• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If Mueller Indicts Putin before Visit

haymarket said:
And why would Putin not be indicted when he has already publicly admitted his guilt to the world? Or do we simply indict the lower underlings who carry out the orders but not the leaders who give those same orders?
Click to expand...

Your play with his words would be trashed by even an appointed public defender.
 
haymarket said:
And the law distinguishes between those two things?

I suspect it does not .
Click to expand...

The law might not. But people will. And I'm pretty sure that people would let Putin go in order to stop a world war that will destroy life as we know it. Some things are bigger than your hatred of Trump.
 
OlNate said:
Oooh...careful, you're suggesting the difference is due to cowardice. ;)
Click to expand...

Hey, when it comes to nuclear war...I'll confess, I'm a coward. :shrug: I didn't have kids just so they could burn in a nuclear flash.....if they're lucky.
 
apdst said:
I don't support starting a war over it. We never arrested any other foreign leader that committed crimes, when they came to The United States. Why now? Are you really that butthurt over losing the election?
Click to expand...

What other foreign leader under indictment has previously come to the USA?

We have already established we indicted and arrested and tried and convicted Noriega. So that precedent is there.
 
haymarket said:
sigh... I fondly remember the days when so called conservatives supported the law and its enforcement.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between supporting the law, and causing a nuclear war over someones blind hatred.
 
Kal'Stang said:
The law might not. But people will. And I'm pretty sure that people would let Putin go in order to stop a world war that will destroy life as we know it. Some things are bigger than your hatred of Trump.
Click to expand...

So much for our honor and defending the nation against all enemies foreign and domestic.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Your play with his words would be trashed by even an appointed public defender.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about as all I did was quote the question and answer word for word.

Reuters reporter Jeff Mason asked on Monday,
“President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?”
Click to expand...

and the immediate Putin answer to both parts of the question
“Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.–Russia relationship back to normal.”
Click to expand...
 
Kal'Stang said:
There are better ways to do so that won't cause nuclear fallout.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you are right. What would you suggest is the way to bring Putin to justice for his crimes against the American people?
 
haymarket said:
I have no idea what you are talking about as all I did was quote the question and answer word for word.
Click to expand...

Yes I know what you did. Leaving out all context. Sorry but a court of law would laugh at such a claim as yours. All that Putin would have to do to get any sort of case based completely on those words would be to say that he was simply answering one question while ignoring the other. And guess what...without anything else to back up your assertion your laughable claim would go down in flames.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Yes I know what you did. Leaving out all context. Sorry but a court of law would laugh at such a claim as yours. All that Putin would have to do to get any sort of case based completely on those words would be to say that he was simply answering one question while ignoring the other. And guess what...without anything else to back up your assertion your laughable claim would go down in flames.
Click to expand...

But he did NOT do that. Two questions were asked and he provided two answers.

And we have the reports of our intelligence agencies which back up those claims and admissions.
 
Howard the Duck said:
Are you agreeing with the Duck that the sixth amendment as well as most constitutional provisions applies to foreigners and not just American citizens?

Yes or no.
Click to expand...

When they are with in the jurisdiction of the US then yes they do. What is your point here?
 
haymarket said:
Perhaps you are right. What would you suggest is the way to bring Putin to justice for his crimes against the American people?
Click to expand...

Convince the Russian government to hand over Putin and revoke his diplomatic immunity. Without doing such then arresting Putin would in fact be breaking the law and would be causing a world war.
 
haymarket said:
What other foreign leader under indictment has previously come to the USA?

We have already established we indicted and arrested and tried and convicted Noriega. So that precedent is there.
Click to expand...

Putin isn't under indictment.

You didn't want Armadinejad arrested when he came to The United States. An American court ruled Iran to be responsible for the Kohbar Tower bombing; Americans were murdered. Where were you then?
 
Kal'Stang said:
Yes I know what you did. Leaving out all context. Sorry but a court of law would laugh at such a claim as yours. All that Putin would have to do to get any sort of case based completely on those words would be to say that he was simply answering one question while ignoring the other. And guess what...without anything else to back up your assertion your laughable claim would go down in flames.
Click to expand...

