Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure if they had a fair trial and ended up with a conviction you would agree with the outcome.
The system worked as it should.
There is no such thing as a "fair trial" under involuntary statism. That pesky term known as consent comes into play.
It's just comical to see the government so drunk on its own power that they couldn't even sack enemies of the State for which they've had a massive hard-on for going on years now.
There is no such thing as a "fair trial" under involuntary statism. That pesky term known as consent comes into play.
It's just comical to see the government so drunk on its own power that they couldn't even sack enemies of the State for which they've had a massive hard-on for going on years now.
I think your point is that the federal government has no power in Nevada, I think I have seen that brought up before.
Let's be honest aside from your personal philosophy, if they were convicted in a fair trial you wouldn't accept it. There is only one outcome you can accept. I didn't like this outcome but I accept the decision as fair, the Bundy supporters on the other hand....
I think your point is that the federal government has no power in Nevada, I think I have seen that brought up before.
Let's be honest aside from your personal philosophy, if they were convicted in a fair trial you wouldn't accept it. There is only one outcome you can accept. I didn't like this outcome but I accept the decision as fair, the Bundy supporters on the other hand....
It's all a dog and pony show. Pure entertainment.
In a logically and morally consistent world (unlike the one we live in) you can't trespass on land not properly owned by an individual.
That's called "walking from Point A to Point B" in the logical/moral world.
(Doesn't haven't to be a linear movement either. Sorry to bring up math. I believe that's racist now.)
I'm sure if they had a fair trial and ended up with a conviction you would agree with the outcome.
The system worked as it should.
Yes I would, I stated many times that I didn't agree with what the Bundys did. If they recieved a fair trail and convicted, I would have no problem with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands
This case was trued by Trump's DOJ. There's no getting around that fact.
Did Trump's people appoint this prosecutor? Were the people in the FBI that were withholding evidence come into the FBI while Trump FBI director Wray was head of the FBI?
Yes I would, I stated many times that I didn't agree with what the Bundys did. If they recieved a fair trail and convicted, I would have no problem with it.
Did Trump's people appoint this prosecutor? Were the people in the FBI that were withholding evidence come into the FBI while Trump FBI director Wray was head of the FBI?
The FBI did not withold information. They shared that information with Trump’s department of justice. Trump’s DOJ was required to share that information with the defense, and they did not.
Did Trump's people appoint this prosecutor? Were the people in the FBI that were withholding evidence come into the FBI while Trump FBI director Wray was head of the FBI?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
