Why the hell can't a president be charged with a crime?

Started by eThneoLgrRnae10 pages
Originally posted by Putinbot1
😆 triggered

LOL. You're a very strange one; I'll give you that. 👆

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I ignore him as PVS said, guys a nonce.

Is the wisest move.

Originally posted by Surtur
Can't wait to see this proof 🙂
😆

Originally posted by Robtard
Is the wisest move.
Yup, horrible, the little I heard tbh.

🙂

Originally posted by Surtur
Can't wait to see this proof 🙂

You're known as the guy who makes claims and refuses to back them up with proof, so demanding others do it is just poor behavior :0

Irony overload.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're known as the guy who makes claims and refuses to back them up with proof, so demanding others do it is just poor behavior :0

Originally posted by Robtard
You're known as the guy who makes claims and refuses to back them up with proof, so demanding others do it is just poor behavior :0
👆 true that.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
👆 true that.

^ triggered 😂

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
^ triggered 😂
Delicious.

Originally posted by Robtard
You're known as the guy who makes claims and refuses to back them up with proof, so demanding others do it is just poor behavior :0

I've refused to indulge you in bad faith arguments, especially when they involve me going digging through various websites just to have you spin it anyways.

Here it is quite clear cut and simple. Nice try though 🙂

Surt also got banned for not providing proof, I guess we'll see if everyone is held to the same standards.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Surt also got banned for not providing proof, I guess we'll see if everyone is held to the same standards.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Surt also got banned for not providing proof, I guess we'll see if everyone is held to the same standards.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
No, it is the epitome of childishness to have a tantrum, because you received a temporary suspension for violating the rules of a private forum.

You insulted a moderator, which is a violation of the first rule of the forum, and you refused to follow the instructions of a moderator, which is a violation of the eighth rule of the forum.

You then created a duplicate registration, which is a violation of the fifth rule of the forum, to complain about it, which has not earned you an additional suspension, or an extension to your previous one.

In registering an account, you agreed to be bound by the terms of service, which includes the provision that administrators and moderators may move, edit, and/or delete posts at any time and for any reason—that the moderation of the forum is entirely at their discretion.

You do not have a First Amendment right to post on KMC. Administrators and moderators are effectively permitting you to play in their metaphorical sandbox at their pleasure.

You need to act like a grown-up, and accept your suspension like an adult.

Rules for thee but not for me, gotcha. We can ignore the rules about harassment, etc. but not the rules about a mod getting insulted lol.

Don't worry, nobody legit thought quan would be banned. As someone pointed out recently: this place needs better mods 🙂

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Now THAT is against the KMC Rules.

Guess Robbie is ALSO on the Protected KMC Snowflake List.

😱 [/B]

u guys only have yourselves to blame for that. U guys voted Rob king of the trolls.

As such he cant be banned, temp or perma for any trolling he does until his reign as king is over.

The best u can do is file his behavior away and ask one of the mods to make a report detailing his activity that u can possibly use against him when someone else replaces him as king.

Originally posted by Raptor22
u guys only have yourselves to blame for that. U guys voted Rob king of the trolls.

As such he cant be banned, temp or perma for any trolling he does until his reign as king is over.

The best u can do is file his behavior away and ask one of the mods to make a report detailing his activity that u can possibly use against him when someone else replaces him as king.

YouTube video

its a law older than america itself - the idea is that all justice is served by the state, so the head of state can't be punished by their own state, but that's not the only thing about it

it goes beyond america, it's far older than america itself, and it's a safety check to prevent the executive branch from being paralyzed by random accusations, and it also serves the public image of the country; it always looks bad if the head of state is prosecuted, and it's also in interest of the country's enemies to damage this image

as far as normal citizens go, it's basically too hard, too risky, and gives too little of a benefit, to make false accusations a common thing, usually the stakes are too low when you look at most normal citizens, but they are in case of head of state (and judges, etc - they usually have similar protection, actually, in 9/10 cases). few people would have any benefit from forging some giant accusations against common folk, but a lot of them would benefit from stalking the head of state with unending list of accusations

therefore this law was created, and most countries of the western civilization pursue this route; the head of state, the judges, sometimes various high ranking officials and military leaders have this "protection"

those people can be charged with crimes, but it requires additional, complicated procedures, to avoid having the state paralyzed by unending list of trials

this thing goes way beyond trump, way beyond america, and it goes way beyond any political options, it's actually more about pure respect to the state

obviously, there are some presidents that are terrifyingly bad, some are walking jokes, but this law is given to the office and its importance to the state, not any singular person

Here is one change I'd make. I heard on the radio that if Trump wins in 2020...by the time he is out of office the statute of limitations for the crime of obstruction would be over.

If this is true(heard it on the radio so who knows) I feel a change should be made so your years as president do not count towards that statute of limitations.

absolutely agreed