Supporters of the person would just vote non-guilty and opponents would just vote guilty. It would just result in hung juries over and over.

  • @Tsavo43@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    -161 year ago

    So you’re going to ignore Joe Biden using his position as VP to take in money illegally… Nice lack of morals.

    • @some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      Not who you responded to, but while most politicians grift a bit, Trump has been shown to grift his base like there’s no tomorrow. I recall that there was fine print on one of the “donate to stop the steal” campaigns that signed people up for recurring donations when they thought they were making a one-time contribution. The mountain of evidence, and your trying to defend him, robs you of any credibility.

    • @Retreaux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      21 year ago

      Nobody’s ignoring it. There’s plenty of room to investigate that too. Corruption of any source SHOULD be confronted and removed regardless of affiliation, but that wasn’t the point of the exercise. Besides, your assumption of my lack of morals from a single reply (and regarding a what-aboutism to boot) is just another logical fallacy. There’s more of them too if you’re looking for more ways to be an unreasonable contrarian online.