Should Donald Trump be in jail?

[vcczar]

New poll in light of today's hearing and from the previous days. 

[vcczar]

@ConservativeElector2 what is your "other no" so we know what it is?

[MrPotatoTed]

Most people don't even have TV anymore.  I expect next to nobody is really paying attention to the hearings, and those who are made up their mind on January 6th.

[Hestia]

13 minutes ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Most people don't even have TV anymore.  I expect next to nobody is really paying attention to the hearings, and those who are made up their mind on January 6th.

I don't doubt that many have made up their minds, but this sort of stuff will permeate discourse. Any sort of news will be talking about what Ms. Hutchinson said today. I don't think the amount of people listening to the hearing directly is the most important thing, but quite a few will hear the bigger things watching the news and just talking with people around them. 

[MrPotatoTed]

4 minutes ago, Hestia said:

I don't doubt that many have made up their minds, but this sort of stuff will permeate discourse. Any sort of news will be talking about what Ms. Hutchinson said today. I don't think the amount of people listening to the hearing directly is the most important thing, but quite a few will hear the bigger things watching the news and just talking with people around them. 

I literally haven't heard or seen a single person talking about the hearings at all.  All political chatter has been 100% about Roe v Wade.

[Hestia]

1 minute ago, MrPotatoTed said:

I literally haven't heard or seen a single person talking about the hearings at all.  All political chatter has been 100% about Roe v Wade.

Well...it did just happen 2 hours ago...lol

[Hestia]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

 

The problem is, it's not justice, and can't possibly be, when only one gang of criminals is dragged in for trial and possible jailing, but all the others are still at large, with no warrants for their arrest, and, in fact, given the keys to the kingdom to keep committing their crimes with impunity, because they all testified against the original gang, with whom they have a vendetta against, anyways. Justice is not even POSSIBLE under such circumstances, but it is, in fact, a MOCKERY of justice. While Trump and his cronies do deserve to have the book thrown at them, the conspicuously and overtly lopsided viewpoint here shows that this is not justice - and should not be called such. "Justice is blind, all are equal before the law, and justice is for all."

Let me know once you've watched the hearing and can formulate an opinion on what was said rather than blathering on with your usual replies.

[Hestia]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

I'm still waiting for hearings to come up on the high crimes the ones I listed, above, to actually happen. It's unfortunate you think so lowly of the integrity, values, Constitutional laws, and the noblest ideals of your nation that me calling out those who have thoroughly transgressed, violated, manipulated, and even outright ignoring them to commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, acts of high corruption, and betrayals of their mandate of authority of trust as just, "blathering on with your usual replies," in a contemptuous and dismissive way, because your honed in, like a hawk, on partisan justice (or, non-justice, rather, as partisan justice is not, and cannot be, justice).

Just let me know when

Edited June 28, 2022 by Hestia

[MrPotatoTed]

11 minutes ago, Hestia said:

Well...it did just happen 2 hours ago...lol

Hearings started almost a month ago, didn't they?  I understand you're talking about one specific person's testimony, but I heard about the Depp-Heard trial every minute on the minute.  I'm hearing NOBODY say a single word about the Jan 6 hearings at all.  I'm telling you, people don't care and aren't paying attention because they've already decided Trump = Good or Trump = Bad and no amount of testimony or evidence will change that.

[Hestia]

Just now, MrPotatoTed said:

Hearings started almost a month ago, didn't they?  I understand you're talking about one specific person's testimony, but I heard about the Depp-Heard trial every minute on the minute.  I'm hearing NOBODY say a single word about the Jan 6 hearings at all.  I'm telling you, people don't care and aren't paying attention because they've already decided Trump = Good or Trump = Bad and no amount of testimony or evidence will change that.

Then it could be entirely different from where you are than me. I've had friends and family that aren't exactly politically dialed in that told me that they at least watched the first hearing or mentioning it to parents/etc. It could also be a difference in generation/difference in who you're around than who I'm around. There's a lot of polarization, but I don't think that it's NOBODY paying attention.

https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3850

[Hestia]

Just now, Patine said:

This political gang turf warfare, not justice. Can't you see that, or have you become that blind?

If you haven't watched the hearings or haven't seen what's been said and can't make it up for your own mind what's happening, then there really isn't that much more to discuss. Remember, these are Congressional HEARINGS. This is not a COURT. The same can be said for the Benghazi hearings. Congress has the power and authority to investigate where it decides it wants to investigate in. The House voted for both of those investigations. It will not and cannot levy power on its own to charge anybody of anything. It is an investigation only. Only the DOJ or other actors (like what's happening in Northern Georgia) has the power to do so. THOSE actors will go to court, in which neutral arbiters (judges or a jury) will rule on the facts of the case. That is a fundamental fact that you don't seem to understand since you aren't paying attention to the basic matters of the case here. If you can't understand that, then I have no use in replying further because you simply don't understand at that point. 

