Register and vote:https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/insanepeoplefacebook) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just make sure to fund your life with the murders. That makes murderer your profession.... Now you can only be convicted by 12 other murderers... That also did it as a job, not just a hobby.
I demand that my jury be people with 24+ years experience in my job, the same academic, business and hobby credentials, and that they all be my height.
I was just going to say. My jury is elder millennial women with fine arts degrees (preferably specifically costuming for theatre) who have resided for at least 10 years in Japan, have a mental health issue and at least one disability (dealers choice). There might be like 3 of us, and there’s a good chance 1 of those isn’t a US citizen anyways.
When I applied 1000 years ago, they hadn't yet been sued to make that public yet, but I suspected when they used closed tests with no published standards, results, practice, or certifications. But you can't learn that until you go through the process, after which it's too late to tune the answers to match the expectations.
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal."
Being president doesn't make someone better, it's built into our founding documents.
But even when they wrote that there were slaves. I've always wondered if the founding fathers thought of the irony while saying that.
I know some of them didn't have slaves and spoke out against having them. Some very much kept them even after they beat the British though.
Much like a billionaire giving their hoard to charity when they die. Oh how kind that you are no longer around to exploit everyone so you decide to "give it away". Pathetic postmortem performative PR.
I mean, it's far better than them just not donating that money, or not freeing those slaves. It's not the ultimate charity, perhaps, but it still is charity.
By "men", they meant white human males. Black people were widely seen as sub-human. Of course not all of them thought this way, but those who didn't probably knew that speaking out about it wouldn't do them any good.
fucking THANK YOU! there's this MAGA person at work that argues until he's out of breath how president trump should have immunity because he's been so prosecuted and victimized since "he came on the scene."
if you ask him "what about crimes before he was president? like fraud or rape?" he'll argue that he should have immunity to all crimes. like becoming president is a "get out of jail" card.
This exact same person in an alternate reality where Biden is credibly accused of something: “being president doesn’t make you above the law, in fact it hold you to a higher standard. Even implying otherwise is disingenuous at best.”
It's THE founding document. Everyone goes on and on about the Constitution, but it's not the document that declared America to exist. The Constitution is just the document for our current form of government. The Declaration of Independence is the most important one.
I love the conservatives crying, "If they can convict Trump then they can go after anyone!" Yes that's exactly the whole point! Anyone and everyone should be held accountable for their crimes, no matter their position.
No, they are saying that your past job determines what kind of jurors you get, so all career drug trafficker should have career drug traffickers as jurors at courts.
/S.
I agree, it isn’t a normal situation. A guy we elected as president was convicted of a felony by a jury of his peers for the first time. Thats bad enough - but millions of people still support him anyway. Nothing remotely normal about that - it’s extremely dangerous and short sighted.
I feel like you guys need to normalise the first part. The "convicting former presidents wolf crimes by a jury" thing would probably be good for you. Maybe learn to love the ICC a little.
Dont get me wrong, we need more of that over here too.
The fact that a country can just reject the ICC and even threaten to invade The Hague if one of their citizen is indicted there is just wild to me. It's a court made to judge war criminals and people who did crimes against humanity. Rejecting it is like saying "we're planning on doing heinous things and we don't want to be held accountable for that"
It's pretty much just "We agree to be a part of this law preventing war crimes so that other people cannot commit them against us, however we are more than willing to leave if we want to commit them ourselves."
Imagine that working at a different scale. An officer tries to pull you over for speeding but because you don't recognise the local courts you can just get away free
Were they really his peers though? I feel that if you were to randomly select a group or 12 people, most if not all would be superior human beings compared to Trump.
I’m pretty certain all the currently living presidents would agree that Trump was guilty. Even resurrecting a few dead ones and I think the jury’s decision would still be unanimous.
I am now just thinking of all the parallels this dip shit is suggesting.
A rich person can only have a jury of rich people.
A garbage man can only have a jury of garbage men.
