Trump says he is likely to be criminally indicted over the January 6 event

[WuWei]

@johnwk2

a founding principle of our Republic.

[FreeAndClear]

In a civil suit? Orly?

Founding principle? Hwat?

[H_Arendt]

@DougBH

I would like to see a poll on what most people consider rape, then. What it all comes down to is only two people know what happened in there and neither of those people was the judge or on the jury.

When you say the truth is in the hands of two people, who disagree, that means no rape case can ever be prosecuted.

Is that your desired outcome?

[H_Arendt]

@johnwk2

And to hell with beyond the shadow of a doubt

It was a civil suit. Reasonable doubt does not apply.

[johnwk2]

The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed democrat owned slaves and put the KKK out of business.

[johnwk2]

So, you have a problem with the principle of, beyond the shadow of a doubt?

[H_Arendt]

@johnwk2

So, you have a problem with the principle of, beyond the shadow of a doubt?

No problem at all. You appear be confused about the difference between civil and criminal trials.

[H_Arendt]

@johnwk2

The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed democrat owned slaves and put the KKK out of business.

Are you saying the Democratic Party leaders who drove the disunion of our nation to protect slavery are immortal and continue to set Democratic Party policy?

I note the Republican leaders are human and those who replaced the party that ended slavery have been on a steady decline in their treatment of African-Americans since the compromise of 1876. By 1964, when the Republican nominee for the President ran against the Civil Rights legislation that the Democratic nominee was championing, the role of the two parties had been reversed.

[johnwk2]

No confusion on this end. I believe in and support a “principle” which ought to always apply in our system of justice.

[DisturbedGuy]

@thinkingman

@H_Arendt

Its the opinion of a judge:

cool. an opinion

all that matters is what you think he really did huh?

Did Trump penetrate Carroll?

[FreeAndClear]

@johnwk2

No confusion on this end. I believe in and support a “principle” which ought to always apply in our system of justice.

Why should it apply in civil litigation?

[johnwk2]

@H_Arendt

Are you saying the Democratic Party leaders who drove the disunion of our nation to protect slavery are immortal and continue to set Democratic Party policy?

Well, considering they advance a genocide in black communities under their abortion policies, you may be onto something.

JWK

If the Chinese Communist Party leadership promised to forgive todays woke generation’s student loans, would they vote for a Communist Party Leadership?

[johnwk2]

Why should it not? And especially when one is alleged to have committed an unforgivable offense.

[FreeAndClear]

@johnwk2

Why should it not? And especially when one is alleged to have committed an unforgivable offense.

In a Civil court setting. He wasn’t convicted criminally of the act.

I don’t necessarily disagree but the president losing a civil case should not be the reason. If he had would you be sticking to your principles? Was the finding by the jury that he didn’t rape her good or bad?

Should it apply to administrative trials like moving violations?

[johnwk2]

You dodged my question (“And especially when one is alleged to have committed an unforgivable offense.”)

So, since you dodged the question, let me give you the answer:

Because scumbag lawyers want to laugh all the way to the bank.

[FreeAndClear]

@johnwk2

You dodged my question (“And especially when one is alleged to have committed an unforgivable offense.”)

So, since you dodged the question, let me give you the answer:

Because scumbag lawyers want to laugh all the way to the bank.

as you dodged mine but asking a question in response . I edited to add that i don’t necesssrily disagree.

So what?

What other profession that earns money through work do you consider scumbags?

So the whole founding principle was nonsense then. Well at least we got this far.

[H_Arendt]

@johnwk2

Well, considering they advance a genocide in black communities under their abortion policies, you may be onto something.

Can’t stop beating that drum, can you. I’ve provided a rebuttal of that assertion but instead of addressing it you repeat yourself over and over. Deal with the rebuttal. If you keep repeating the same assertion over an over there’s not much of basis of a dialogue.

[johnwk2]

@FreeAndClear

as you dodged mine

Oh, but I did address your question . . . the principle [beyond the shadow of a doubt] ought to apply when one is charged to have committed an unforgivable offense.

[johnwk2]

@H_Arendt

@johnwk2

Well, considering they advance a genocide in black communities under their abortion policies, you may be onto something.

Can’t stop beating that drum, can you.

When the policy which embraces genocide in our nation’s black communities ends, I will have no need to beat that drum.

[FreeAndClear]

@johnwk2

@FreeAndClear

as you dodged mine

Oh, but I did address your question . . . the principle [beyond the shadow of a doubt] ought to apply when one is charged to have committed an unforgivable offense.

Beyond a shadow is not an standard in any court in this country not in a criminal not a civil

He was acquitted of one of the “unforgivable” offenses.