[Hestia]

1 minute ago, Patine said:

But ignoring these issues is what, "good citizens who have nothing to fear - turning in a relative is a doubled reward - and know and accept that 1+1=3," are expected to do. I'm not proclaiming a conspiracy theory - because what I say is just so blatantly obviously if you take off your damned blinders. If you actually GIVE A DAMN about your country, and NOT one party or another.

It's not obvious and you're obviously incorrect because you don't know how this process is playing out since you seem to believe that the Congressional investigation is a trial when it is not.

[Hestia]

Just now, Patine said:

Ah, fair enough. Still, where were the hearings for the others I mentioned (except Hillary Clinton with Benghazi?)

Congress has the power to invoke hearings for those if they desire to. They obviously do not. You can believe they "should" if you want to. They haven't. It's a power of Congress to decide where and when they investigate, there are no specific rules (that I know of) that mandates when they have to and when they don't. Whether that is right or not is up to your opinion, but in the end, it isn't a travesty of justice if they do not, because it isn't against the law.  

[ConservativeElector2]

1 hour ago, vcczar said:

@ConservativeElector2 what is your "other no" so we know what it is?

My other no is that the testimonies are indeed just a political sham, but that I cannot determine whether Trump did something personally wrong or not. As this was implied with option 2 as well, I chose option 4.

Even if he did "something" wrong, it would not warrant a sentence to jail most likely.

Edited June 28, 2022 by ConservativeElector2

[Hestia]

Just now, Patine said:

And, I've always thought peer review of transgressions and crimes by political figures (Congressional hearings and impeachments) was a horrible mistake from the start, and wreaks of the old British Nobility who, being above the Common Courts, had their fate decided by their Peers in the House of Lords when accused of a crime. Does such Feudal indulgence belong in a Republic, or the shadow thereof?

That's a fair shake of it, but in the end, it's how everything is. It's how it all was created. I don't necessarily agree with it either, but trying to set up something that would (say something that looks more like the reviews into Boris Johnson's partying from independent investigators and civil servants) is impossible in Washington. I wish it weren't, but it is. 

[pilight]

4 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Hearings started almost a month ago, didn't they?  I understand you're talking about one specific person's testimony, but I heard about the Depp-Heard trial every minute on the minute.  I'm hearing NOBODY say a single word about the Jan 6 hearings at all.  I'm telling you, people don't care and aren't paying attention because they've already decided Trump = Good or Trump = Bad and no amount of testimony or evidence will change that.

Must be the crowd you hang out with.  Nobody I know watched the Depp-Heard trial but almost all of them are following the hearings.

[MrPotatoTed]

12 hours ago, pilight said:

Must be the crowd you hang out with.  Nobody I know watched the Depp-Heard trial but almost all of them are following the hearings.

Were any of them undecided on whether they'd support re-electing Trump before the hearings began?  Have any of them changed their minds?

[jvikings1]

 

[jvikings1]

 

[10centjimmy]

51 minutes ago, jvikings1 said:

 

I mean, she admitted she wasn't in the car so they should testify on a lot of things. Did she say why the deputy didn't want to corroborate the statements?

[jvikings1]

17 minutes ago, 10centjimmy said:

I mean, she admitted she wasn't in the car so they should testify on a lot of things. Did she say why the deputy didn't want to corroborate the statements?

So the big “bombshell” new evidence was just a bunch of hearsay nonsense that turned out to be false.

Why not call up the actual witnesses? If it was about transparency that would have happened. Exactly why this whole sham means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

[10centjimmy]

1 minute ago, jvikings1 said:

So the big “bombshell” new evidence was just a bunch of hearsay nonsense that turned out to be false.

Why not call up the actual witnesses? If it was about transparency that would have happened. Exactly why this whole sham means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

False? Did they already testify under oath?

Get in the room and testify. Not hide behind tweets and stories of "sources".

Edited June 29, 2022 by 10centjimmy

[pilight]

4 hours ago, MrPotatoTed said:

Were any of them undecided on whether they'd support re-electing Trump before the hearings began?  Have any of them changed their minds?

Is anybody undecided about Trump?

[MrPotatoTed]

15 minutes ago, pilight said:

Is anybody undecided about Trump?

Exactly my point.  The question was what impact these hearings will have on whether Trump gets re-elected.  My answer was none.

[Hestia]

1 hour ago, jvikings1 said:

So the big “bombshell” new evidence was just a bunch of hearsay nonsense that turned out to be false.

Why not call up the actual witnesses? If it was about transparency that would have happened. Exactly why this whole sham means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

The testimony about the car is hearsay yes because she wasn't in it and heard it from others. The other things she directly heard are not hearsay because she was heard them firsthand.