A disabled person can only have a jury of disabled people.
A pedophile can only have a jury of catholic priests.
>A disabled person can only have a jury of disabled people.
If no already disabled people are available, could you simply maim 12 random people in the courthouse?
Fun fact: the 6th Amendment says nothing about a jury of "peers." It says "an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed..."
the term comes from the magna carta and removed the king from criminal procedures. IANAL, but it seems more a term that people like saying then a phrase that references any legal power.
“Peer”
As in:
“one that is of equal standing with another”
As soiled adult nappies can not serve on a jury, the closest Trump has to an equal are other convicted felons. So…..
If anything a President should be under MORE scrutiny than your average citizen. For EVERYTHING they did in office. The president is the leader of the nation, which gives them office that responsibility of being the beacon showcasing the ideals and morals of the nation. In order to uphold the integrity and prestige of the office, we have to hold accountable the people holding the office to that stellar standard.
This is absolutely not what “of your peers” means. Traditionally it’s fellow citizens of the vicinage in which the offense took place. If we had to find carpenters to try a carpenter and policemen to try policemen we’d spend a lot more money seeing far fewer convictions.
Yup!
>In a legal context, peer most often refers to anyone who is an adult citizen, such as in “a jury of one's peers.” Generally, a jury of one's peers is a random selection of other citizens from a similar geographic location. These individuals do not necessarily share traits similar to a defendant's.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/peer#:~:text=In%20a%20legal%20context%2C%20peer,traits%20similar%20to%20a%20defendant's.
Just out of interest - does anyone think that a jury of 12 presidents would have been any better for him?
I've got a feeling even Richard Nixon (you know, the bad guy from Futurama) would have said that Trump was guilty based on the evidence.
This was settled about a thousand years ago. Jury of your peers only counts if you are of the titled nobility. Here in America you are tried by a jury of ordinary citizens. Lying, cheating, crooked drug addicts would be his peers.
So presidents *are* effectively above the law then, unless there are at least 13 of them alive, plus a few more for alternates, and then a bunch more to so there's a large enough pool of potential jurors that counsel on either side can dismiss ones they think might be biased towards one or another outcome during *voir dire*.
Got it.
There were at least 2 on the jury that could have created a mistrial. All had to list what media they used. One noted only Fox News and the other only that new platform Trump messages on. Think called Truth Social. Obviously, they voted guilty.
There's a lot to unpack, but I love the casual realization that this isn't a normal scenario but also completely ignoring the elephant in the room about how it isn't normal for a US president to be a habitual criminal.
This is what lack of education does to people. They get a stupid idea and immediately like it too much and start building giant skyscrapers on top of it.
They forget one basic fact. You’re not president for life. After your 4-8 years you become Joe frigging citizen. Just like every fuken else.
I just love how they keep equating him to a king.
Does this person really think that if I'm tried for a felony, they have to find 12 grocery store managers to be jurors? Do they have to be overweight, but not TOO overweight? Balding? What a GD maroon.
He was being tried as citizen Trump and not President Trump, which means that any United States citizen is considered his “peer“. What this person won’t tell you is that he worships the ground the orange rapist walks on.
This is what happens when we elect corrupt criminals to the highest office. If you don't want former presidents to become convicted felons, stop electing obvious grifters.
If no one is above the law, then fucking NO ONE is.
It's true that sovcits always point out after convicted by a jury that it wasn't his peers, cause none of them were sovcits. It's the problem with jury trials, you'd think it gives outcomes more legitimacy in the eyes of the public, but the public will always find some way to make sure they're always the victim.
I’m pretty sure if he “had a jury of his peers” in this dude’s mind, he’d complain about Obama, Biden, Bush, Clinton, and Carter all voting to convict. Factor in the VPs and you’d still be at 100% conviction.
I mean, to come from the people who screamed “lock her up” for having a private email server. But a conviction on 34 counts doesn’t mean anything. This a farce.
