THE ACCURATE RELOADING POLITICAL CRATER


Moderators: DRG
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
What do you mean by "lawfare"? Login/Join 
One of Us
posted
Republicans like to claim that Trump is the victim of "lawfare." (Have you noticed that he's always the victim of something or another?)

I'd like to know what they--including our Republican forum members--mean by that term as applied to Trump. Specificity, please.

Do you mean he didn't do the crimes? Is innocent? That the jury verdict was wrong? Why should we disbelieve a jury that heard all the evidence?

Do you mean he was targeted for prosecution because he's a big celebrity? Because of limited funding for their departments, prosecutors like to go after high-profile individuals in order to set an example for others who might be tempted to violate the law. The prosecutor did their duty by prosecuting Trump, if they thought he was guilty. Should Trump's fraud be overlooked because of who he is?

Court decisions are presumptively valid, unless overturned on appeal. Please give me one good, specific reason why this verdict should be considered invalid.
 
Posts: 6960 | Location: Coeur d' Alene, Idaho, USA | Registered: 08 March 2013Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.......


.
 
Posts: 42433 | Location: Crosby and Barksdale, Texas | Registered: 18 September 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ledvm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JTEX:
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.......


.


Good first answer Jim!


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.
 
Posts: 38213 | Location: Gainesville, TX | Registered: 24 December 2006Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
"Lawfare" is any time a Republican is held accountable for breaking the Law.


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 10969 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Roland & Jeffive,

I'll give you a definition of Lawfare. Every Democrat should be thoroughly investigated and prosecuted, but only when appropriate, not like this administration has conducted themselves.
 
Posts: 10436 | Location: Houston, Texas | Registered: 26 December 2005Reply With Quote
Administrator
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ledvm:
quote:
Originally posted by JTEX:
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.......


.


Good first answer Jim!


Instead of you two being like tweedle de and tweedle dum, get your heads out of Trump’s arse and pick a decent person to lead you!

You and the dems are what the English call six of one and half a dozen of the other! jumping


www.accuratereloading.com
Instagram : ganyana2000
 
Posts: 69052 | Location: Dubai, UAE | Registered: 08 January 1998Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by JTEX:
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.......


.


You're deflecting and not addressing my question.

But I'll play a little bit. Who were the Democrats you remember calling for Trump's impeachment the minute he announced he was running?
 
Posts: 6960 | Location: Coeur d' Alene, Idaho, USA | Registered: 08 March 2013Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of ledvm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Saeed:
quote:
Originally posted by ledvm:
quote:
Originally posted by JTEX:
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.......


.


Good first answer Jim!


Instead of you two being like tweedle de and tweedle dum, get your heads out of Trump’s arse and pick a decent person to lead you!

You and the dems are what the English call six of one and half a dozen of the other! jumping


I voted for Rick Perry in the Primary. He didn’t get the nomination. Thus I will go with the next best option for President — any Republican.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
J. Lane Easter, DVM

A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House

No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991.
 
Posts: 38213 | Location: Gainesville, TX | Registered: 24 December 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of LongDistanceOperator
posted Hide Post
A Republican excuse for crying.
 
Posts: 7622 | Location: near Austin, Texas, USA | Registered: 15 December 2000Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Steve Ahrenberg
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Republicans like to claim that Trump is the victim of "lawfare." (Have you noticed that he's always the victim of something or another?)

I'd like to know what they--including our Republican forum members--mean by that term as applied to Trump. Specificity, please.

Do you mean he didn't do the crimes? Is innocent? That the jury verdict was wrong? Why should we disbelieve a jury that heard all the evidence?

Do you mean he was targeted for prosecution because he's a big celebrity? Because of limited funding for their departments, prosecutors like to go after high-profile individuals in order to set an example for others who might be tempted to violate the law. The prosecutor did their duty by prosecuting Trump, if they thought he was guilty. Should Trump's fraud be overlooked because of who he is?

Court decisions are presumptively valid, unless overturned on appeal. Please give me one good, specific reason why this verdict should be considered invalid.


Roland -

I'll attempt to give you an honest answer, with no flippant remarks;

When both Alvin Bragg and the female DA who's name escapes me, run on "getting Trump" that's lawfare.

