America needs a trial.

[CC27]

Mon Jul 3, 2023, 07:53 AM
Star Member kentuck (109,677 posts)


America needs a trial.

But, is it possible?

Many people believe that Donald Trump should have been arrested on January 6th, the day of the insurrection. Every day since, he has only become more and more emboldened.

However, our system was not prepared for the events of January 6th.

Would a trial only make our country more divided than it is at present? Is it time to hold our noses and take the castor oil?

Joe Biden and his Cabinet refuse to comment on the actions of the Justice Department. Still, Trump and Republicans blame Biden for the investigations against Trump. There is no way to win this argument.

Trump, on the other hand, considers himself on trial already. His rallies are his closing statements. There is nothing less than his freedom at stake. It is unfortunate that he is permitted to lie at will, as he does on every occasion.

But, as someone noted a few days ago, there are not two sides to a lie.

No doubt, a trial would be difficult, both strategically and politically. Emotions and tensions would be high.

However, the Justice system needs to end this assault upon our democracy. People that lie need to be put under oath and questioned.

If there is no trial by election day of 2024, then the election will be the trial. If Trump wins, America loses.

The decision must come soon.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218061619

BLAH BLAH BLAH Ken****

[SVPete]

kt needs to move up to Canada so he and Nance could drunk-post together

[Delmar]

Down towards the bottom of the thread was this funny little exchange.

Response to kentuck (Reply #26)Mon Jul 3, 2023, 02:36 PM
Star Member brooklynite (87,617 posts)
27. Name the SPECIFIC criminal action that would have warranted arrest on Jan 6th.

"organized an insurrection" is insufficiently vague. And "told people to go to the Capitol" is worthless unless you can prove intent.

FWIW, my wife -- who has worked as a Federal Prosecutor -- does not think DOJ will indict on this issue.

Response to brooklynite (Reply #27)Mon Jul 3, 2023, 02:46 PM
Star Member kentuck (109,683 posts)
28. Even Donald Trump thought he was guilty.

Certainly his Party thought he was the only one that could call off the dogs and he didn't.

The argument sounds like a cop that sees a bank robber leaving the bank with a sack of money and a smoking gun but he doesn't have enough evidence to make an arrest.

I think the reason is not about insufficient evidence. It is about something else.

I think maybe we see what we want to see.

Response to kentuck (Reply #28)Mon Jul 3, 2023, 03:07 PM
Star Member brooklynite (87,617 posts)
29. "Thought" is not the basis of a prosecution.

Neither is "we know what he meant"

The brooklynite primitive pushing back and making kentuck look like the dumb ass he is.

[ADsOutburst]

However, our system was not prepared for the events of January 6th.

No, it wasn't. Hence why the alleged ringleader of the "insurrection" offered more help. You know, to... uh... make it look like he wan't trying to overthrow the government, or something... I guess.

[SVPete]

No, it wasn't. Hence why the alleged ringleader of the "insurrection" offered more help. You know, to... uh... make it look like he wan't trying to overthrow the government, or something... I guess.

Trump offered National Guard assistance before 1/6. Because riot planners always reinforce police before their planned riot.