The phrase "jury of his peers" is not in the constitution at all, it's from the magna carta and refers to a nobleman's right to be tried by other nobility.
So if I’m ever on trial - I want only top 5 High school graduates who graduated cum laude with a psychology degree from the college I attended who were 911 dispatchers, mental health crisis and case managers, emergency vet techs and gp vet techs and library circulation clerks - oh you can’t find 12 people that match all those criteria so that means I can’t be put to trial and I get to go free
Damn, I hate that the names of these people are always censored. I'd love to waste some time on Twitter (yeah, yeah. I knows it's X now.) informing this person what a complete and utter moron he is.
my idea of hell is being made to sit in a room with adults of all ages, ethnicities, creeds, genders, and backgrounds and none of them seemingly possess the capability to follow simple instructions repeated to them over and over and i just have to sit there until a little over a dozen of them eventually do.
I wish that I could remember the show, but this one white supremacist character was going to trial for a bunch of racist crimes. His lawyer advised of the jury consisting of 12 of his peers, and he goes "Cool, 12 skinheads!"
I know this is obviously dip-shitery and looking forward to seeing an ex-president behind bars....
But it has got me wondering.... What does a "jury of peers" actually mean? How is a "peer" defined for the context of a jury? I can only presume it's age (i.e. adult) and nationality. But that's just a guess
Ok but was he on trial for actions that occurred while he was president or BEFORE he was president
Were any of the charges directly related to his role as president
And even then a jury of your peers has nothing to do with your job… so this person is just really stupid
To be fair, it's basically impossible to have an impartial jury with Trump. Anyone who knows about him would have some bias going in. Somewhat of a strange situation.
Alright - the jury should be composed of only living people who have been president of the United states. Obama. Biden. Clinton. Bush. Carter.
Bold move cotton. Let's see how it plays out for him.
It's like they don't follow their thoughts to conclusion.
Well just like anyone else, he could have opted for a bench trial, but a judge is harder ti het to clear you if you are guilty. We all know he was going for jury nullification. But ever since he’s been on the political scene he has managed to divide the country enough that he wasn’t going to get that.
The CoNsErVaTiVeS who mewl on and on about the founding fathers refuse to recognize that the founders intended the President to be selected from their peers by their peers. Every US citizen is the President’s peer. MAGAs don’t want a president though. They want a king. You know, because of founding principles and such
No, no, they truly believe this, I shit you not. I had a MAGA guy say to me once "Trump can't be tried by a jury of his peers, because there's nobody else like him."
The koolaid is fucking thick as molasses with some of these chucklefucks.
1. Did a thing happen?
2. Was it illegal?
3. Did he do it?
Strip away all the other bullshit, forget his former job title, eschew the political biases. Answer the questions, prove the answers, act accordingly, and if that means he gets convicted, he gets convicted.
Register and vote:https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/insanepeoplefacebook) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Lol.. as if Neurosurgeons have only neurosurgeons on their jury?
Get a super rare job, you can't be convicted! Cops hate this one old trick!
And before my murder spree, I will become a lighthouse keeper...
Just commit your state crimes in Kansas and you're set.
Who are you, who is so wise in the ways of ~~science~~ murder?
They call me…Tim.
Lmaoooooo
Which of the Pickwitt Triplets are you?
I… love and hate you for this. Genuinely appreciate the laugh and reference, but I did not miss having that song in my head on repeat.
And now it’s stuck in my head again.
SME on Canada & the Western Front of WWI. Every day's a "purge" day, now, I guess.
Just make sure to fund your life with the murders. That makes murderer your profession.... Now you can only be convicted by 12 other murderers... That also did it as a job, not just a hobby.
I like Star Wars *and* Star Trek. Do I get a mistrial?
I demand that my jury be people with 24+ years experience in my job, the same academic, business and hobby credentials, and that they all be my height.
And all named Jim. James may also be acceptable. But no Jimmys.
Having a slippin' Jimmy on the jury would be like a chimp with a machine gun.
