Posted on 07/16/2018 5:13:51 PM PDT by FL_Native
We’ve seen so many people’s lives ruined and now they want to start a war with Russia over accusations. Can’t we wait until after these accusations have been proven in a court of law?
Fire away
Currently locked up in pre-trial solitary confinement by an Obama appointed federal judge. Bail revoked. Put in the “deep cooler” to break him.
Total abuse of judicial power for political purposes.
Yep.
Did I hear Putin say something along the lines of “when you have proven it in a court of law, I will respond”? Why aren’t our reps answering these accusations with something like that?
Have Bill and Hillary Clinton been convicted in court of any crimes? Do you believe they are innocent ... never did anything wrong or illegal?
Trump only accepted control of Russia to do what Hitler did not succeed at doing.
Trump only accepted control of Russia to increase the number of white people in US territories.
Trump only accepted control of Russia because he wanted to put the guys who built the Berlin Wall in charge of his wall on our southern border.
Trump only...
“Innocent until proven guilty...”
I’ve always hated that term. The word “until” makes it sound like a guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion, like a kangaroo court.
The correct term should be, “Innocent UNLESS proven guilty.”
I believe there’s enough evidence to charge them with numerous crimes and can’t understand why they haven’t been. Have their lives been ruined by these accusations?
Excellent point!
This idea of the seriousness of the charges permeates legal authorities all over our country.Accused of racism ,sexual harassment and objecting to homosexuality you are guilty, period.
They aren’t just baby killers but had rather watch their children die in mushroom clouds just to get rid of Trump.
They would rather have a war than have the Truth about them come out - Putin knows too much for their liking...
If one is a conservative, you are guilty simply by the fact an accusation is made, and deserve to be executed on the spot.
It's been this way for many decades.
With regard to most uses of “innocent until proven guilty” they wrongly refer to private individuals and their opinions.
For example: If you as a private individual have formed an opinion about whether a certain football player killed his ex-wife, you are under no obligation - social, professional, or otherwise - to regard him as “innocent”, EVEN IF a court of law has not convicted him.
If on the other hand you are sitting on a jury considering the evidence, then the rules say that you must consider him (temporarily) innocent until you have heard the State and the defense cases and been instructed in the law by a judge.
If, after that, you vote “guilty” you are under no obligation to believe him innocent, EVEN IF your trial ends with the jury 1-11 to acquit and a subsequent jury finds him not guilty.
HTH.
That depends.
I would not hire a man acquitted of rape if I believed he did it, and I would be perfectly within my rights to do so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.