US Politics Thread

[bluethrunthru]

"Everyone has the right to a trial to prove their innocence."

which is simply the truth

1/ There are accusations
2/ Charges are raised
3/ arrests made
4/ court proceedings take place in which the state makes their case against the defendant
5/ the accused - in a right thinking country - has the right to defend themselves against the evidence and prove they are innocent

 

[bluethrunthru]

View attachment 73659

How does she even know this? The indictments will not be public until Tuesday - they are panicked

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

It’s brazen antisemitism that’s become totally mainstream in US politics.

It's one of a number of words that you basically swap out for 'jews'.

 

[Username Required]

which is simply the truth

1/ There are accusations
2/ Charges are raised
3/ arrests made
4/ court proceedings take place in which the state makes their case against the defendant
5/ the accused - in a right thinking country - has the right to defend themselves against the evidence and prove they are innocent

No. One is innocent until proven guilty. The burden is on the prosecution, not the defendant.

 

[Username Required]

Social Media Influencer Douglass Mackey Convicted of Election Interference in 2016 Presidential Race.​

Social Media Influencer Douglass Mackey Convicted of Election Interference in 2016 Presidential Race

“Mackey has been found guilty by a jury of his peers of attempting to deprive individuals from exercising their sacred right to vote for the candidate of their choice in the 2016 Presidential Election,” stated United States Attorney Peace. “Today’s verdict proves that the defendant’s fraudulent...

www.justice.gov

 

[bluethrunthru]

No. One is innocent until proven guilty. The burden is on the prosecution, not the defendant.

yeah - read what I put - the charges are laid the evidence forms the case against the defendant - at that point the state is claiming/assuming guilt hence the defendant produces their own evidence to prove innocence - or do you think all charges brought against a defendant do not assume a level of guilt which is why they are brought?

 

[Username Required]

yeah - read what I put - the charges are laid the evidence forms the case against the defendant - at that point the state is claiming/assuming guilt hence the defendant produces their own evidence to prove innocence - or do you think all charges brought against a defendant do not assume a level of guilt which is why they are brought?

"the defendant produces their own evidence to prove innocence"

The defendant is under no obligation to prove innocence, or mount a [positive] defence of any kind. It is for the state to prove [the facts] guilt.

 

[bluethrunthru]

"the defendant produces their own evidence to prove innocence"

The defendant is under no obligation to prove innocence, or mount a [positive] defence of any kind. It is for the state to prove [the facts] guilt.

Good plan - let the state lay charges and produce evidence and have nothing to come back with - do you really think that will win for the defendant?

 

[bluethrunthru]

sorry to piss all over the Telegraphs chips but sitting American Presidents never attend a UK Monarchs Coronation - something to do with some War of Independence I'd expect

 

[SkyBlueFlux]

Trump and his brainwashed parrots do seem to have a problem with Soros, don't they?

The amount of US politicians parroting insane antisemitic boogeyman conspiracy theories in 2023 would make Goebbels proud.

Of course we can't compare them to the Nazis though because that's in poor taste. Even though everything they say, think and do seems to be inspired by them to an uncanny degree.

If it walks like a duck...