Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

List of Trump's crimes?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    I can tell you didn't read the article.

    Also, the judge would be entitled to do no such thing, and in fact the judge showing undue preference for the prosecution would probably result in a mistrial.
    Yeah, and it's even out of line for the prosecutor to make any such statement about the fifth, and the defense will quickly object.... the judge, then, in most cases, will scold the prosecution for trying to misrepresent the principle of self-incrimination. THEN the judge will instruct the jury to disregard the prosecutors attempt to pervert "the fifth", and the jury will do no such thing.

    That's how it goes in real life.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      Before I respond to the rest of your post, can we PLEASE get past this "offend you" stuff? I am not easily offended, angered, upset, set off, outraged, etc.... I am occasionally surprised, disappointed or amused, but can we PLEASE stop assuming negative emotion on my part where there is none?
      You responses in that case was what I would expect of a person offended. I can try not to use the word 'offended' I guess. Perhaps you and I mean different things by the word 'offended'? Either way, your post didn't seem to recognize that the context and content of your reply conveyed the message that it was only or mostly one side, and that needed correction, even if it is not your personal point of view. So would this have been a more appropriate way to word my response:

      "Perhaps you didn't realize it, but your reply implies the issue is only on one side, and as I see it, the issue is a problem on both sides".
      Last edited by oxmixmudd; 11-18-2019, 08:17 AM.
      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

      Comment


      • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
        You responses are those that I would expect of a person offended.
        So, you're lumping me in with "those people".

        So I'm not sure how to respond otherwise.
        Same way I'm dealing with JimL --- I imagine him sitting at a table across from me having a cup of coffee. I would NEVER say some of the things I've said to him on this board if he were "across the table", so I was able to substantially moderate my responses. He still seems to try his best to provoke, but I just consider the source, and don't take the bait. It works wonderfully well.

        I can try not to use the word 'offended' I guess.
        Or you can actually take me at my word! Have I ever lied to you? EVER?

        Perhaps you and I mean different things by the word 'offended'? Either way, your reply didn't seem to recognize that the context and content of your reply conveyed the message that it was only or mostly one side, and that needed correction, even if it is not your personal point of view. So would this have been a more appropriate way to word my response:

        "Perhaps you didn't realize it, but your reply implies the issue is only on one side, and as I see it, the issue is a problem on both sides".
        I think I'm on the verge of giving up again. You seem to keep making this about the "communication" rather than the issues.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          Except that if the congress has no means to investigate, then it has little or no means to impeach (remember, the DOJ can't/won't indict a sitting president), and impeachment then becomes a paper dragon with no capacity to control the executive branch. The 'check' in 'checks and balances' is removed. Convenient when you are so partisanly blind you will tolerate any crime or evil deed if the president is in your party, but insofar as its effect on one of the core distinctnesses and safeguards of our freedom, devastating.
          The purpose of impeachment is not "to control the executive branch". It is to remove a president from office in the event that there is clear evidence that he committed a serious crime such as treason or accepting a bribe. If the House wanted to give their subpoenas legal sufficiency then all they had to do was make their inquiry official with a House vote, which the Democrats never did because they're trying to make a political case against Trump and not a legal one. The entire goal here is to dirty Trump up for the 2020 campaign, which is ironic because that's what they're falsely accusing Trump of doing to Biden (even though we have Biden on camera openly bragging about his dirty deeds).
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            Had the Democrats gone about this in anything but a deranged "Get Trump at ALL COSTS" manner, it would be a whole different ballgame.
            If that was the case then impeachment wouldn't even be on the table, and Democrats would be spending their time working for their constituents (or at least giving enough of an appearance to be reelected).
            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
            Than a fool in the eyes of God


            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              If that was the case then impeachment wouldn't even be on the table, and Democrats would be spending their time working for their constituents (or at least giving enough of an appearance to be reelected).
              Van Drew, D-NJ, makes an excellent case against this impeachment process in explaining why he voted against it.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • First you say:
                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I am not obsessed with trump.
                Then you say:
                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                I am truly fearful of what Trump represents in terms of the effect the sort of person he is can have is having on the internal unity, honor, and dignity of our country, its ideals, and on the stability of our relationship with world, both in the deterioration of trust with our allies, and the ground we are giving up to our enemies. I do not understand how so many can be so blind as to the dangers we face from what he is bringing to the table. Those same people seem to understand the dangers of socialism, or too much government, or amorality, but are blind to this. And it's not so much the dangers you can see coming down the road that will get you as the dangers you can't see, that you are blind to.
                Which is just another way of saying that you're obsessed with Trump.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  So, you're lumping me in with "those people".
                  And this is the guy that says he's not easily offended.

                  Same way I'm dealing with JimL --- I imagine him sitting at a table across from me having a cup of coffee. I would NEVER say some of the things I've said to him on this board if he were "across the table", so I was able to substantially moderate my responses. He still seems to try his best to provoke, but I just consider the source, and don't take the bait. It works wonderfully well.
                  Actually you haven't changed your ways, CP, your snide comments or ad hominums are just more subtle now which you seem to think is better.


                  Or you can actually take me at my word! Have I ever lied to you? EVER?
                  How would he know, CP?


                  I think I'm on the verge of giving up again. You seem to keep making this about the "communication" rather than the issues.
                  You were the one making the communication the issue, not Jim.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                    And this is the guy that says he's not easily offended.
                    It's a question, Jim - a question to a real life friend of mine.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                      You responses in that case was what I would expect of a person offended.
                      This reminds me of the bit from Monty Python's The Life Of Brian:

                      Brian: "Will you stop following me? I'm not the Messiah!"
                      Crowd: "Only the true Messiah would deny his divinity!"
                      Brian: "Oh, hell, what sort of chance does that give me? Fine, then I am the Messiah."
                      Crowd: "He admits, he is the Messiah!"
                      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                      Than a fool in the eyes of God


                      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        It's a question, Jim - a question to a real life friend of mine.
                        No, it was a statement, CP, as indicated by the wording and the punctuation.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          No, it was a statement, CP, as indicated by the wording and the punctuation.
                          It was intended as a question, Jim - I forgot the question mark.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            First you say:


                            Then you say:

                            Which is just another way of saying that you're obsessed with Trump.
                            No - It's not MM. But that you do not/will not understand it's not the same goes to many of the difficulties we have communicating.
                            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              So, you're lumping me in with "those people".
                              Same way I'm dealing with JimL --- I imagine him sitting at a table across from me having a cup of coffee. I would NEVER say some of the things I've said to him on this board if he were "across the table", so I was able to substantially moderate my responses. He still seems to try his best to provoke, but I just consider the source, and don't take the bait. It works wonderfully well.
                              CP - I'm trying very hard not to make this a big deal. I am not trying to provoke anything with you, and I'm not talking to you any differently than I would in person.


                              Or you can actually take me at my word! Have I ever lied to you? EVER?

                              I think I'm on the verge of giving up again. You seem to keep making this about the "communication" rather than the issues.
                              There is no need for that CP. Just move on to the other points in my post.

                              IOW: Since you are not offended, great! Let's move on.
                              Last edited by oxmixmudd; 11-18-2019, 09:16 AM.
                              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                It was intended as a question, Jim - I forgot the question mark.
                                Okay then, how's the coffee.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                232 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                310 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X