only as much as attempted murder is as bad as murder
or attempted robbery is as bad as robbery,,,
^ What
progressive hunter said ^
Also
nat4900 you bring to mind my prolife friends
who believe that aborting an unborn child is as bad as murder.
And ATTEMPTING to abort and FAILING should also be banned as illegal,
the same as murder or attempted murder.
In those cases, when "someone else" equates them as the same,
opponents argue "that's YOUR belief" and believe
"those people can be under that laws, but can't impose it on others"
So in this case, with attempted but failed obstruction of justice,
I'd ask the same of you and the other "64%" of polled voters:
Would YOU agree to have THIS STANDARD applied to YOU:
that if YOU were SUSPECTED of "attempted but failed obstruction"
would YOU agree to confess and accept charges and sentencing
that applies to CONVICTION OF OBSTRUCTION? Or would you FIGHT it
as Trump is?
Would you react as he is? or would you AGREE to accept charges
just for SUSPECTED ATTEMPT? @nat4000
abortion isnt as bad as murder ,,,it is murder,,,,
the rest of your comment is incoherent babble,,,
Dear
progressive hunter
I was addressing
nat4900 about the structure and application
of the argument, trying to hold Trump responsible to the opinions of
nat4900 and "64% of people polled."
(As for your belief that abortion is murder, would you equate
"failed attempt at abortion" to be "the same as murder"?)
nat4900 given that you and this "64%" believe in holding
Trump equally responsible for "failed attempts at obstruction"
as you would if Trump were convicted of "obstruction"
My Question to you is still:
Then do YOU agree that if you were in Trump's position
YOU would AGREE to the charges, punishment and sentencing
for "failed attempts at obstruction" that you were accused of
by the same standards of punishing actual "obstruction."
progressive hunter do you understand what I am asking
nat4900
A. if
nat4900 believes in punishing "failed attempts at obstruction"
the same as actual "obstruction" does this mean
nat4900 (and the 64% polled) would agree to be punished if THEY were facing that situation?
Would THEY agree to be punished the same as they are asking for Trump?
B. If not, then WHY push to interpret this law to punish Trump
if THEY would not want such law applied to THEM. Once you
establish a law, it applies to EVERYONE not just select people!
So WHY would anyone insist on interpreting laws
in ways THEY WOULDN'T WANT TO BE UNDER.
^
nat4900 if you are more clear on what I'm asking here ^
can you please answer and/or explain to
progressive hunter
what I'm presenting to you? Thank you both! Sorry if this wasn't clear.