Do Democrats/liberals charge republicans with crimes, but not democrats?

See #5

 

FACT: Not all crimes are prosecuted.

Have you ever heard of 'prosecutorial discretion'?

Hmmmmm?

What that is, kriman, is when a prosecutor deems that the facts of the case result in a situation where the prosecutor does not feel confident he can get a conviction, so they decide not to prosecute.

That is what occurred with Biden.

Regarding Trump, the prosecutors believe they can get a conviction.

Now why is that, kriman?

Here is the answer:

 

See #27

You are omitting facts which constitute context.

In so doing, you arrive at wrong conclusions.

Your point is vanquished when those facts are understood.

See #27.

 

Trump shared NDI docs with someone who didn't have proper clearance.
He stored boxes of NDI docs in easily accessible places at Mar A Lago, where thousands of people from all of the world came to visit. Already we arrested a chinese spy at Mar A Lago.

Fake news. Hillary ordered the manager of the server to delete files, which is routine, 2 weeks prior to the subpoena. yes, the manager forgot to do it but did it shortly after the subpoena, but no evidence has been produced to prove she was aware of it. You don't prosecute without concrete evidence, which is why she wasn't prosecuted.

He conspired to have inculpatory evidence destroyed, video tape segment which revealed documents being moved to avoid detection, and now we have proof of that via testimony.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics...fied-information-brian-butler-tsc-hnk-vpx.cnn

Worse that Trump?

Trump goes on TV and announces he has the right to do as he pleases regarding NDI documents, in direct violation of the PRA, and for someone who wants to be president who doesn't understand security protocols, he surely cannot qualify for security clearances, and if they can't qualify for security clearances, how can they be effective as president?

Trump jacks the gov around for a year forcing the gov to issue a search warrant.

Worse than Trump, my ass. Trump is a threat to national security.

At least Joe understands these protocols.

 

Not prosecutable.

Why?

Because that which he is guilty of a lot of presidents are guilty of, which is why the DOJ's policy is not to prosecute for mere possession, and all of that which is guilty of doesn't rise above mere possession.

In Trump's case, there are aggravating circumstances, which warrants prosecution because the prosecutors believe they can get a conviction.

 

That is false. The relevant question is the one the prosecutor will ask himself, which is:

Is there enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Biden violated the DOJ's prosecutorial threshold of 'aggravated circumstances'?

The answer HUR came to was "NO".

Your knowledge of the PRA is nil. He most certainly did not.

https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/laws/1978-act.html
https://www.archives.gov/files/guid...-archives-and-records-administration-2020.pdf

Moot point, but, FYI: THE PRA........(see above link)

• Requires that Vice-Presidential records be treated in the same way as Presidential records.

If the prosecutor didn't beleive he was in violation of the law, and that the facts couldn't delivery a guilty verdict, he wouldn't have indicted Trump on espionage charges.

What is known:

Trump conspired to have inculpatory evidence destroyed. "consciousness of guilt".
Trump jacked the gov around for a year, forcing the gov to issue a search warrant.
Trump went on TV and declared he had the right to do as he pleases with NDI docs, in violation of the PRA.

None of these aggravated circumstances which are required for DOJ to prosecute, are present in either Biden or Pence.

We shall see what the jury decides.

 

Sorry, your thought-terminating cliché, is dismissed.

You'll need to provide an actual argument, if you want me to take your comment seriously.

 

after stealing an election and undoing the will of the people, they have to save some face to throw off suspicion
OF COURSE they are gonna throw some of their own under the bus
Makes perfect sense to me

 

You do not unintentionally take boxes full of classified documents out of a secure area and store them in a non-secure area.

 

I have considerable experience handling classified material. Biden clearly broke the law.

 

given all the prosecutions in the last two administrations, I listed every person in the prosecutorial chain that I can think of, most of whom were not Democrats or liberals. It has nothing to do with the 'population'. Prosecutors and FBI directors, AGs, etc., are appointed, not elected.

No, no such conclusions are being sought.

The point of the OP was to diffuse and oft told claim by many on the right that 'Democrats/liberals are out to get Republicans/conservatives'

Well, I just scrutinized your comment, and it fails.

 

Trump broke the law. Biden broke the law. Only Trump is being prosecuted.

 

Who were YOU talking about?

I assume both you and @Golem were referring to HUR, who, despite your failure to read the transcript, declared, under oath, that HUR was a REPUBLICAN, just as Golem said.

 

Biden is not being prosecuted because he is an old man with a poor memory. Trump is being prosecuted. You have been claiming that Trump has more severe memory problems than Biden. You need to get your story straight.

 

Biden broke the law. He is not being prosecuted because he is old and has a poor memory. See #39 above.

 

You mean the 2020 election that Trump tried to steal?

Oh stop it.

I'm getting sick of Republican lies.

 

Sure! as soon as you make an apology thread for the Russia HOAX
Ready..............GO!!!!

 

Really?
30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 investigations at the Federal or state or even local level against Trump.
To this day not one criminal conviction.
The question from this is, is Trump truly that innocent or are his persecutors that incompetent?
I submit that the answer is;
Yes.

We also see, daily almost, fundamental differences in treatment like Steve Nikoui, dragged from the House chamber during biden's SOTU stump speech and charged criminally for shouting out "ABBEY GATE".
Meanwhile, our Democratic elected officials were shouting out "FOUR MORE YEARS" with not so much as a stern glare from the sergeant at arms.

And in New York, Princess Letitia James was triggered when FDNY members called out "TRUMP, TRUMP, TRUMP" as she approached her podium to tell them ................... something.
Now, the hunt is on to identify and skewer the miscreants who dared trigger princess James.

What a Democrat does is politics.
What a Republican does is Criminal.

 

Yes, and in the transcript, he tells Biden he has a photographic memory.
Clearly this is not a well-thought out response by Hur.

The reasons I gave are general DOJ policy, which, if the case were presented to Garland, would have been considered.

 

Photographic memory and dementia are not mutually exclusive conditions.

 

Given the facts listed in the OP, your point is false.

Recall that in the prosecutorial command line, of the 11 persons I could think of who are involved in the prosecutions in the last 2 administrations, only 2 were democrats.

You can hardly accuse Democrats of 'politics' when 98.8% of the folks doing the indicting are not democrats.

and FYI, James is civil, not criminal, which is why her name was excluded.

 

Of course this has nothing to do with anything. The issue isn't the party affiliation of people who are prosecuted. It is about politically motivated prosecution. Yes, I realize you don't think it exists but I can't help what you think.

 

I don't take your thread seriously. It is full of a bunch of bullet points taken out of context so that you can be biased. Please repost with the whole context. Otherwise, I dismiss your thread as being biased.

 

You have it wrong. Hur has only to give his report to AG Garland. It is Garland, not the Special Counsel, who has the authority to empanel a grand jury, and Garland chose not to. Same goes with Comey, it was the AG who had the authority to empanel a grand jury, it's just that AG Loretta Lynch chose not to. Note that my 'premise' only dealt with the last two administrations.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...no-reasonable-prosecutor-would-bring-charges/

Attorney General Lynch’s spokeswoman further confused matters after the announcement, telling The New York Times the Attorney General still had “ultimate responsibility for any decision [in the case].”

It was only confusing to the public because Comey made it appear that it was his decision, but, in fact, as it was pointed it, it was Lynch's decision,.

 

I would call that "drive-by posting". @Tipper101 just drives by, shoots a post into a thread despite the fact that he/she has no clue what the topic is, and when it's their turn to admit that they didn't know what they were getting into in the first place, they disappear.