Which is worse, convicting a former president of the USA, or having a former president of the USA who could be convicted?

[Anonymous]

So, Trump's been convicted on all 34 counts in court by a jury of citizens (which included a juror who got his news from "Truth" social) on charges brought by a grand jury of citizens. The three other trials are being delayed by a Trump appointed judge, SCOTUS, and the Georgia appeals court.

Why would you want to delay your trial, costing millions, if you thought you could prove your innocence?

Convicting a former president of the USA is worse

Having a former president of the USA who could be convicted is worse

Don't know/see results

[Chazmatazz269]

They’re probably about the same.
Let’s face facts, TDS is real and it’s going nowhere. The tiny minded people who can’t stop obsessing about him won’t be satisfied even if he gets prison time. They could lash him to a pole in Times Square and every democrat could be allowed to cut a tiny chunk of flesh from him one at a time until he succumbed from the totality of his trauma. And they would still rave until their own dying breaths that he didn’t suffer enough. They’re all psychopaths, to the one.

[Asker]

Or they simply want to see justice done.

[Chazmatazz269]

If it was “justice” they were after, they could have charged him a decade ago. Since he’s obviously a criminal, two or three decades ago. Before he was even eyeing the presidency. Drumpf was formerly pals with the Clintons. You think they didn’t exchange recipes? You think they didn’t know each other’s dirty secrets? You’re putting on blinders if you think they didn’t. Drumpf proved it in the debate when he called out Hillary for palling around with people whose business practices matched his own because she tried to malign him for being rich.
They chose to try him now in order to marginalize the democratic party’s primary political rival. Any who suggests otherwise is a liar and idiot.

[Asker]

Who else did he "exchange recipes" with?

https://i.insider.com/640b7a579ef79f001828975f

I don't think many people would be upset with the law going after businessmen who cheat on their taxes; that's why the Democrats expanded funding for the IRS (and Republicans lie about it and try to reverse it).

In this case, though, Cohen went to prison for the underlying crime, but Trump ran out the clock by playing president.

Al Capone was a crook and a murderer, and they had to get him on tax evasion charges. Do you think that was wrong?

The three remaining cases, RICO in Georgia, documents in Florida, and the big one, Attempting to overturn the 2020 US presidential election in DC, are all extremely valid and especially in the documents case clearly open and shut - he took them, he kept them, he hid them, he lied about them.

[Chazmatazz269]

You’re straw manning. Copy and paste any point at which i even suggested that Drumpf isn’t a criminal. I defy you. Scroll through every post i’ve ever made, every comment and every response to a comment. I’ll wait.
You’re straw manning because you CAN’T honestly argue in favor of what the democrats have done. I know you’re not going to change your mind. My response only serves to point out your willful ignorance and hypocrisy to otherwise rational minds who will scroll through your ridiculous, ANONYMOUS post.

[Asker]

OK, so, you've never said Trump isn't a criminal, and I'm sure you're right. Your argument, then, is simply that the only reason he's being charged with crimes is political, is that right?

[normalice]

Seems like the first one should read "having a former president who is a convict is worse." As it is worded, convicting a former president is actually a very good thing, if they are guilty of a crime.

[Asker]

That's why I hope it gets no votes! You're right though.

[AngryCarl]

Making a convict President is worse.