Buck: ‘I won’t support a convicted felon for the White House’

I actually would vote for a convicted felon if the only other viable candidate is a Republican.

I vote for policy positions, not people.

The former impact my life.
The characters involved are people I'll usually never have to meet.

I did meet Biden in 1987, wasn't spectacularly impressed,
nor was he likely impressed with me,
but I none the less voted for him in 2000.
The only other viable candidate was Trump.
 
Yakuda said:
All you have to do is prove intent. Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

No, proof of intent is NOT required. Read the link I cited:

Under the law, prosecutors will not be required to prove that Mr Trump knew that the information he possessed could harm national security, but rather that any reasonable person would understand the harm it could do. They will instead focus on Mr Trump's efforts to retain the information, even after being given multiple opportunities to surrender it to authorities.
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...al-defenders-are-saying&p=5667565#post5667565


As for your post #12, the argument seems to be that there were many allegations against Trump but no indictments for seven years, which shows he was the victim of a witch hunt.

Now he has been indicted - twice in two months - and that shows he is the victim of a witch hunt.

Maybe we should agree that as long as the sun rises in the east, Trump is the victim of a witch hunt. :laugh:
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
No, proof of intent is NOT required. Read the link I cited:

Under the law, prosecutors will not be required to prove that Mr Trump knew that the information he possessed could harm national security, but rather that any reasonable person would understand the harm it could do. They will instead focus on Mr Trump's efforts to retain the information, even after being given multiple opportunities to surrender it to authorities.
https://www.justplainpolitics.com/s...al-defenders-are-saying&p=5667565#post5667565


As for your post #12, the argument seems to be that there were many allegations against Trump but no indictments for seven years, which shows he was the victim of a witch hunt.

Now he has been indicted - twice in two months - and that shows he is the victim of a witch hunt.

Maybe we should agree that as long as the sun rises in the east, Trump is the victim of a witch hunt. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Read the espionage act

No thats not my argument. You either dont understand what I wrote or you didn't read what I wrote. Which is it?
 
Yakuda said:
You either dont understand what I wrote or you didn't read what I wrote. Which is it?
Click to expand...

This is what you wrote in post #12:
“What I see is allegations on top of allegations which have never been proven. 7 years plus and not one conviction.”

That is what I responded to. Where did I misrepresent it? I replaced “conviction” with “indictment”, because of course an indictment is required before there can be a conviction. For four of those years there could be no indictments because Trump was president.

There were two impeachment motions, which is a record, but they were blocked by the GOP majority in the Senate. (In the second impeachment, seven Republican senators voted to convict, which is also a record, but that was not enough for the required super-majority.)
 
Tinkerpeach said:
If Buck doesn’t support Trump and starts voting democrat then his constituents will toss him out

So I have no idea what he means about not supporting Trump

Is he gonna skip his birthday party or something?
Click to expand...

Don't you believe in elections? They do not throw each other out.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
This is what you wrote in post #12:
“What I see is allegations on top of allegations which have never been proven. 7 years plus and not one conviction.”

That is what I responded to. Where did I misrepresent it? I replaced “conviction” with “indictment”, because of course an indictment is required before there can be a conviction. For four of those years there could be no indictments because Trump was president.

There were two impeachment motions, which is a record, but they were blocked by the GOP majority in the Senate. (In the second impeachment, seven Republican senators voted to convict, which is also a record, but that was not enough for the required super-majority.)
Click to expand...

Conviction and indictment arent the same thing you stupid clown. You're lying disingenuous motherfucker AKA a leftist. This is precisely why you people aren't worthy of any respect.
 
Last edited:
There are more Republicans speaking out against Trump and as he begins to accumulate more indictments, the number will grow.
 
Phantasmal said:
There are more Republicans speaking out against Trump and as he begins to accumulate more indictments, the number will grow.
Click to expand...

That's basically the plan right? Keep piling on accusations in the hope that people will jump ship from trump. Explain why you people have such a hard on for trump. Please don't use that he it above the law and democracy bullshit. Apparently everyone but you leftist know that you don't really give a fuck about any of that. So what's your addiction to this trump porn really all about?
 
Tinkerpeach said:
If Buck doesn’t support Trump and starts voting democrat then his constituents will toss him out

So I have no idea what he means about not supporting Trump

Is he gonna skip his birthday party or something?
Click to expand...

^He will support one of the other repugs in the running.
 
