Yip I don’t have knowledge on the aspects of all his criminal charges, I’m not a lawyer. I rely on a logical outlook on what I am reading.
I believe this thread is littered with huge majority of people with severe Trump derangement syndrome, that can not think objectively when it comes to this particular person. I’m not knocking the people who think like this as I am sure they are capable of objective thinking, just not on this subject. I neither hate the man, nor love the man, so believe I can see this through less foggy glasses.
I personally think has been quite smart and calculated, which on the surface seems strange as he gives the impression of being unhinged. I believe he is smart as the paper trail has been by design (or pure luck) very subjective and convoluted. I have read no direct proof that he paid Cohen AND that it was marked as payment towards the non-disclosures. It seems this way, it’s just not that cut and dried, and has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. There is nothing with a note attached saying this payment is for Cohen, for the payment to Daniels. There is no invoice from Cohen detailing breakdowns of the payment. There is no signatures on the non disclosure (which I am led to believe is normal). There is testimony from a seriously unreliable witness, Cohen, that has had even more doubt cast over his testimony. Cohen made the payments, whether you think Trump knew is irrelevant, it’s what can be proven.
Some of you also think there are other cases that are cut and dried, and I also don’t see it that way. You all go on about a recorded phone call where he say “find me x number of votes”, and while I find it suspicious, I also find the wording extremely ambiguous. If he said, make me x votes, or create x votes, then I think it would be cut and dried, and near impossible to explain away. And before you go searching for the quote, let me just say Im going on memory so can’t be 100% sure it is accurate. It’s semantics, and I sincerely hope nobody gets criminally charge on semantics alone.
I am obviously not right on all aspects of my train of thought, I just think I am right on my general train of thought. I don’t think he will be convicted even before appeal, and this is bound to upset some of you.
I’ve probably got a few things wrong in this post as well.
Let me get this straight. You believe that an under the table payment to keep a pornstar from blabbing about Trumps pee wee, that he couldnt keep to himself while married, and possibly made using election funds would normally be recorded with an invoice and a receipt?
You also believe that the guy that thought we should swallow torches and inject bleach is clever? The same guy that was so clever he thought he could shag a pornstar at a golf tournament while having ambitions of the top job and no one ever would know?
I don’t think it would be worded that way, and you might also want to remove possibly before you convict someone.
I think this is your problem, you think that someone is stupid because they did something stupid, while I personally think something someone does is stupid and not the person, and that’s something you would do well to remember, or else you will continue to underestimate people in life. Or maybe this is only something you believe when it’s related to Trump, I don’t know you so I can’t tell. I also do this in the heat of the moment, yet don’t think the person is literally an idiot.
Trump’s guilty of a lot of the charges put up against him
The courts might well rule in his favour though. I feel prosecuting him on this only helps make him into a martyr.
The fact that he’s been shown as someone who’s got a possible chance of being the next President shows how fucked quite a lot of people are (the people who vote for him)
As for me , I’ll roll on the butter chicken and Naan and keep enjoying myself at this car-crash that is the US elections.
Would be good if they still give buzz cuts on entering the penal system in U S… would love, just love to see him lose that rebarbative ‘bouffant’ of a quiff of his
How is that different from yourself? In this thread you have engaged with multiple arguments with people who have very diffferent opinions, at times you’ve admitted that you were wrong and they were right about certain details then at the end of it all you come right back and give the exact same opinion dismissing whatever anyone else says as being politically motivated.
The trials alone - you decided its all politically motivated by the Democrats. You’ve dismissed any evidence given in the trials (despite here demanding any counter arguments to your assertion be made with evidence) then attacked others by calling them deranged.
If anything, there is an Overton window effect that is the opposite of the claimed Trump Derangement Syndrome. The man spoke to a mob on January 6 that then took a short walk and made the most serious attack on American democracy since the Constitution was enacted. What John Brown did was an intermural squabble compared to attacking Congress. Even the Confederacy did not challenge the legitimacy of Lincoln’s election and dispute the handover of power, they just attempted to leave the federal system. It is actually astonishing how miniscule the consequences of January 6 have been, minor sentences to foot soldiers but otherwise nothing. Yet that somehow passes as normal. In the broad arc of American political history, this is an utterly bizarre era.
Not calling them deranged at all, I’m saying a lot of people here have Trump derangement syndrome. The meaning I interpret is that people can not think objectively when it comes to trump, and it doesn’t mean people are deranged per se. I have already admitted I am wrong in certain aspects, I just don’t think I am wrong in the overall analysis. The difference is people that hate trump beyond reason will never admit to being wrong about anything when it comes to him, hence trump derangement. I neither hate the guy or love the guy, I dont think he is the reincarnation of Hitler and I don’t think he is the saviour of the republicans.
Do you think that the people on here who have argued with you in a calm and rational manner are unable to look at the situation with any objectivity?
Are they beyond reason?
Here’s a tiny nice excerpt from npr that highlights what I think is the issue with the entire situation. The reason I have highlighted this is not to show guilt or innocence, it’s the highlight that there is very little middle ground, and each party has their pov.
Democrats have pointed to one phrase in particular as they argue that Trump incited those present to march down Pennsylvania Avenue toward the Capitol.
“We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore,” he said.
His defense lawyers, however, point to a different passage, in which Trump said, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” They argue that his words were not a call for actual violence and lawlessness.
Some have, and have made good points. I think some will never be happy with anything other than a guilty. I can think of a few here that want trump to be found guilty under any circumstances, and that’s just the feeling I have when reading responses.
You castigate people fpr assuming Trump is guilty, but you assume he is innocent and being railroaded - no matter what evidence to the contrary is given.
Well quite a few say it, and a few I’ve seen on this site (just to be clear, I not talking literally the reincarnation). Maybe its just hyperbole. I don’t mean to castigate, I just call it as I see it, I don’t think any of you are bad or idiotic people just because of your Trump views, I’m sure we agree on other subjects.
