- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
CLARIFIED QUESTION: "Can you prove anything Trump has been accused of is false?"
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:06 am
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:06 am
ETA: I teed this up wrong because almost ALL of you are arguing the wrong point. I GET that "innocent until proven guilty" is a thing. It's just not my question. MY QUESTION IS: Even if it were all true, is there anything in there that is impeachable?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Got this question in a Twitter spat.
My gut reaction is to say that I don't feel the need to refute it simply because nothing I have heard is an impeachable offense.
Before I bite that off, though, is that a valid position? It seems to all boil down to whether he was pressuring Ukraine ONLY to damage a rival candidate. The fact that it would indeed be damaging to Biden is, to me, incidental to the fact that it is valid to pursue suspicion that the Bidens were selling influence.
I know there are many baws here much more informed on the nuts and bolts of all this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Got this question in a Twitter spat.
My gut reaction is to say that I don't feel the need to refute it simply because nothing I have heard is an impeachable offense.
Before I bite that off, though, is that a valid position? It seems to all boil down to whether he was pressuring Ukraine ONLY to damage a rival candidate. The fact that it would indeed be damaging to Biden is, to me, incidental to the fact that it is valid to pursue suspicion that the Bidens were selling influence.
I know there are many baws here much more informed on the nuts and bolts of all this.
This post was edited on 12/6/19 at 9:34 am
36
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:07 am to Ag Zwin
So... the legal system in this country is now guilty until proved innocent?
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:08 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
"Can you prove anything Trump has been accused of is false?"
Wait, aren't we in America where they have to prove you're guilty not the other way around?
This post was edited on 12/6/19 at 9:56 am
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:08 am to Ag Zwin
It is the burden of the accusers to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Not the burden of the accused to prove innocence.
These people are truly the worst “Ends justify the means” people ever
Not the burden of the accused to prove innocence.
These people are truly the worst “Ends justify the means” people ever
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:08 am to Ag Zwin
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/27/20 at 4:22 pm
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:08 am to Ag Zwin
Burden of proof is on the accuser....this is common knowledge. That's all that needs to be said.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:09 am to Ag Zwin
Democrats dont believe in the Constitution
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:09 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
My gut reaction is to say that I don't feel the need to refute it simply because nothing I have heard is an impeachable offense.
You are correct. This is impeachment. You can't play the what if game. It needs to be based on facts.
If the what if strategy works then the dems are screwed. There are so many whatifs surrounding Joe Biden and other dems on corruption in Ukraine.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:10 am to Ag Zwin
quote:lol of course it's not. Are you really asking? That's the epitome of "guilty until proven innocent". The burden is always on the accuser to prove the allegations.
Before I bite that off, though, is that a valid position?
Where do you even find these backwards thinking idiots?
quote:
Twitter spat.
Ah.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:11 am to Ag Zwin
this is to me, the same as saying a watermelon is purple inside until you cut it open, prove me wrong
how the heck can someone PROVE their innocence when there is NO CRIME to prove innocence of?????
how the heck can someone PROVE their innocence when there is NO CRIME to prove innocence of?????
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:12 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
"Can you prove anything Trump has been accused of is false?"
Can you prove anything Trump has been accused of is true?
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:13 am to ChexMix
quote:
Democrats dont believe in the Constitution
bullshite.... Nancy said so yesterday during her emphatic rant that left the world scratching their collective heads wondering WTF just occurred.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:13 am to Ag Zwin
Burden of proof is to actually PROVE that he’s actually done anything he’s been accused of
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:14 am to Ag Zwin
All you guys are missing the point. I agree that the "proving a negative" and "innocent until proven guilty" positions are valid.
MY POINT, though, is that EVEN IF it were all true, it's still not an impeachable offense.
Is THAT valid?
MY POINT, though, is that EVEN IF it were all true, it's still not an impeachable offense.
Is THAT valid?
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:16 am to Ag Zwin
Tell your twitter friend that you can't prove that he\she isn't an ax murderer so therefore needs to be arrested and imprisoned.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:16 am to KLSU
quote:
Wait, aren't we in America were they have to prove you're guilty not the other way around?
Silly, that's the way it used to be, those old laws were written by racist and are not enforceable anymore. The old hag told us that yesterday. They don't need evidence, they just say he's guilty and he is
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:17 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
Got this question in a Twitter spat.
Liberal logic 101.
We see that same one on here all the time. It's hilarious.
quote:
Before I bite that off, though, is that a valid position?
Of course not.
How could it be? It's the same silliness they did with Kav.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:18 am to Ag Zwin
This is similar to "prove you aren't a racist".
You ignore it. You are dealing with an authoritarian.
You ignore it. You are dealing with an authoritarian.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:18 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
Before I bite that off, though, is that a valid position?
No, it's a stupid position.
Posted on 12/6/19 at 8:18 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
MY POINT, though, is that EVEN IF it were all true, it's still not an impeachable offense.
Is THAT valid?
Yes.
You are correct. Even if everything they actually have accused him of, it isn't impeachable. Hell, it's not even wrong.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News