Crime and punishment

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

mickthinks
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: a different tack

Post by mickthinks »

Was he found guilty?

57 Senators found him guilty, yes. 43 Senators didn't which was enough to prevent a guilty verdict being entered into the record. We know at least one of those 43 also considers Trump guilty but voted against the impeachment on technical (and obviously false) grounds that, as Trump was no longer president, the Senate had no power to convict.

Are you seriously relying on the fact that not enough Republican senators voted #45 guilty as a reason to discount the abundant conclusive evidence you have seen and heard for yourself?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: a different tack

Post by henry quirk »

mickthinks wrote: Sat Apr 24, 2021 4:56 pm Was he found guilty?

57 Senators found him guilty, yes. 43 Senators didn't which was enough to prevent a guilty verdict being entered into the record. We know at least one of those 43 also consider Trump guilty but voted against the impeachment on technical (and obviously false) grounds that, as Trump was no longer president, the Senate had no power to convict.

Are you seriously relying on the fact that not enough Republican senators voted #45 guilty as a reason to discount the abundant conclusive evidence of his guilt?
First, in America, there is the principle of innocent till proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That one group insists guilt is irrelevant in the face of rule of law. He was tried, found not guilty, and apart from our feelings on the matter that's the end of it.

Second, you're the one makin' appeals to the public record. The public record states clearly ORANGE MAN was impeached, but not convicted, so -- again -- apart from our feelings on the matter that's the end of it.

Third, have any of the so-called insurrectionists been charged with insurrection or treason? Have any been convicted of insurrection or treason?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Crime and punishment

Post by henry quirk »

Are you seriously relying on the fact that not enough Republican senators voted #45 guilty as a reason to discount the abundant conclusive evidence you have seen and heard for yourself?

That's the thing, Mick: I've seen, and considered, the same abundant conclusive evidence you have and I reach a different conclusion.

What do we do with that?

You want me to see it your way, the only legit way, accordin' to you, it can be seen.

I want you to see it my way, the only legit way, accordin' to me, it can be seen.

We've gone at it for a littie bit now, and neither of us is budgin'.

So: what now?

Me, I think we're done.

You think I'm blind; I think you're hoodwinkd: what's left to say?
mickthinks
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: Crime and punishment

Post by mickthinks »

I want you to see it my way, the only legit way, accordin' to me, it can be seen.

But you haven't presented any kind of alternative interpretation of facts, Henry. All you've done from the start is, without grounds, to deny that the attack on Congress on Jan 6th was an insurrection, and to deny that the former president incited the act.

And you've tried to argue that the fact no one involved has been charged with "insurrection" is overwhelming evidence that it wasn't really an insurrection (that's a fallacy) and that because the former president's impeachment was voted against by a minority of Republican senators, that is incontravertable proof that he didn't incite the insurrection (that's another fallacy).

And you've tried to hide #45's massive crimes behind the tiny figleaf called the presumption of innocence. You and I, not being officers of the law engaged in criminal proceedings, are not in any way bound by the presumption of innocence when discussing #45's guilt. (Nor for that matter is the actual prosecutor in an actual court of law else how would the prosecution ever make its case?)

Now, stop trying to find excuses for not addressing the evidence of #45's guilt. If you don't want to defend him, that's fine by me, but this "there is no case to answer" shtick is getting old.
Last edited by mickthinks on Sun Apr 25, 2021 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Crime and punishment

Post by henry quirk »

As I say: I think we're done.
mickthinks
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: Crime and punishment

Post by mickthinks »

lol

Dude, you were done when you denied that #45 had incited the act of insurrection on Jan 6th. It didn't stop you then, so why would it stop you now?
Walker
Posts: 14280
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Crime and punishment

Post by Walker »

Derek Chauvin asks for probation as prosecutors seek 30 years ahead of sentencing
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/derek-chau ... ation-ask/

“Chauvin could face up to 40 years in prison when he is sentenced June 25 on the top count of second-degree murder, though Minnesota sentencing guidelines suggest a term of just over 10 and a half years to 15 years in prison.”


Q: Will the media and the mob influence sentencing?

Q: Should pre-trial police-evidence such as the Floyd video be leaked to the public, pre-trial?
Should pre-sentencing appeals be leaking to the public, pre-sentencing?
mickthinks
Posts: 1501
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: Crime and punishment

Post by mickthinks »

Will the media and the mob influence sentencing?

lol Do you remember that dude who took out a full page ad in the paper calling for those black kids to be put to death? And then they turned out to be innocent. He was a kind of one-man-mob wasn't he?

What was his name again? ...
Post Reply