Our system isn't one of investigating somebody until you find a crime.

Or a Special Council illegally established?

Reasonable answer?


Formerly "Nganga"
 
Posts: 3603 | Location: Phoenix, Arizona | Registered: 26 April 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
What did the head of the NKVD tell Stalin?


“Give me the man and I will find the crime.”


DRSS
Kreighoff 470 NE
Valmet 412 30/06 & 9.3x74R
 
Posts: 1993 | Location: Denver | Registered: 31 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
quote:
Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Republicans like to claim that Trump is the victim of "lawfare." (Have you noticed that he's always the victim of something or another?)

I'd like to know what they--including our Republican forum members--mean by that term as applied to Trump. Specificity, please.

Do you mean he didn't do the crimes? Is innocent? That the jury verdict was wrong? Why should we disbelieve a jury that heard all the evidence?

Do you mean he was targeted for prosecution because he's a big celebrity? Because of limited funding for their departments, prosecutors like to go after high-profile individuals in order to set an example for others who might be tempted to violate the law. The prosecutor did their duty by prosecuting Trump, if they thought he was guilty. Should Trump's fraud be overlooked because of who he is?

Court decisions are presumptively valid, unless overturned on appeal. Please give me one good, specific reason why this verdict should be considered invalid.


Roland -

I'll attempt to give you an honest answer, with no flippant remarks;

When both Alvin Bragg and the female DA who's name escapes me, run on "getting Trump" that's lawfare.

Our system isn't one of investigating somebody until you find a crime.

Or a Special Council illegally established?

Reasonable answer?


Seems like that indicates that a majority of voters thought there was a criminal that needed "getting".

Still had to present evidence to a Grand Jury to get indictments and to a jury for conviction.


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 10969 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
quote:
Originally posted by JTEX:
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.


You're deflecting and not addressing my question.

But I'll play a little bit. Who were the Democrats you remember calling for Trump's impeachment the minute he announced he was running?


Well Roland, how about this article from the Wash Post on 01/20/2017-By Matea Gold
January 20, 2017 at 12:19 p.m. EST
The effort to impeach President Donald John Trump is already underway."

Or this:
Fox, Emily Jane (December 15, 2016). "Democrats Are Paving the Way to Impeach Donald Trump". Vanity Fair. Archived from the original on February 2, 2015.'

Notice the date o February 02, 2015.

February 02, 2015!!!


Or this"
 
Posts: 151 | Registered: 04 May 2019Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Huvius
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Republicans like to claim that Trump is the victim of "lawfare." (Have you noticed that he's always the victim of something or another?)

I'd like to know what they--including our Republican forum members--mean by that term as applied to Trump. Specificity, please.

Do you mean he didn't do the crimes? Is innocent? That the jury verdict was wrong? Why should we disbelieve a jury that heard all the evidence?

Do you mean he was targeted for prosecution because he's a big celebrity? Because of limited funding for their departments, prosecutors like to go after high-profile individuals in order to set an example for others who might be tempted to violate the law. The prosecutor did their duty by prosecuting Trump, if they thought he was guilty. Should Trump's fraud be overlooked because of who he is?

Court decisions are presumptively valid, unless overturned on appeal. Please give me one good, specific reason why this verdict should be considered invalid.


I think the simple answer is the targeting your political opponents by charging them for crimes that would otherwise not be pursued against a regular citizen or the pursuit of prosecution of your political opponents for alleged crimes that people in your own political party are obviously guilty of as well but are not prosecuted under the notion of equal justice under the law.
Good for the goose is good for the gander sort of stuff.
 
Posts: 3358 | Location: Colorado U.S.A. | Registered: 24 December 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Apparently Trumps lawyers just filed a complaint with the FEC over the DNC turning over 91M in donation that were pledged to Biden.


Time for impeachment!!!!!


Because that’s what the left would demand.


DRSS
Kreighoff 470 NE
Valmet 412 30/06 & 9.3x74R
 
Posts: 1993 | Location: Denver | Registered: 31 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hasher:
Apparently Trumps lawyers just filed a complaint with the FEC over the DNC turning over 91M in donation that were pledged to Biden.


Time for impeachment!!!!!


Because that’s what the left would demand.


First, those donations were to the Biden/Harris campaign.

