It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Mach2
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
The point of investigation is to make a provable court case.
You investigate the crime. That is not what happened here. Here they found dog crap on the sidewalk, then attributed to Trump, even though he had never been in that part of town.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Mach2
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
The point of investigation is to make a provable court case.
You investigate the crime. That is not what happened here. Here they found dog crap on the sidewalk, then attributed to Trump, even though he had never been in that part of town.
The number of convicted felons he brought with him says otherwise.
... and he had allegations directly against him that needed to be resolved.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Mach2
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
The point of investigation is to make a provable court case.
You investigate the crime. That is not what happened here. Here they found dog crap on the sidewalk, then attributed to Trump, even though he had never been in that part of town.
The number of convicted felons he brought with him says otherwise.
... and he had allegations directly against him that needed to be resolved.
Ok so what is the cirteria for "allegations" that require special counsels, spying, raiding lawyers in the middle of the night, etc?
I am sure trump can pay some foreigners to make allegations about any democrat running against him, so surely we need midnight raids, spying by the fbi, looking at crimes from decades past, special counsels, etc. on all of the dems that trump can pay to get allegations about.
After all, we need to make sure to resolve those allegations as well, right?
originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Mach2
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
The point of investigation is to make a provable court case.
You investigate the crime. That is not what happened here. Here they found dog crap on the sidewalk, then attributed to Trump, even though he had never been in that part of town.
The number of convicted felons he brought with him says otherwise.
... and he had allegations directly against him that needed to be resolved.
Ok so what is the cirteria for "allegations" that require special counsels, spying, raiding lawyers in the middle of the night, etc?
I am sure trump can pay some foreigners to make allegations about any democrat running against him, so surely we need midnight raids, spying by the fbi, looking at crimes from decades past, special counsels, etc. on all of the dems that trump can pay to get allegations about.
After all, we need to make sure to resolve those allegations as well, right?
Allegations against the left need not be resolved.......figured you would know this by now
originally posted by: St Udio
…
now the AG should begin building the case against the clique of insiders who created and planted Fake Evidence which was meant to perpetrate a fraudulent Impeachment of an Elected POTUS/VP
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
To investigate there must be a crime.
Otherwise what is being investigated?
An investigation uncovers who committed the crime.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
To investigate there must be a crime.
Otherwise what is being investigated?
An investigation uncovers who committed the crime.
The crime was Russian interference in the 2016 US Presidential elections. There was no doubt that it occurred. It was alleged that individuals from the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians. There were many indictments and convictions to that effect as a result of the investigation.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
To investigate there must be a crime.
Otherwise what is being investigated?
An investigation uncovers who committed the crime.
The crime was Russian interference in the 2016 US Presidential elections. There was no doubt that it occurred. It was alleged that individuals from the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians. There were many indictments and convictions to that effect as a result of the investigation.
Show me one indictment that shows anyone connected to trump conspiring with russians in the 2016 election.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut
Then he should be charged and prosecuted. In America we investigate crimes, not people in the hopes of finding a crime.
What is the point of investigation if we already know a crime has been committed and who the guilty party is?
The rule is 'innocent until proven guilty', and that determination of guilt happens in a court of law, and well after the investigation.
An investigation does not equal guilt, just like an allegation does not equal guilt.
To investigate there must be a crime.
Otherwise what is being investigated?
An investigation uncovers who committed the crime.
The crime was Russian interference in the 2016 US Presidential elections. There was no doubt that it occurred. It was alleged that individuals from the Trump campaign had conspired with the Russians. There were many indictments and convictions to that effect as a result of the investigation.
Show me one indictment that shows anyone connected to trump conspiring with russians in the 2016 election.