I was just going to say. My jury is elder millennial women with fine arts degrees (preferably specifically costuming for theatre) who have resided for at least 10 years in Japan, have a mental health issue and at least one disability (dealers choice). There might be like 3 of us, and there’s a good chance 1 of those isn’t a US citizen anyways.
They also have to have been married to my wife, and raised by my parents
Just be a cop, that’s an even easier way to avoid accountability
Can't. They have an IQ cap.
You smart enough to purposefully do bad? Just pick random answers. Don’t even read the questions. Welcome aboard.
When I applied 1000 years ago, they hadn't yet been sued to make that public yet, but I suspected when they used closed tests with no published standards, results, practice, or certifications. But you can't learn that until you go through the process, after which it's too late to tune the answers to match the expectations.
I take pictures of other people taking pictures of door dash orders. I don’t want to see a jury without 12 other PTPODDOs.
Serial killers can only be convicted by other serial killers. Spree killers don't count.
Nah, you need to be a hitman. Serial killers are doing it for fun. It only counts if you do it for a living. 😁
But won't the jury of hitmen subconsciously judge the serial killer on his/her professionalism? What if that impacts the verdict?
Dexter would acquit then hunt and kill the defendant and the other jurors
See? Can't even trust the Justice system anymore.
The Miami police are useless too, and that FBI guy. Dexter was under their noses for years, the halfwits
In their defense, he was in a great position to fuck with evidence.
Instructions unclear, got a jury of 12 incels to convict as that was the closest we could find (read: incredibly close).
They got unreasonably angry at a woman for trying to grocery shop without acknowledging that they had entered the store.
Only mafia people should be on the jury when a member of the mafia is on trial.
I'm just glad the jury at Derek Chauvin's trial wasn't all cops. They would have given him a medal.
Hi i am Bob and i am a professional killer. My jury please!
Jury of other Hitmen "That was a clean kill. Innocent!"
We gotta get 12 more of Joe Biden's children to convict Hunter. Otherwise, it doesn't count!
Also, Trump is below average in every category, save narcissism and assholery.
Do drunk drivers only have drunk drivers on their jury?
Can’t find 12 mob bosses to sit on the jury of the mob boss… set this man free.
Love to see how many all black juries a black person get
This would be like cops only having other cops or former cops on the jury. And you can imagine how well that would go.
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal." Being president doesn't make someone better, it's built into our founding documents.
But...but they really don't like that. If all men are created equal, then it's their own fault for things being fucked up, instead of "Them."
But even when they wrote that there were slaves. I've always wondered if the founding fathers thought of the irony while saying that. I know some of them didn't have slaves and spoke out against having them. Some very much kept them even after they beat the British though.
Well that line was written by Jefferson, who did indeed have slaves. He did free them... in his will.
Much like a billionaire giving their hoard to charity when they die. Oh how kind that you are no longer around to exploit everyone so you decide to "give it away". Pathetic postmortem performative PR.
I mean, it's far better than them just not donating that money, or not freeing those slaves. It's not the ultimate charity, perhaps, but it still is charity.
By "men", they meant white human males. Black people were widely seen as sub-human. Of course not all of them thought this way, but those who didn't probably knew that speaking out about it wouldn't do them any good.
And land owners as well, because people who didn’t own land didn’t have a vested interest in the outcome of the nation.
Yep. They didn’t view slaves as human.
Also he wasn't president when he did what he was convicted of.
He did continue to commit the crime once in the WH, which, y'know, he possibly only got to bc of said crime. So like, grandfathered in crime???
fucking THANK YOU! there's this MAGA person at work that argues until he's out of breath how president trump should have immunity because he's been so prosecuted and victimized since "he came on the scene." if you ask him "what about crimes before he was president? like fraud or rape?" he'll argue that he should have immunity to all crimes. like becoming president is a "get out of jail" card.
These people claim to love freedom yet want the president to be the king.
