What is the future of the Republican Party?

[Enhance]

18 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

presumed innocent——goes to trial——found not guilty (as you finally agreed one can’t be found innocent)——still legally presumed innocent.

This is wrong. Correction: Presumed innocent > goes to trial > found not guilty. "Innocence" has nothing to do with the verdict, as you agree, because one can't be found innocent. They are separate legal standards.

 

You're choosing to inaccurately imply a presumption of innocence to guiltlessness. Legally, they are not the same thing. You have been shown this on three occasions, including by your own source, which you continue to ignore as if it doesn't exist.

 

Why does your source say not guilty and innocent are NOT the same thing and you continue to say that they are?

[Archy1221]

18 minutes ago, Enhance said:

. It suggests you're not really interested in having an honest conversation, which is 100% unsurprising.

Suggest whatever you please, being wrong in your above post is something beyond my control.  
 

Just for posterity, I am having an actual discussion with you.  You don’t seem to believe in the backbone concept of presumed innocent until proven guilty (one can’t be found innocent of charges by a court so by the standards of our system are still presumed innocent ) and I do.  We are discussing that.  I feel your having an honest discussing, just using semantics where they don’t belong.  
maybe I’m way off base and maybe I’m not, I’m giving you my judgement based off how I read the concept of innocent until proven guilty so Not sure why you had to go where you did with the honesty thing but to each his own. 

[Archy1221]

2 minutes ago, Enhance said:

This is wrong. Correction: Presumed innocent > goes to trial > found not guilty. "Innocence" has nothing to do with the verdict, as you agree, because one can't be found innocent. They are separate legal standards.

 

You're choosing to imply innocence to guiltlessness. Legally, they are not the same. You have been shown this on three occasions, including by your own source, which you continue to ignore as if they don't exist.

Wrong...presumed innocent in our system has nothing to do with if someone actually committed on offense or not.  

[Enhance]

1 minute ago, Archy1221 said:

maybe I’m way off base and maybe I’m not, I’m giving you my judgement based off how I read the concept of innocent until proven guilty so Not sure why you had to go where you did with the honesty thing but to each his own. 

You're willfully integrating legal concepts inaccurately and trying to use that as a basis for your argument, despite being shown a source (that you linked) that explains why you're wrong. That's the issue.

 

If someone is going to directly ignore a verifiable source in order to maintain a false opinion, that's not having a conversation in good faith.

[Enhance]

5 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

presumed innocent in our system has nothing to do with if someone actually committed on offense or not.  

Ergo, being found not guilty does not mean you are innocent. You said earlier that "if you aren't guilty you are innocent." That's wrong and that's my point.

 

You can choose to believe someone is innocent after being found not guilty, but legally, they are not equivalent to one another. That's your choice. Example: in a court of law, O.J. Simpson was found not guilty of murder. He was not found INNOCENT of murder. Therefore, we can not say "since he's not guilty he's innocent."

[Archy1221]

10 minutes ago, Enhance said:

You're willfully integrating legal concepts inaccurately and trying to use that as a basis for your argument, despite being shown a source (that you linked) that explains why you're wrong. That's the issue.

 

If someone is going to directly ignore a verifiable source in order to maintain a false opinion, that's not having a conversation in good faith.

The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered "innocent until proven guilty".

 

https://www.humanrights.com/what-are-human-rights/videos/innocent-till-proven-guilty.html

 

1.  Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.

 

Presumption Of Innocence

One of the most sacred principles in the American criminal justice system, holding that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each essential element of the crime charged.

[Archy1221]

21 minutes ago, Enhance said:

Ergo, being found not guilty does not mean you are innocent. You said earlier that "if you aren't guilty you are innocent." That's wrong and that's my point.

 

You can choose to believe someone is innocent after being found not guilty, but legally, they are not equivalent to one another. That's your choice. Example: in a court of law, O.J. Simpson was found not guilty of murder. He was not found INNOCENT of murder. Therefore, we can not say "since he's not guilty he's innocent."

ONE CANNOT BE FOUND INNOCENT IN COURT.  It’s not even an option.  When will you comprehend this?
 

Ergo...I changed my terminology to include presumed innocent yet you still go on with nonsense.  
 

The person is still presumed innocent in the eyes of the law when found not guilty.  It’s the only rational thing to say.  If one is innocent until proven guilty and one is NEVER proven guilty,  one would still be presumed innocent until proven guilty.   

[TGHusker]

48 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

@Omaha-Husker @TGHusker

 

I don't remember when Oklahoma's primary is, but in Nebraska, our primary vote for President is totally meaningless.  It is completely, 100% decided before we even get to think about voting.  So, me switching to independent had no affect on my ability to affect the Presidential primaries.

Okla was moved up to super Tuesday - it use to be June - by then we were only waiting for the fat lady to sing. 

[knapplc]

Just burn that party to the ground.

 

 

 

[TGHusker]

7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Just burn that party to the ground.

 

 

 

That big whooooosing sound you just heard - the conscience of GOP Senators rushing out of their ears

[commando]

5 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Just burn that party to the ground.

 

 

 

i keep trying to give the republicans a chance...but they keep doing everything possible to prove that they aren't worth supporting.   if they say a president can break laws  with no responsibility.  if they say you can send a lynch mob to the house to overturn an election.  if they say you must obey or be thrown out.   well.....they are done as far as i am concerned.    i am not a democrat....but i can support the dems more than i can support what the republican party has become.  

[Moiraine]

1 hour ago, commando said:

i keep trying to give the republicans a chance...but they keep doing everything possible to prove that they aren't worth supporting.   if they say a president can break laws  with no responsibility.  if they say you can send a lynch mob to the house to overturn an election.  if they say you must obey or be thrown out.   well.....they are done as far as i am concerned.    i am not a democrat....but i can support the dems more than i can support what the republican party has become.  

 

 

 

We are all going to reap what they sow. There is someone out there who is going to be far worse than Trump.

[Scarlet]

16 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

 

We are all going to reap what they sow. There is someone out there who is going to be far worse than Trump.

That's going to be tough to do.  I guess they could dig up Jeffrey Dahmer and run him.  Or Marjorie Taylor Green and run him.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Tell you what: let's presume all parties are innocent of election fraud until proven guilty. 

 

Donald Trump & minions have borne zero responsibility for proving guilt, and that's how we got to this incredibly dangerous place. 

 

That's a fact. 

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

You don’t seem to believe in the backbone concept of presumed innocent until proven guilty

This is ONLY a legal issue within our court system.  It has nothing to do with how anyone else understands things.  I know people who have been absolutely guilty of things but, not found guilty in court.  That doesn't make them innocent with anything else other than the court system not being able to punish them.