Yakuda said:
Conviction and indictment arent the same thing you stupid clown. You're lying disingenuous motherfucker AKA a leftist. This is precisely why you people aren't worthy of any respect.
Click to expand...

I said: "an indictment is required before there can be a conviction", and Trump had no indictments until this year.

Do you dispute that? WTH is your point?

That's the finish, Yakuda. I give up trying to argue rationally with you.
 
Tranquillus in Exile said:
I said: "an indictment is required before there can be a conviction", and Trump had no indictments until this year.

Do you dispute that? WTH is your point?

That's the finish, Yakuda. I give up trying to argue rationally with you.
Click to expand...

Yes but convictions matter not indictments. You imbeciles seem to think piling up indictments against trump means he's guilty. For 7 years now we've heard how you got him and after 7 fucking years nothing.

You should run away
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
The outcome of any of the many pending trials, indictments, prosecutions, that Trump is now facing, will not move the needle on the support for Donald Trump.

It is true that about 75 million Americans support Donald Trump. But, it is only because these 75 million Americans do not care that Donald Trump is an habitual liar, or that he breaks the law, or that he abuses his power of office, or that he corrupts everything and everyone he touches, or that he is unfit for public service of any kind.

In fact, because Donald Trump is so morally, and ethically inept, and that he will do anything to seek power, is the ONE MAIN THING that makes him so popular with his cult following.

Donald Trump has only one reason to run for president again, and that is to either be able to pardon himself for all of his charges against him, or to hope for a pardon, by whoever Republican should win the election.

But here is the deal, Donald and his 75 million deplorable Cultists will not be able to win the general election.

And because they are 75 million strong, there is no chance for any other Republican contender to be able to beat him out of the primary election.

Biden clearly won the 2020 election with only 80 million votes. And most people that voted for Biden voted for him as a non-vote for Donald Trump. Had Biden not won the primary, any of the other contenders could have won against Donald Trump. Because these 80 million voters were actually just saying NO! Hell NO! Fuck NO! ANYONE BUT DONALD TRUMP!

It's simple math and simple explanations for everything here. IT'S JUST SIMPLE MATH that most any 5th grader understands.

So, the Republican party is in much worse shape than they have yet to understand.

They have put themselves into a no win situation again.
Click to expand...

Not only that but there are many republicans that voted for Trump that will never do so again because of Jan 6th. That move turned one hell of a lot of republicans off to Trump and about 40 felony indictments isn't helping. It may make his Nazi's stauchly supportive of him but it damn sure is not winning new supporters. Some more indictments is not going to help either. He caused republicans to lose a lot in the midterms and the democrats hopes only get better if the lying piece of shit wins his primary.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
I doubt if it will even go to trial since no laws were broken

It’s just another show hit job by the democrats
Click to expand...

What a fucking idiot. His own attorney general says he is toast after reading the indictment and some right wing asshole doesn't think any laws were broken? No, a president cannot take 1000 classified secrets with him when he leaves and refuse to turn them over and not be breaking laws. How the fuck could the FBI get a search warrant for these documents if Trump had every right to have them?
 
Yakuda said:
I also could shoot gum drops out of my ass but....

So you ask an EXCELLENT question which I've answered before with a question which no leftist has ever even attempted to a answer.

What I see is allegations on top of allegations which have never been proven. 7 years plus and not one conviction.

BTW in normal circumstances I wouldnt support a "convicted" felon either.
Click to expand...

First it was if he broke laws he would be charged. Then it was he's innocent until proven guilty. When he is found guilty it will be bullshit, he was railroaded. The fucker could come out and say he was guilty and fuck all of you for prosecuting me and you would still vote for him.
 
Tinkerpeach said:
An indictment only means there may be enough evidence to go to trial but it’s up to the judge, not them

An indictment is in no way a preponderance of evidence
Click to expand...

You are a fucking idiot. It will go to trial and the judge will not be the one who decides guilt. Every lawyer even rightwing ones that have read it say it's a very detailed and damning indictment. You are nothing but a fucking ignorant rightwinger that sucks trumps dick continuely, how the fuck would you know?
 
Tinkerpeach said:
This is already settled with precedent

In 2012 the DOJ argued in district court that the president may keep any documents produced during his administration

They even argued that Clinton could keep audio records with classified information on them and the judge agreed

There is zero chance of them changing it now when the law hasn’t changed
Click to expand...

Amazing that a judge ordered a search warant for documents he was legally allowed to have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top