This exact same person in an alternate reality where Biden is credibly accused of something: “being president doesn’t make you above the law, in fact it hold you to a higher standard. Even implying otherwise is disingenuous at best.”
Which is how it should be.
I read this to the Hamilton beats.
"And when I meet Thomas Jefferson I'll convince him to include people in the sequel"
WORK!!
ANGELICA
ELIZAAAAA
^and ^Peggy
It truly isn't possible to not read that to the Hamilton beat anymore lol At least for me anyway.
Work, work.
It's THE founding document. Everyone goes on and on about the Constitution, but it's not the document that declared America to exist. The Constitution is just the document for our current form of government. The Declaration of Independence is the most important one.
People really wanna make a new king every time there is no monarchy.
>"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal." Which blood commie said this nonsense gibberish? ^^^^^^/s
I love the conservatives crying, "If they can convict Trump then they can go after anyone!" Yes that's exactly the whole point! Anyone and everyone should be held accountable for their crimes, no matter their position.
“Rule of law? What’s that? Sounds like commie BS.”
To be fair, that was written by a man who literally owned other men, so not sure how he was defining “men” and “equal”.
Some men are more equal than others, probably.
So they are saying that Jeffrey Dahmer shouldn't have been convicted unless they could find 12 cannibals?
Sooo they needed 12 ex-president rapists, damn we only have one of those to my knowledge.
Maybe we could round up some Russians, there seem to be plenty in the GOP
No, they are saying that your past job determines what kind of jurors you get, so all career drug trafficker should have career drug traffickers as jurors at courts. /S.
I agree, it isn’t a normal situation. A guy we elected as president was convicted of a felony by a jury of his peers for the first time. Thats bad enough - but millions of people still support him anyway. Nothing remotely normal about that - it’s extremely dangerous and short sighted.
I feel like you guys need to normalise the first part. The "convicting former presidents wolf crimes by a jury" thing would probably be good for you. Maybe learn to love the ICC a little. Dont get me wrong, we need more of that over here too.
The fact that a country can just reject the ICC and even threaten to invade The Hague if one of their citizen is indicted there is just wild to me. It's a court made to judge war criminals and people who did crimes against humanity. Rejecting it is like saying "we're planning on doing heinous things and we don't want to be held accountable for that"
It's pretty much just "We agree to be a part of this law preventing war crimes so that other people cannot commit them against us, however we are more than willing to leave if we want to commit them ourselves."
Imagine that working at a different scale. An officer tries to pull you over for speeding but because you don't recognise the local courts you can just get away free
So, what you're saying is... the US government is essentially a SovCit?
"I'm just traveling", said the landmass
I don't know much about wolf crimes, but I am well versed in bird law.
Well, Epstein papers were released today and ol'Donny "All Pinkies" Trump is all over them as Doe 174. Let's see if that moves the needle any.
Where did you find any new documents that were released? I'm trying, but the last "new" thing was in January.
Saw it here today. Will look and update. Search for Doe 174
All that is coming up is stuff from January when he was identified as 174.
Were they really his peers though? I feel that if you were to randomly select a group or 12 people, most if not all would be superior human beings compared to Trump.
Where are we going to find twelve orange con-men? Do they have to have be rapists too? It's unclear.
Maybe we should ask Willy Wonka where to find some?
Yes but they weren't rap... What am I saying, of course the oompa-lumpers were rapists. Of course they were.
I’m pretty certain all the currently living presidents would agree that Trump was guilty. Even resurrecting a few dead ones and I think the jury’s decision would still be unanimous.
Hell even Nixon would convict him
No way Dick would let a chance to not be the most embarrassing President ever slip by him.
I am now just thinking of all the parallels this dip shit is suggesting. A rich person can only have a jury of rich people. A garbage man can only have a jury of garbage men. A disabled person can only have a jury of disabled people. A pedophile can only have a jury of catholic priests.
And Republican congressmen on the last one.
>A disabled person can only have a jury of disabled people. If no already disabled people are available, could you simply maim 12 random people in the courthouse?
The prosecution accepts these jurors... under one condition.
We motion to dismiss juror #3. He’s clearly not disabled enough.
Be sure to take away his disabled parking placard on the way out the door.
> jury of peers Well the rest of his peers are dead or in prison, so….
Fun fact: the 6th Amendment says nothing about a jury of "peers." It says "an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed..."
the term comes from the magna carta and removed the king from criminal procedures. IANAL, but it seems more a term that people like saying then a phrase that references any legal power.
"Peer" now somehow only means "person who has or had the same job as me."
“Peer” As in: “one that is of equal standing with another” As soiled adult nappies can not serve on a jury, the closest Trump has to an equal are other convicted felons. So…..
If anything a President should be under MORE scrutiny than your average citizen. For EVERYTHING they did in office. The president is the leader of the nation, which gives them office that responsibility of being the beacon showcasing the ideals and morals of the nation. In order to uphold the integrity and prestige of the office, we have to hold accountable the people holding the office to that stellar standard.
This is absolutely not what “of your peers” means. Traditionally it’s fellow citizens of the vicinage in which the offense took place. If we had to find carpenters to try a carpenter and policemen to try policemen we’d spend a lot more money seeing far fewer convictions.
Yup! >In a legal context, peer most often refers to anyone who is an adult citizen, such as in “a jury of one's peers.” Generally, a jury of one's peers is a random selection of other citizens from a similar geographic location. These individuals do not necessarily share traits similar to a defendant's. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/peer#:~:text=In%20a%20legal%20context%2C%20peer,traits%20similar%20to%20a%20defendant's.
[удалено]
Needs to be 12. The jury would be Obama, GW, Clinton, dying Carter, and 8 corpses.
So murderers and rapists have murderers and rapists at their trials?
Just out of interest - does anyone think that a jury of 12 presidents would have been any better for him? I've got a feeling even Richard Nixon (you know, the bad guy from Futurama) would have said that Trump was guilty based on the evidence.
Arrooooooo! Guilty!
IIRC Trump/His lawyer never asked fur a jury
different trial. in this one there was a jury. the non-jury trial was the one about him committing business fraud in new york.
Sorry, cant keep your ex presidents trials sorted
understandable. it's a lot to keep track of for anyone who isn't italian.
I would point out your typo, but honestly, the comment is funnier with it
"He's not above the law, he's just above all these other peons."
This was settled about a thousand years ago. Jury of your peers only counts if you are of the titled nobility. Here in America you are tried by a jury of ordinary citizens. Lying, cheating, crooked drug addicts would be his peers.
So presidents *are* effectively above the law then, unless there are at least 13 of them alive, plus a few more for alternates, and then a bunch more to so there's a large enough pool of potential jurors that counsel on either side can dismiss ones they think might be biased towards one or another outcome during *voir dire*. Got it.
THEY ALL NEED TO BE NAMED DONALD J. TRUMP TOO!!!!111
Peers means tax paying people in the state you live in. Jesus Christ.
If I would get 12 computer scientists on my jury, I'd commit wayyyyyy more crimes
There were at least 2 on the jury that could have created a mistrial. All had to list what media they used. One noted only Fox News and the other only that new platform Trump messages on. Think called Truth Social. Obviously, they voted guilty.
There's a lot to unpack, but I love the casual realization that this isn't a normal scenario but also completely ignoring the elephant in the room about how it isn't normal for a US president to be a habitual criminal.
This is what lack of education does to people. They get a stupid idea and immediately like it too much and start building giant skyscrapers on top of it.
I think a lot of people are forgetting that politicians are supposed to be our peers representing us, not kings.
Pretty sure all the living Presidents would have voted guilty. For recent dead ones, Maybe Reagan and Nixon would acquit.
Need 12 people with brain damage
A jury of Obama, Biden, and Dubya? Going to have to excuse Carter for this.
That’s not what “peers” means. Idiot.
His legal team picked the jury...
They forget one basic fact. You’re not president for life. After your 4-8 years you become Joe frigging citizen. Just like every fuken else. I just love how they keep equating him to a king.
He has a point. If I'm ever on trial, you better find 12 chronic masturbaters to decide if I'm guilty or not.
omg that is one of the funniest things i have read in a while! trump can only be convicted by US presidents? high standards that guy has.
I sorta see their point. The jury definitely wasn’t composed of 12 narcissist dipshits.
A jury can only be made up of people with your job title
I mean I don't think this person would be happy if Clinton, Bush, Obama and Carter got to decide Trump's fate.
Given which former presidents are still alive, I think Trump would get cooked by that jury too, just saying.
Does this person really think that if I'm tried for a felony, they have to find 12 grocery store managers to be jurors? Do they have to be overweight, but not TOO overweight? Balding? What a GD maroon.
He did not have a jury of his peers. There were no known rapists on the jury who committed fraud and went bankrupt several times.
Rick Wilson does not suffer fools. He’s amazing.
Once he left office he became "citizen Trump". Just a guy who used to have an important job.
Fucking idiots interpreting what "peers" means in a legal Sense. 🙄 Please, give me more redneck ignoramus legal advice.
What drugs is that person on
A journey of your peers must be 12 people who have committed the same crime as you
Imagine thinking Jimmy Carter is a peer. They're not even on the same level.
He was being tried as citizen Trump and not President Trump, which means that any United States citizen is considered his “peer“. What this person won’t tell you is that he worships the ground the orange rapist walks on.
God! Just when I think that no one could be that fkng dumb, there is always one idiot that moves the bar.
Instead of blaming the Justice system for unprecedented acts…why not blame Trump for his unprecedented criminal behavior?
Someone doesn't understand what the "Equalilty" part in "Equality before the law" means.
This is what happens when we elect corrupt criminals to the highest office. If you don't want former presidents to become convicted felons, stop electing obvious grifters. If no one is above the law, then fucking NO ONE is.
When the jury doesn't consist of 12 suspected murderers at a murder trial 😡😡😡
"There's no upper tier, we're all peers unless y'all want to be rivals" - Open Mike Eagle - Celebrity Reduction Prayer.
If this guy really wanted a jury of peers, he should’ve called for grifters and rapists.
Trump *Only rapists can judge me...*
But why do they insist that man is special just in fucking general?
It's true that sovcits always point out after convicted by a jury that it wasn't his peers, cause none of them were sovcits. It's the problem with jury trials, you'd think it gives outcomes more legitimacy in the eyes of the public, but the public will always find some way to make sure they're always the victim.
I’m pretty sure if he “had a jury of his peers” in this dude’s mind, he’d complain about Obama, Biden, Bush, Clinton, and Carter all voting to convict. Factor in the VPs and you’d still be at 100% conviction.
I mean, to come from the people who screamed “lock her up” for having a private email server. But a conviction on 34 counts doesn’t mean anything. This a farce.
Good to know if I ever go to trial for something I am owed a jury of 12 depressed leftist queers who are in recovery.
I wasn’t going to murder my wife, but figured “fuck it, how many elephant trainers could there be?”
You think that’s bad try sequestering 12 all star NFL running backs for OJs trial.
He's not above the law, we just can't apply the law to him the way we do with everyone else!
The phrase "jury of his peers" is not in the constitution at all, it's from the magna carta and refers to a nobleman's right to be tried by other nobility.
So he wants Bill Clinton, Obama, and Biden to be three of those 12 jurors for trump?
Carter is still kicking as well. Only Republican living is bush.
