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.
As of October 2019 Trump had spent somewhere between $109-115,000,000 playing golf at taxpayer expense. He played at his clubs and billed the Secret Service for rooms, meals, and golf carts. Google it.
Free, indeed…
Oh my gosh criticism of presidential vacations, it's as old as time... Goes so far back I can't even remember the beginning.
Trump actually worked from his properties, too. Biden just goes to his beach house and sucks on a binkie and eats Gerber. While the country is literally in disaster mode, shambles.
So why the legislative branch are playing CSI and accusing a private citizen of crimes? I thought only a prosecutor or grand jury can accuse citizens of a crime and only jury convict.. Amazing, huh. I didn't know the legislative branch was into criminal investigations of the opposing party.
I can accuse you of a crime, but I can’t prosecute you. However, if I have evidence you have committed a crime, I can turn it over to the authorities, and use what I learned about your crimes to put measures in place to keep you or others from being able to commit the same crimes in the same way in the future.
Oh my gosh criticism of presidential vacations, it's as old as time... Goes so far back I can't even remember the beginning.
Trump actually worked from his properties, too. Biden just goes to his beach house and sucks on a binkie and sucks Gerber. While the country is literally in disaster mode, shambles.
Trump played golf 278 times in four years, putting him way ahead of his predecessors. Google it.
To explain, he took a year of vacation in four years. He’s the all-time winner.
fine but until that day, Trump is the opposite of Biden. All he has to do is 1 term and if he gets a young V.P that is pro active, that would be a plus.
When Trump start shaking the hand of the wind or forgets his wife's name and be so lost, then I will call it out and demand for him to retired.
I can accuse you of a crime, but I can’t prosecute you. However, if I have evidence you have committed a crime, I can turn it over to the authorities, and use what I learned about your crimes to put measures in place to keep you or others from being able to commit the same crimes in the same way in the future.
That’s as simple as I know how to explain it.
LMAO! How is a legislative branch the authority to do criminal investigations of a private citizen?
So I should call the legislative branch of my state to accuse you that you stole my wallet and they do an investigation and a public hearing? Is that the division of powers in the constitution? Amazing.
Regarding the crowd count from 1/6, no one knows how many people were there. That's the point. People can guess, but that's all they can do. Two days before the event, the National Park Service adjusted the permit for the rally from 5,000 to 30,000 people. Heavy.com noted that the National Park Service doesn’t give estimates of events anymore, but permits can give an idea of how many were expected. WRAL and the NY Post reported "thousands were in attendance." The Post wrote that " hundreds then breached the U.S. Capitol perimeter, seeking to force their way into the Capitol." Heavy, on the other hand, said that hundreds marched from Trump's speech to the Capitol. (Where I might add sme folks already were.) SOURCE (Photos f crowd included)
On December 23, pro-Trump organizer Cindy Chafian sent a follow-up email about the planned January 6 event, saying that 15,000 participants were expected.
Afterward, Trump lamented that the media was not admitting just how many people were there.
Quote:
"The crowd itself was the biggest crowd I've ever—and I've spoken before the biggest crowds—the biggest crowd I've ever spoken by far, by numerous times I think," the former president said.
Then there is this guy who talked about why it is so hard to estimate crowd sizes.
Quote:
The reason is that people are bad at making appropriate estimates of the size of crowds. It’s actually a difficult thing to do. Once you get more than a few hundred people, it just looks very big. All you can do is pull big numbers out of the air. Then there are all sorts of political reasons the sizes of crowds get either inflated or deflated. The size of a crowd has become a token of popularity of whatever the cause that gathered the crowd is, whether it’s a political event like this, or sports or a celebration. Inevitably, the estimate of the size of the crowd is sort of vastly larger than reality.
Ironically, later in the interview he actually does give an estimate that 10,000 people were there. Go figure. I'll go back t my first point. No one knows how many were there.
Regarding the crowd count from 1/6, no one knows how many people were there. That's the point. People can guess, but that's all they can do. Two days before the event, the National Park Service adjusted the permit for the rally from 5,000 to 30,000 people. Heavy.com noted that the National Park Service doesn’t give estimates of events anymore, but permits can give an idea of how many were expected. WRAL and the NY Post reported "thousands were in attendance." The Post wrote that " hundreds then breached the U.S. Capitol perimeter, seeking to force their way into the Capitol." Heavy, on the other hand, said that hundreds marched from Trump's speech to the Capitol. (Where I might add sme folks already were.) SOURCE (Photos f crowd included)
Then there is this guy who talked about why it is so hard to estimate crowd sizes.
Ironically, later in the interview he actually does give an estimate that 10,000 people were there. Go figure. I'll go back t my first point. No one knows how many were there.
840 people have been charged so far according to Time.
NO, NO, NO. Being outside protesting is legal and protected under the constitution. We are taking about the people that entered the capitol which is a crime of trespassing or resisting police orders or arrest. How many that came in?
So you need aerial imagery from the sky to know how many enter in the capitol? Doesn't Congress have security cameras in every section of the building to get a good estimate how many people entered? Don't you need the exact number to prosecute people of trespassing? Or they lost all the camera hard drive.?
840 have been charged but that includes many that stayed outside.
Last edited by SanJuanStar; 07-25-2022 at 07:29 PM..
In this case, the legislature is not doing a criminal investigation of a private citizen. They are doing an investigations into the origins of and events that led up to January 6. If the investigation turns up evidence of criminal activity by any particular individuals, then that evidence can (and should) be presented to the public and shared with the Department of Justice. At that point, the DoJ evaluates the evidence and determines what to do with it.
This has been explained many times on this thread. It appears that some people believe that hemming and hawing about the legislative branch doing criminal investigations is some type of winning argument that somehow discredits the bipartisan January 6 Commission and distracts from the sworn testimony provided by the Republican witnesses and Trump appointees who have appeared before it. It is not.
So you are also b.s. that this isn't a criminal investigation. This is just an oversight hearing. They already accused Trump of crimes before the hearing started and when it started and when it ended.
How does a legislative branch accuses citizens of crimes without doing a criminal investigation? Where is the evidence coming from?
You don't know cr@p about the constitution and division of powers. So stop repeating that this has been "explained" many times. The legislative branch can't do criminal investigations on private citizens or publicly accuse them of crimes and violate their rights and due process. This is an abuse of power.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,591 posts, read 12,535,636 times
Reputation: 10477
Quote:
Originally Posted by God of Truth
In this case, the legislative is not doing a criminal investigation of a private citizen. They are doing an investigations into the origins of and events that led up to January 6. If the investigation turns up evidence of criminal activity by any particular individuals, then that evidence can (and should) be presented to the public
Ah yes, publicize hearsay "evidence" in the committee's 'Court of Public Opinion' prime time variety show. (do you think the committee should win an Emmy?)
Quote:
and shared with the Department of Justice.
Share, lol. The committee will be milking this until November and there probably won't be a whole lot of sharing until then...dribs and drabs most likely.
Quote:
At that point, the DoJ evaluates the evidence and determines what to do with it.
This has been explained many times on this thread. It appears that some people believe that hemming and hawing about the legislative branch doing criminal investigations is some type of winning argument that somehow discredits the bipartisan January 6 Commission and distracts from the sworn testimony provided by the Republican witnesses and Trump appointees who have appeared before it. It is not.
IF the DoJ prosecutes. If that happens the defense will likely make mincemeat out of much of the hearsay "evidence".
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.
