Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (221695)	1/4/2022 12:14:22 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 360977

>> So they don't have anything because they didn't have have anything. I believe that's called a tautology. I don't think it is quite a tautology, but more importantly, it is a product of Occam's Razor. The most likely explanation is the Democrats have nothing because there is nothing to have. There is no crime of inaction of a president to a riot based on the television reports he was seeing. That simply does not exist. Hence, there is no reason for this fake committee to exist, other than as a political tool. That Trump's likely primary opponent is on the committee is pretty ridiculous if you think a little. Consider that not one member of that committee showed up on the first day with a clear head: There was never any intent to do anything but get Trump. That's why we have Cheney instead of someone who took his seat with an open mind. Not one did. Every person on that committee was appointed because they had it out for Trump. This statement alone disqualifies all output, not most but ALL output of the committee from consideration. So, you tell me. What righteous output from this committee can occur other than the development of a bragging right or false accusation? What is the range of possibilities?

To: Lane3 who wrote (221695)	1/4/2022 7:08:21 PM
From: combjelly	4 Recommendations Recommended By bentway Ms. Baby Boomer Sam Terry Maloney Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 360977

The thing is, the DOJ has rules about not charging a sitting president with a crime. So the fact that he wasn't convicted of any is pretty meaningless. And, given the statute of limitations, he is unlikely to be convicted of several crimes he committed in office. In principle, he could be impeached and removed from office for them, but it is abundantly clear that really isn't going to happen. So being president can be an honest to God get out of jail free card. Especially when the no charging rule has been extended to not even being able to investigate the president unless he got a blow job.