

You've never heard of liberal Republicans and never Trumpers like McCain and McConnell?

They don't want non politicians in office and they are trying to show everyone else what happens if a non politician actually wins.