Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Georgians, Kemp wtf. Election not stolen

Not True.

The debate is irrelevant. Its what they can actually prove in court and if they can prove it, does he have a defense.

BMT

SO the legal system in our country doesn't use precedent??

So many of these dipsticks don't seem to understand the meaning of the word "evidence". To them, "evidence" would be nothing short of signed confessions, and video, from multiple angles, of Joe Biden himself voting a hundred times, fingerprints all over the ballots, 64 sworn eyewitnesses, and convictions in a court of law. Well, that ain't the way it is. "Evidence" and "proof" aren't the same thing, and "proof" does not HAVE to be decided by a judge or jury. If you're waiting for some legal decree from the authority figures before you can make any kind of judgement (and then claim that everything is settled, since the authority figures MUST be right), then you are exactly why America has gone to schidt.

Jeff Obama,

How hard did you hit your head during the ladder incident? Have you seen a medical professional lately?

You misunderstand precedent.

Precedent applies to law (such as the NYRPA v Bruen) not facts (such as whether A defendant committed X crime, at Y bank, on Day Z).

BMT

You are so ignorant. Both Clinton and Obama were either given buildings to store their materials or had warehouses built to house them in. Available doesn't mean Trump had to go to a library and work from there dumbass. NARA is supposed to work with ex presidents to supply their needs and no there is no return date.

The derp squad going hard.

So there is no limit on what a president can have? Anything and everything is just belongs to the president to do as he wishes?

Or are there limits?

What year did you pass the Bar and how many cases have argued in criminal court in the US? You appeared in state and federal court? Are you a AUSA or an ADA or a defense attorney?

Approximately how many classified documents have you examined in your career? How high was your security clearance? You seem to be quite the expert in both areas

Thanks

I passed the bar in 1993. I am not making any points about security clearances.

My points related to admissible evidence, what documents Trump had, and what documents he was permitted to have.

Documents based cases are easier to prove. Cases that deal with a person's state of mind are harder.

BMT

How many times have you appeared in a criminal court involving felony charges? How many GJ appearances?


What’s your win loss record in felony cases?

Thanks

Better questions:

What year did you pass the bar?

Have you studied law?

Have you even taken an evidence course?

What training are you basing your analysis on?

BMT

Conversely, what evidence will YOU need to see or hear to admit Trump tried to steal it?

The proof, by your definition, was in the eyeball test: he did.

The evidence, as normally defined, will be presented and vetted and debated in the multiple trials he will soon face.

So how.... exactly... did Trump try to "steal" anything?

Not to mention the subpoenas demanding the return of said docs, and what sure looks like his very willful defiance of same.

I completely agree, they got him by the short hairs on the docs case. I just don’t care that much about it, other than just be sort of bemused that he’s SUCH an entitled narcissist that he kept them and then literally refused to give them back. I think he truly believed he was essentially immune from everything, forever, by dint of having been POTUS. It was like crack to him. D’oh!

I care that he tried to steal an election and had his plan, such as it was, played forward he intended to use the military against Americans. I know that’s exactly what many sick [bleep] here openly pine for. I hope the DoJ rams that straight up his, and by extension their, ass.

Read the indictments. They list plenty of actual, shall we say, evidence.

Yeah, sure!

Did Webster rewrite the definition of evidence?

somebody sure has.

Indictments do not contain evidence.