Second, since the Republicans have neutered the FEC, so what?


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 10969 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
So you’re a campaign insider now and have intimate knowledge of who donated to who?


I salute you sir.

Should be plenty of graft for you this election cycle.


DRSS
Kreighoff 470 NE
Valmet 412 30/06 & 9.3x74R
 
Posts: 1993 | Location: Denver | Registered: 31 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hasher:
So you’re a campaign insider now and have intimate knowledge of who donated to who?


I salute you sir.

Should be plenty of graft for you this election cycle.


I have the magical ability to read.


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 10969 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by k-22hornet.:
quote:
Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
quote:
Originally posted by JTEX:
I remember several democrats calling for impeachment the minute he announced he was running.


You're deflecting and not addressing my question.

But I'll play a little bit. Who were the Democrats you remember calling for Trump's impeachment the minute he announced he was running?


Well Roland, how about this article from the Wash Post on 01/20/2017-By Matea Gold
January 20, 2017 at 12:19 p.m. EST
The effort to impeach President Donald John Trump is already underway."

Or this:
Fox, Emily Jane (December 15, 2016). "Democrats Are Paving the Way to Impeach Donald Trump". Vanity Fair. Archived from the original on February 2, 2015.'

Notice the date o February 02, 2015.

February 02, 2015!!!


Or this"


There is no bad faith in preparing to impeach a 34 count felon and an adjudicated sexual abuser.
 
Posts: 12495 | Location: Somewhere above Tennessee and below Kentucky  | Registered: 31 July 2016Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Before he was a felon or adjudicated?

You are walking into the lawfare accusation there.
 
Posts: 11130 | Location: Minnesota USA | Registered: 15 June 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:
quote:
Originally posted by Hasher:
So you’re a campaign insider now and have intimate knowledge of who donated to who?


I salute you sir.

Should be plenty of graft for you this election cycle.


I have the magical ability to read.



It’s the ability to comprehend and reason that you lack.


DRSS
Kreighoff 470 NE
Valmet 412 30/06 & 9.3x74R
 
Posts: 1993 | Location: Denver | Registered: 31 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of JudgeG
posted Hide Post
Assuming, arguendo, that Trump should have been prosecuted by both state and federal authorities, is it not lawfare to prosecute Trump and not Biden for his classified documents thefts, not impanel a grand jury to investigate the payments that he and his family have received for selling political influence, Sec. of Homeland security Mayorkas for lying to Congress, Garland for refusal to abide by subpoenas, Hillary Clinton’s, destruction of evidence and election fraud (Russian dossier… there are probably more than 34 felonies there Confused ), in ad nasueam?

The intellectual dishonesty, I guess, is just another proof of TDS.


JudgeG ... just counting time 'til I am again finding balm in Gilead chilled out somewhere in the Selous.
 
Posts: 7747 | Location: GA | Registered: 27 February 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
JudgeG

Let me respond for them.

Bri f up something from this century.

That was already looked at.

It’s ok when we do it because it’s for the people.

They are so dirty we need a separate prison just for their leaders and their famalies.


DRSS
Kreighoff 470 NE
Valmet 412 30/06 & 9.3x74R
 
Posts: 1993 | Location: Denver | Registered: 31 May 2010Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Before he was a felon or adjudicated?

You are walking into the lawfare accusation there.


Impeachment is a purely political function, not a legal one.


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 10969 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
He's only a victim of headstuckupassism !!!
 
Posts: 2649 | Registered: 25 June 2016Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Yes it is… but to claim that trying to impeach Trump before he held office or just after because he was found against in a civil case and found guilty in a criminal case was justified when the convictions occurred what 7-8 years later is either showing lawfare or that the democrats are prescient…

And JFK would never have gotten on the plane to Dallas if they were prescient.


quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Before he was a felon or adjudicated?

You are walking into the lawfare accusation there.


Impeachment is a purely political function, not a legal one.
 
Posts: 11130 | Location: Minnesota USA | Registered: 15 June 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Yes it is… but to claim that trying to impeach Trump before he held office or just after because he was found against in a civil case and found guilty in a criminal case was justified when the convictions occurred what 7-8 years later is either showing lawfare or that the democrats are prescient…

And JFK would never have gotten on the plane to Dallas if they were prescient.


quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Before he was a felon or adjudicated?

You are walking into the lawfare accusation there.


Impeachment is a purely political function, not a legal one.


Kindly point out where I said any of those things.


"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”- Donald Trump
 
Posts: 10969 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Nakihunter
posted Hide Post
Ok. now let us see what your moral compas is made of. Smiler

Was Trump not guilty of "Lawfare" in 2016 when he promised to prosecute Hillary and the Republicans screamed "lock her up"?

Were the Republicans and Ken Starr not guilty of "lawfare" against bill Clinton?

Is Johnson not guilty of "lawfare" when he threatens to sue the DNC for Biden dropping out?



quote:
Originally posted by Steve Ahrenberg:
quote:
Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Republicans like to claim that Trump is the victim of "lawfare." (Have you noticed that he's always the victim of something or another?)

I'd like to know what they--including our Republican forum members--mean by that term as applied to Trump. Specificity, please.

Do you mean he didn't do the crimes? Is innocent? That the jury verdict was wrong? Why should we disbelieve a jury that heard all the evidence?

Do you mean he was targeted for prosecution because he's a big celebrity? Because of limited funding for their departments, prosecutors like to go after high-profile individuals in order to set an example for others who might be tempted to violate the law. The prosecutor did their duty by prosecuting Trump, if they thought he was guilty. Should Trump's fraud be overlooked because of who he is?

Court decisions are presumptively valid, unless overturned on appeal. Please give me one good, specific reason why this verdict should be considered invalid.


Roland -

I'll attempt to give you an honest answer, with no flippant remarks;

When both Alvin Bragg and the female DA who's name escapes me, run on "getting Trump" that's lawfare.

Our system isn't one of investigating somebody until you find a crime.

Or a Special Council illegally established?

Reasonable answer?


"When the wind stops....start rowing. When the wind starts, get the sail up quick."
 
Posts: 11388 | Location: New Zealand | Registered: 02 July 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Nakihunter
posted Hide Post
it depends on what the documents were and if the removal of the documents was calculated & deliberate or just an error of memory.

Trump claimed that those documents were his. A lie.

He and his lawyers claimed that all documents had been handed over. A lie that was repeated more than once.

The evidence shows that Trump tried repeatedly to take the classified documents despite being told to return them and ordered to return them. That is theft.

No such allegations against Biden.

Have you heard of the "sniff test"? Trump stinks while Biden does not. Simple.


quote:
Originally posted by JudgeG:
Assuming, arguendo, that Trump should have been prosecuted by both state and federal authorities, is it not lawfare to prosecute Trump and not Biden for his classified documents thefts, not impanel a grand jury to investigate the payments that he and his family have received for selling political influence, Sec. of Homeland security Mayorkas for lying to Congress, Garland for refusal to abide by subpoenas, Hillary Clinton’s, destruction of evidence and election fraud (Russian dossier… there are probably more than 34 felonies there Confused ), in ad nasueam?

The intellectual dishonesty, I guess, is just another proof of TDS.


"When the wind stops....start rowing. When the wind starts, get the sail up quick."
 
Posts: 11388 | Location: New Zealand | Registered: 02 July 2008Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
You did not, but you responded to a post I placed regarding LHeym's right above mine.

There is no bad faith in preparing to impeach a 34 count felon and an adjudicated sexual abuser.

quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Yes it is… but to claim that trying to impeach Trump before he held office or just after because he was found against in a civil case and found guilty in a criminal case was justified when the convictions occurred what 7-8 years later is either showing lawfare or that the democrats are prescient…

And JFK would never have gotten on the plane to Dallas if they were prescient.


quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:
quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Before he was a felon or adjudicated?

You are walking into the lawfare accusation there.


Impeachment is a purely political function, not a legal one.


Kindly point out where I said any of those things.
 
Posts: 11130 | Location: Minnesota USA | Registered: 15 June 2007Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
They will never give direct answers.

They will just continue to reply as homem with the talking points they have been given by the left.


DRSS
Kreighoff 470 NE
Valmet 412 30/06 & 9.3x74R
 
Posts: 1993 | Location: Denver | Registered: 31 May 2010Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia

Since January 8 1998 you are visitor #: