Replies to post #451590 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[zab]

I know you enjoy being absurd, the election decided trump lost. That was done by having every single state certify their results and forward them along, sure a few states were close, and in those cases the votes were counted again, and in some states, they were even counted again, then those results were certified by those states.

Unfortunately, trump did not like the results of the election, or how he lost certain states, so he tried to circumvent the law. You do not understand that Trump had no right to do that. Trump used lawyers to try and change the rules of elections in states that he had lost. Then when trump challenged those results in court, over sixty FUCKING times. He lost all of those court cases.

But trump did not care about what courts decided, just like he did not care what each state decided, he had lost an election, and trump wanted to hold onto the office of President of the United States, and he was really to use lawyers to circumvent the election.

That is not what a President of the United States does. Now he is has been charged by one state for trying to use the power of the office of the President to change results of an election. That is called the American Criminal Justice System. In Each election a few citizens actually voted twice, and they were held accountable. Trump is not above the law.

You keep wanting America to treat trump special, he is not. By United States law he is also being held accountable for an Insurrection that he held in Washington DC that resulted in financial lost and death. In Florida trump is being held responsible for taking classified papers with him when he left office, and not returning them when he was asked to. In New York he is being charged for tax evasion.

Just when do you open your eyes and be happy you actually live in a country called America where NO one is above the law, even an Ex-president.

[blackhawks]

You can't credibly question the investigational process that of COURSE took many months to sift through the evidence, interview witnesses, review texts and emails, view videos and listen to phone calls.

I get that you're a proud student in the 'lock her up', 'hang Mike Pence', school of vigilante justice. But you're out sick when it comes to applying that to Trump and to his treason weasel accomplices.

This has nothing to do with the timing of Trump's run for the nomination. With DOJ policy not to indict a sitting president, AND, what you want, not to indict while he's out of office but running, you have a formula for non-accountability that you would never accord to a Dem replicating the same conduct as Trump and running for nomination.

That is the test you Trumpers ALWAYS fail because if you didn't have double standards would have no standards at all.

Try applying the test before posting and spare us all a lot of forehead palm slaps.

[fuagf]

livefree_ordie, Bullshit. As blackhawks said, you are questioning the integrity of all the work put into the cases before the actual issuing of the indictments. You are questioning the quality and the integrity of all involved. Inducing those on the grand juries

In that, of course, as put to you earlier ..

livefree_ordie, Your extremist anti-rule of law, pro-Trump view is no more than hot air. You have been repeatedly told Smith and Willis and Bragg are upholding the law as they see it. Grand juries were involved, or not, in all four cases. It is far from being a "sad day for all Americans today. " Your "it's all politics" is not valid. Thankfully the principle that no one is above the law is being put into practice.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172680805

and which you more often than not just ignore. This sort of

"I have no issue with following the rule of law, as long as a law was in fact broken in this and those instances. It will all come out if true or not
and based on what is allowed by a former President and at the time current President to verify that they either won or lost an election."

gobbledygook of yours is no more than subterfuge on your part. if you have no problem with following the law you would not cast such grave doubt on the work of Bragg, Smith and Willis to date. And what of the hundreds (must be) involved in all the investigations. If the indictments had come down earlier those whom you take your guidance from would have said they were rushed. If they came later those whom you parrot would say they should have come earlier. You are also saying the grand juries involved are all open to suspicion.

In application of the law the fact he is an ex-president should not matter. The fact he is running for office again should not matter. The fact that he in fact is a pathological liar and a remorseless manipulator of susceptible people as you should not matter.

In their application of the law Bragg, Smith and Willis understand all that. Sadly those as you still use it against them.

To your -- " But to me not a very American thing to do to any former President. Reeks of politics not the law and brings to mind that great socialist & marxist statement "For my Friends Everything, For My Enemies, The Law". This is exactly what is occurring here to the tee. Tell me it isn't so Jethro."

In your first sentence there you are saying any former president is above the law. In that you contradict the first part of your very first sentence

"I have no issue with following the rule of law, as long as a law was in fact broken in this and those instances."

Under the system which you say you support; under the eyes of the law you say you support, the only way anyone finds out if any law was broken is to take instances as this to trial. To a verdict. And you also accept, i hope, that does not in every case always give anyone the correct answer.

How do you know the earth is not flat, because the overwhelming weight of evidence does not support that position.

Apply similar logic to the indictments.

In conclusion. please pay attention to all the well-meant replies you get here. You don't appear to give any credence, weight, watever to them either.

Repeat yet again, you come across as not doing much more than parroting pro-Trump arguments which no one who claims to support the rule of law could in all conscience do.