Close to certain.
(Someone can have a stroke or get hit by a bus or assassinated, or what have you.)
But it has been pretty clear it was going to be the two of them for over a year, maybe more.
Joe Biden ruled as too incompetent to face charges
- Thread starter Butler1000
- Start date
(Someone can have a stroke or get hit by a bus or assassinated, or what have you.)
But it has been pretty clear it was going to be the two of them for over a year, maybe more.
True, but the both of them appear to becoming senile pretty quickly right now.
Senate Dems privately fear Biden’s age could cost him White House
Democratic senators are admitting to private worries that President Biden’s age and health could cost their party the White House, but are loath to discuss those fears publicly, insisting ther…
thehill.com
My point is those aren't facts.
Even the executive summary makes clear that they could nor rebut any of the innocent explanations and that the entire argument rests on how you interpret an 8-word utterance in a recording.
He did do the latter.
There is a whole section on pages 10 and 11 about how this case is different than the Trump situation.
It's quite an opinion, though.
What political benefit would shameless capitulating to Trump in this manner accrue to anyone?
The least controversial and most straightforward of the cases legally isn't going to get dropped because maybe Trump will appreciate the favor.
He's a lifelong Republican, I thought.
He may have re-registered as an independent after getting the case, though.
When has this ever happened?
Governors get plenty of media exposure.
So do senators and house reps.
Hell, Buttigieg is on TV lots in his role.
Who is he holding back by not doing this thing I have never seen any president do?
What gave you that idea other than wishful thinking and media gossip?
Biden certainly never said it as far as I know.
Biden not doing a thing he never said he was going to do in order to fulfill some vision you had that you would prefer isn't really a flaw.
I don't think pursuing the documents case against Trump is constructive for the Justice Dept. One might argue for some things on social media that just won't happen.
It is my opinion that Donald Trump is not go to jail over the documents case. I would guess he would get hit with a fine. Furthermore, I don't think the documents case is swaying public opinion for or against Donald Trump. That's just political reality of the outside world that I see.
I know someone will want to argue with this next statement and every statement like this. The Biden and Trump cases start at the same basic violation of the law. There are no charges against Trump if a President is allowed (or is tolerated) to retain classified documents. (In Biden's case a Vice President.)
We can debate about everything that happened after that, but that's where these documents cases begin. Why is that important where there was an obstruction of justice? The voters who make the difference in the election don't seem to care.
The maga base doesn't care but I'm sure soft mushy middle righties and independents think otherwise. I suspect you will not agree but I believe the loss in New York with the Santos seat easily going back to the DEMS is just the beginning of the beating that will be coming in November under a Trump/Maga run.
A Haley at the helm would have had a better chance except it probably would result in the majority of the Maga base not voting at all.
It's important - obstructing justice - as it's evidence of criminal intent, and it's evidence for delegitimization of the rule of law.
It matters heaps. Some people in the USA allowed to ignore the law, whereas others get book thrown at them?
Why was he holding them and lying about it?
Was he going to sell them to the highest bidder? Give to Putin because he's compromised? Was he using them as leverage to prevent being indicted?
Why does he need so many?
Trump says sorry, come on in and take them, there would be no charges.
Keep in mind the Mueller report outlined a dozen clear acts of obstructing justice bt Trump. Over 1,000 US Attorneys of both parties said they would have prosecuted.
It matters heaps. Some people in the USA allowed to ignore the law, whereas others get book thrown at them?
Why was he holding them and lying about it?
Was he going to sell them to the highest bidder? Give to Putin because he's compromised? Was he using them as leverage to prevent being indicted?
Why does he need so many?
Trump says sorry, come on in and take them, there would be no charges.
Keep in mind the Mueller report outlined a dozen clear acts of obstructing justice bt Trump. Over 1,000 US Attorneys of both parties said they would have prosecuted.
This might not be what the OP was getting at, but I think party leaders have a way of sending messages. Given that the Democrats are not having contests in several states and the Democratic primaries (if you can call them that this year) were set-up to start in South Carolina, one would think the message was loud and clear to the next generation of Democratic leaders. Do not get in this race!
Iowa and New Hampshire have generally been favorable turf for new challengers.
It appeared the Biden campaign was sending strong signals in 2020/21 that he would be one and done. However, he and his team did not want to give the appearance of a lame duck Presidency. But yes, Biden never said he would not run in 2024.
I don't think mandrill's is projecting anything like that. There are plenty of progressive members who probably would have liked to see a Bernie Sanders-type Presidency, but they also know the practical realities of getting things through Congress.
Haha, who would have thought I would be defending mandrill on a thread. Perhaps I can look forward to him returning the favor one day.
I think you missed my point. It wasn't that I said there wasn't obstruction of justice. Americans have simply become jaded to legal actions against Presidential candidates and their Administrations.
While probably not agreeing with me here, I think Valcazar, mandrill and others would agree there is the principle and the practical. The practical here is where does this case really end up.
Turning on CNN or MSNBC will not give you an idea of how important Americans think of the DOJ's case against Trump. The biggest stories on the news might not be the biggest story to the average American.
Suozzi was essentially an incumbent who took time to run for Governor. Some of his positions are not as progressive as the Democratic caucus. That's great, but is that how he will legislate when he gets back to Congress.
This Congressional race was a one-off. You don't have to look hard to find some unbiased news sources that say the same thing.
Last edited:
I got your point. But I believe when people facewash the justice system you HAVE to prosecute.
I agree he's not going to a proper prison over it, unlike those people currently in gaol for 5+ years for taking single documents. But failure to prosecute greenlights this unacceptable behavior forever.
Sorry, I'm a hawk on national security for all democracies, and anti totalitarianism everywhere.
Please provide this unbiased news source or I'm left with this https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...george-santos-mazi-pilip-tom-suozzi-new-york/
do you agree with the ex-insurrectionist POTUS?
Yes, yes, yes.........there must be the Wayne Gretzky of Democrats out there somewhere.
Can you imagine the photo ops of the tall, dashing pair of Gavin Newsom and Justin Trudeau standing together. Macron will slide out of frame.
Even progressive Briahna Joy Gray is mocking the Democrats and Joe Biden's leadership.
It's so sad when a women of color criticizes a woman of color.