Relax before you go down in flames. The OP made an interesting observation. Accept it as such. As a purely technical matter, Putin may be exposed to criminal liability if he sets foot in a U.S. jurisdiction. As a practical matter there is not a chance of it happening.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Hey, when it comes to nuclear war...I'll confess, I'm a coward. :shrug: I didn't have kids just so they could burn in a nuclear flash.....if they're lucky.
Click to expand...

hehe...let's see how this one flies...cuz I'm about to whataboutyou, brother... ;)

Ahem...but it was cowardice when Obama "kicked the can down the road" with N. Korea, or when he handled Putin with kid gloves diplomatically, or when he attempted to work out an agreement with Iran? :lol:

I'm not saying you said that, the response you're quoting wasn't directed at you, which puts me in the awkward position of defending a flippant comment to someone I generally wouldn't give a flippant comment to...hehe... Some of your brothers on the right, though...they do make things confusing AF, when it comes to defending Trump.
 
haymarket said:
But he did NOT do that. Two questions were asked and he provided two answers.

And we have the reports of our intelligence agencies which back up those claims and admissions.
Click to expand...

The reports from our intelligence agencies can only tie the hackers to what happened and that they are in some way connected to Putin. They cannot prove that Putin ordered them to do anything. All one of them would have to do is say that he did it without any orders from Putin and you're screwed.

And again, all Putin has to do is say that he was ignoring one question while answering the other. You cannot prove otherwise.
 
JackA said:
Relax before you go down in flames. The OP made an interesting observation. Accept it as such. As a purely technical matter, Putin may be exposed to criminal liability if he sets foot in a U.S. jurisdiction. As a practical matter there is not a chance of it happening.
Click to expand...

I don't consider it interesting. :shrug: I consider it a very foolish suggestion.
 
apdst said:
Putin isn't under indictment.

You didn't want Armadinejad arrested when he came to The United States. An American court ruled Iran to be responsible for the Kohbar Tower bombing; Americans were murdered. Where were you then?
Click to expand...

You are missing the point - the discussion is based on the premise that he could be.
 
Kal'Stang said:
The reports from our intelligence agencies can only tie the hackers to what happened and that they are in some way connected to Putin. They cannot prove that Putin ordered them to do anything. All one of them would have to do is say that he did it without any orders from Putin and you're screwed.

And again, all Putin has to do is say that he was ignoring one question while answering the other. You cannot prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

It matters not what Putin will say or what Trump will say in trying to walk back previous statements and admissions. Its out there.

Putin already admitted to the world that he ordered it.
 
OlNate said:
hehe...let's see how this one flies...cuz I'm about to whataboutyou, brother... ;)

Ahem...but it was cowardice when Obama "kicked the can down the road" with N. Korea, or when he handled Putin with kid gloves diplomatically, or when he attempted to work out an agreement with Iran? :lol:

I'm not saying you said that, the response you're quoting wasn't directed at you, which puts me in the awkward position of defending a flippant comment to someone I generally wouldn't give a flippant comment to...hehe... Some of your brothers on the right, though...they do make things confusing AF, when it comes to defending Trump.
Click to expand...

Life IS complicated. ;)

When it comes to NK, yes it was cowardice because when there was a chance to do something about them all past Presidents failed. It could have been handled long before NK actually got ahold of nuke technology and in a manner which wouldn't have led to an all out war, even with China in their corner.

As for Putin and Russia...that is a whole different ball game. One that does need to be handled with kids gloves. So no, not cowardice. Just smarts.

As for Iran, I disagreed with the agreement because I know that it didn't go far enough in securing Iran from getting nukes. I don't think cowardice had anything to do with it. Knowing Obama it was probably a case of severe optimism.
 
haymarket said:
It matters not what Putin will say or what Trump will say in trying to walk back previous statements and admissions. Its out there.

Putin already admitted to the world that he ordered it.
Click to expand...

No, he didn't. Only your wishful thinking has him admitting it. Real life doesn't work your way.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Life IS complicated. ;)

When it comes to NK, yes it was cowardice because when there was a chance to do something about them all past Presidents failed. It could have been handled long before NK actually got ahold of nuke technology and in a manner which wouldn't have led to an all out war, even with China in their corner.

As for Putin and Russia...that is a whole different ball game. One that does need to be handled with kids gloves. So no, not cowardice. Just smarts.

As for Iran, I disagreed with the agreement because I know that it didn't go far enough in securing Iran from getting nukes. I don't think cowardice had anything to do with it. Knowing Obama it was probably a case of severe optimism.
Click to expand...

Ooo, I wanna come at you, bro, but you're defending against allegations I'm not laying at your feet. ;)

Of course life is complicated. So far the only thing I'll say for sure was that Trump made a huge mistake by throwing his intelligence services, and by extension the country, under the bus in favor of Putin's word. Even if he believed him, there was a better way to sort that out than making a grand gesture on international TV. That was a hack job.

Other than that, the rest is still up in the air for me...pending results of investigations... I disagree with you on North Korea and Iran, but those are different conversations.

In the meantime, we have plenty of hypocrisies we can sink our teeth into to scratch our debating itch. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom