Crime Mango Molester's sentencing

Andy Capp said:
Bending over and taking it in the ass is not the way to win the next election.
Click to expand...

They ran their entire campaign on "he must be stopped at all costs!" with clips of Jan 6th and used the word "dangerous" nonstop. How'd that work this past election?
And now they won't have that to run on. People are already tired of hearing about it, they are more interested in solutions to the challenges they face daily. Is that too shortsighted by the public to not realize that what happened is serious? Maybe, but focusing on that is a tactic that was tried. And it failed.
 
kflo said:
If the “did it” what would be the reason not to prosecute him for what he did?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you mean if "he" did it. There's not a reason necessarily to "not prosecute" him outside some thinking it wreaks even more havoc in our national political scene. But again, that still doesn't belie that political rivals are likely to pounce on the chance to go after someone they consider a monster. The fact that surprises you (if it does) is pretty weird.
 
Gutter Chris said:
I have tried to tell her how retarded that shit sounds and she got mad at me and told me we aren't friends.
Click to expand...

I'm kind of worried about her mental health. Before thus 4 years is over she may need to seek help and get prescribed some medication to make it through. If Vance gets elected after Trump is done she may lose all connection with this world.

I hope she gets help to cope.
 
mkess101 said:
I'm assuming you mean if "he" did it. There's not a reason necessarily to "not prosecute" him outside some thinking it wreaks even more havoc in our national political scene. But again, that still doesn't belie that political rivals are likely to pounce on the chance to go after someone they consider a monster. The fact that surprises you (if it does) is pretty weird.
Click to expand...
You seem to be agreeing that if there was sufficient evidence that he “did it” the only reason to NOT prosecute him would be political. Agree.
 
kflo said:
You seem to be agreeing that if there was sufficient evidence that he “did it” the only reason to NOT prosecute him would be political. Agree.
Click to expand...

What I think is that in the context of "is there political motivation?", what he did/didn't do isn't all that relevant. Unless your argument is that every crime no matter the circumstances are pursued the exact same way by someone looking to prosecute it.

Trump appointees are going to (and have) defend, deflect, and downplay to protect him. That's politically motivated. Trump's political rivals' appointees are going to pursue the maximum of what's available to them even if they may well not in a scenario where the accused was more politically aligned with them.

You guys REALLY think this is some kind of bombshell LOL?
 
mkess101 said:
What I think is that in the context of "is there political motivation?", what he did/didn't do isn't all that relevant.
Click to expand...
Apparently neither are the facts of the matter.
mkess101 said:
Trump appointees are going to (and have) defend, deflect, and downplay to protect him. That's politically motivated. Trump's political rivals' appointees are going to pursue the maximum of what's available to them even if they may well not in a scenario where the accused was more politically aligned with them.

You guys REALLY think this is some kind of bombshell LOL?
Click to expand...
You're acting like everyone appoints lap dogs like Trump does but Biden appointed Merrick Garland because he was a moderate who he hoped would bring credibility to the Trump investigations. In the end it was foolish as uninformed people like yourself will assume political motivations regardless of the evidence or any good faith gestures meant to address those concerns.

The fact that Garland appointed Robert Hur as a special counsel to investigate the nothingburger that was the Biden documents incident three days after it was reported on suggests that if anything Garland's political motivations went in the opposite direction, that he was so committed to appearing impartial that he was willing to go after Biden for a minor offense while dragging his feet in holding Trump accountable.
 
Last edited:
Islam Imamate said:
Apparently neither are the facts of the matter.

You're acting like everyone appoints lap dogs like Trump does but Biden appointed Merrick Garland because he was a moderate who he hoped would bring credibility to the Trump investigations. In the end it was foolish as uninformed people like yourself will assume political motivations regardless of the evidence or any good faith gestures meant to address those concerns.

The fact that Garland appointed Robert Hur as a special counsel to investigate the nothingburger that was the Biden documents incident three days after it was reported on suggests that if anything Garland's political motivations went in the opposite direction, that he was so committed to appearing impartial that he was willing to go after Biden for a minor offense while dragging his feet in trying to hold Trump accountable.
Click to expand...

If you don't think appointees feel a degree of pressure to skew toward who appointed them, not sure what to tell you. You don't need to be a "lap dog" to have some level of loyalty to the ones who gave you the job. Garland may be LESS beholden to those who put him where he is than others but that hardly means he's immune to human nature.

Yes, I tend to believe there is SOME level of political motivation to most things that politicians and their appointees do. And since we aren't mind readers, your plea for evidence is ridiculous.
"Mr. Garland, did you feel even the slightest amount of pressure to push forward with filing the charges you did against president Trump given that you were appointed by his political rivals?"
"No."
Case closed, we can't for one second believe that he might be saying what he has to say and possibly not being 100% truthful! He's pure as the driven snow!

Like...I'm not sure what to tell you here. If you wanna believe that not one iota of the legal issues launched against Trump has even a shred of political motivation, fine? That's absurdly naive to me, but by all means cite "no evidence to prove it is!" as a rallying cry. As I stated, that's silly because nobody would ever admit it and we can't read minds.

Like what I posted about my college roommate's bed getting pissed on and us having an inkling that our friend Jake did it despite no proof. (You never replied to that i dont think). You're arguing that we are out of bounds even thinking he likely did it. It's comical.
 
mkess101 said:
If you don't think appointees feel a degree of pressure to skew toward who appointed them, not sure what to tell you. You don't need to be a "lap dog" to have some level of loyalty to the ones who gave you the job. Garland may be LESS beholden to those who put him where he is than others but that hardly means he's immune to human nature.
Click to expand...
Who is to say that Garland's primary motivation isn't a job well done? I understand that for some that might be hard to imagine and especially for uninformed populists who see everything as politically motivated. But many career bureaucrats actually care more about their reputation, that of their agency, and doing a job well done within the confines of the constitution than they do loyalty to any party. In fact its precisely this fact that bothers people like Trump, that the federal agencies aren't staffed with lapdogs who sit on command. Hence some of Trump's biggest roadblocks to carrying out his Jan 6th conspiracy were Republicans some of whom were appointed by Trump himself like Bill Barr.

If Trump, who specifically chose people for their loyalty to him, was unable to bend the bureaucracy to his will the way he wanted why would Biden, who purported to represent the exact opposite impulse and who is far weaker within his party than Trump is, be able to pressure Garland and Smith? Why did Garland drag his feet in appointing a special counsel to go after Trump but appointed one to go after Biden three days after it his documents incident was reported?

Its because if anything his "political motivation" was precisely the opposite of what you're alleging here, he was trying to restore faith in the DOJ by taking it easy on Trump while being tough on Biden in the hopes that the Trump investigations would be seen as fair. But it backfired, people like you who care nothing for the facts of the matter will always assume everything is political.
mkess101 said:
Yes, I tend to believe there is SOME level of political motivation to most things that politicians and their appointees do. And since we aren't mind readers, your plea for evidence is ridiculous.
"Mr. Garland, did you feel even the slightest amount of pressure to push forward with filing the charges you did against president Trump given that you were appointed by his political rivals?"
"No."
Case closed, we can't for one second believe that he might be saying what he has to say and possibly not being 100% truthful! He's pure as the driven snow!
Click to expand...
You were the one who said that rhetoric suggested political motivation
mkess101 said:
No offense, but it's utterly absurd that you'd think in 2025 after the rhetoric about how awful the guy is that it's not logical to assign SOME level of political motivation to his enemies going after him (again, even if they're justified in doing so).
Click to expand...
And yet when I ask you to produce the rhetoric by either Merrick Garland or Jack Smith suggesting any political motivation you move the goalposts by saying that they're aligned in a general sense with the Dems and thus are guilty for the rhetoric of others. Absurd.
mkess101 said:
Like...I'm not sure what to tell you here. If you wanna believe that not one iota of the legal issues launched against Trump has even a shred of political motivation, fine? That's absurdly naive to me, but by all means cite "no evidence to prove it is!" as a rallying cry. As I stated, that's silly because nobody would ever admit it and we can't read minds.
Click to expand...
I'm talking specifically about the Jack Smith indictment here because it relates to Jan 6th. Unlike you I care about the facts of the matter so I am going to talk about the case I am most informed on.
mkess101 said:
Like what I posted about my college roommate's bed getting pissed on and us having an inkling that our friend Jake did it despite no proof. (You never replied to that i dont think). You're arguing that we are out of bounds even thinking he likely did it. It's comical.
Click to expand...
What's comical is your level of detachment from reality and disregard for evidence.

In the silly and completely unrelated example you mentioned there you would have evidence, the evidence would be testimony from you and your roommates. When you build a case that kind of evidence isn't a silver bullet but it absolutely helps create context. The way to counter that is to undermine the credibility of those witnesses but the more witnesses the harder it is to do that. If one floozy woman accuses a man of raping her but the circumstances are murky that is one thing but if ten women accuse the same man with similar stories then even if you can undermine the credibility of one in a vacuum their testimony as a whole becomes stronger.

Even if you have limited testimony of this kind you can pair it with other kinds of evidence to make your case. For example if you and your other roommates all had alibis and the only one who didn't was Jake that, combined with out testimony regarding the falling out, would help make the case against Jake.

Can you point me to a credible witness who claims that the Jack Smith special counsel was politically motivated?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

nhbbear
Crime NYC retiree justifiably shoots man trying to rob him-sentenced to 4 years for gun possession vs felons with firearms getting similar sentences
3 4 5
Replies
94
Views
1K
My Spot
My Spot

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,793
Messages
58,318,135
Members
175,998
Latest member
Rosabelot

Share this page

Back
Top