I don’t think you understand impeachment… Anyway, that would be a criminal issue, and if a fair trial found him not guilty then he would be innocent.
If you’re implying that I think that, were he convicted of such a thing but the Senate still declined to impeach him that he would still be fit to serve as a Judge then yes, I do, as the power to make that decision belongs to the Senate. Sometimes democracy sucks.
But that’s not what you said. What you said, very specifically, is that convicted child-murderer Dunn, who was determined beyond a reasonable doubt to have killed an unarmed child and shot at fleeing children, is “the sort of [person] normal people want around them”. Those are your specific words, different than what you say above. Do you still believe those specific words of praise about Dunn?
I believe what the evidence demonstrates. That’s why we have trials. The evidence demonstrated, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Dunn was lying, and he had no justification for killing the unarmed child and then shooting at the fleeing children.
I agree, unless the evidence demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that they are lying. In this case it did. Dunn was not a victim, not by any means. He’s a child murderer and liar, convicted by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
I can’t really do anything more to condem someone than what you’ve just done to yourself.
This is a misunderstanding of the law. A “not guilty” verdict is not a declaration of innocence and should not be treated as such; it’s simply a conclusion that the state did not make a “beyond a reasonable doubt” case for guilt.
He is presumed innocent, a not guilty verdict reaffirms that presumption. There are, of course, cases where someone is proven guilty outside of court, but they are rare and can only happen when there’s an unfair trial - such as an incompetent prosecution. The trial of Emmett Till’s killers is the most egregious example I know about in any detail.
This is why I’ve repeatedly asked people what additional evidence they have that was not presented at the Zimmerman trial, as that must exist if the trial was badly prosecuted. As yet, no one had produced any, so it remains the fact that Zimmerman is innocent.
Condemn me for what, precisely? A preference for democracy and the rule of law even if they are flawed? What should be done in your hypothetical apart from voting for a new Senate that would disqualify him?
He’s talking about Dunn idiot. And Zimmerman should be in jail.
ETA: … idiot.
Burn down the senate. Yes, sometimes that is the PROPER response.
I have repeatedly said yes, I stand by them. People should stand up to bullies and defend themselves against them, I believe that to be praiseworthy behaviour.
Why should someone found not guilty by a court be in jail? I’ll ask again, what evidence do you have that wasn’t presented to the court that would change the jury’s verdict?
Or do you just want him locked up because you dislike what he did, regardless of the legality of it? That’s what I actually believe of you, and it makes you a dangerous person.
The people on January 6th believed as you do. Look in the mirror and weep.
Go fuck yourself. Your previous United States exists because of a revolution.
I edited the title to reflect the new pit title rules.
That’s what I actually believe of you, and it makes you a dangerous person.
So dangerous! That’s fine. You’re a racist dinosaur who defends the murder of unarmed black children.
An ironically correct typo there. I’m as american as I am christian, as suggested earlier. For those who might think I’m a straight white christian american man, you’d get 2 out of 5, and recent reflection suggests that one of those is more a habit than anything else.
Remember he’s also okay with Supreme Court justices buggering toddlers in public as long as they have sufficiently powerful friends.
No, I defend those who defend themselves against violent criminals. That you don’t do this should cause a fair amount of self reflection, but I strongly doubt it will.
I’m just sayin. You seem to like child killers a whole lot. People make connections.
The next unarmed black child shot by an armed and righteous seeking white guy… I’m betting you’ll side with the killer.
No, I think they should be locked up for their crimes if they’re proven guilty, and that if those powerful friends try to protect them they should be voted out of their positions of power.
What I’m not OK with is ignoring the process of law and democracy because you don’t like the results.
I see the typo but the rest of your post is gibberish.
In the previous United States slavery was the law, I’m sure you think slave rebellions were criminal acts, but that’s just because you’re a revolting immoral monster.