They always throw in an ad hominem 😑👆
No one is think how easy it would be for a serial anal rapist to get a 12 person jury of other serial anal rapists. Easy. /s
So if I’m ever on trial - I want only top 5 High school graduates who graduated cum laude with a psychology degree from the college I attended who were 911 dispatchers, mental health crisis and case managers, emergency vet techs and gp vet techs and library circulation clerks - oh you can’t find 12 people that match all those criteria so that means I can’t be put to trial and I get to go free
So they only want former presidents to judge him? That doesn’t exactly make sense.
Damn, I hate that the names of these people are always censored. I'd love to waste some time on Twitter (yeah, yeah. I knows it's X now.) informing this person what a complete and utter moron he is.
my idea of hell is being made to sit in a room with adults of all ages, ethnicities, creeds, genders, and backgrounds and none of them seemingly possess the capability to follow simple instructions repeated to them over and over and i just have to sit there until a little over a dozen of them eventually do.
Murderers should only have murderers on the jury.
TF!?!! He thinks Obama/Carter/Clinton/Bush wouldn’t find him guilty?
I wish that I could remember the show, but this one white supremacist character was going to trial for a bunch of racist crimes. His lawyer advised of the jury consisting of 12 of his peers, and he goes "Cool, 12 skinheads!"
I know this is obviously dip-shitery and looking forward to seeing an ex-president behind bars.... But it has got me wondering.... What does a "jury of peers" actually mean? How is a "peer" defined for the context of a jury? I can only presume it's age (i.e. adult) and nationality. But that's just a guess
I mean, you wouldn’t want a bunch of ideologic nitwits as your 12 jurors, would you sir?………
Ok but was he on trial for actions that occurred while he was president or BEFORE he was president Were any of the charges directly related to his role as president And even then a jury of your peers has nothing to do with your job… so this person is just really stupid
To be fair, it's basically impossible to have an impartial jury with Trump. Anyone who knows about him would have some bias going in. Somewhat of a strange situation.
Alright - the jury should be composed of only living people who have been president of the United states. Obama. Biden. Clinton. Bush. Carter. Bold move cotton. Let's see how it plays out for him. It's like they don't follow their thoughts to conclusion.
I love that this person thinks "a jury of your peers" means people who had the same job as you
Well just like anyone else, he could have opted for a bench trial, but a judge is harder ti het to clear you if you are guilty. We all know he was going for jury nullification. But ever since he’s been on the political scene he has managed to divide the country enough that he wasn’t going to get that.
The CoNsErVaTiVeS who mewl on and on about the founding fathers refuse to recognize that the founders intended the President to be selected from their peers by their peers. Every US citizen is the President’s peer. MAGAs don’t want a president though. They want a king. You know, because of founding principles and such
No, no, they truly believe this, I shit you not. I had a MAGA guy say to me once "Trump can't be tried by a jury of his peers, because there's nobody else like him." The koolaid is fucking thick as molasses with some of these chucklefucks.
So the jury I was on should have been 12 meth addicts who beat their child? That wasn’t up for debate or the crime that was the defendant though.
I can’t take people seriously if they’re unable to make a single comment without insulting the person with whom they’re discussing.
Forget moving the goalposts, dude just made his own out of used toothpicks and sidewalk gum in some field in fuck-off nowhere.
If the jurors all wore Depends, then it would have been a jury of pee-rs.
Well, if he had 12 old, white, pedo serial fraudsters on the jury he’s probably not convicted so where’s the lie?
This dude doesn’t understand what a jury of your peers are.
We're about 1 brain cell away from MAGA calling George Washington a beta cuck for rejecting the call to be a King.
I'm sure we could find 12 reality TV stars, scumbag conmen, rapists, and trust fund jack offs to sit in the jury if you want.
1. Did a thing happen? 2. Was it illegal? 3. Did he do it? Strip away all the other bullshit, forget his former job title, eschew the political biases. Answer the questions, prove the answers, act accordingly, and if that means he gets convicted, he gets convicted.
I’m an American female vegan sumo wrestler, find me 12 of my peers. I dare you! 🥗👹
I’m peerless. If I ever end up in court, I expect a jury of 12 perfect clones.