Maggie's Farm

This is long, but due to Victor Davis Hanson doing his usual Gish Gallop, as he rehashes every right-wing trope.


That's not a "constitutional norm". Background investigations of political opponents has a long history. The Steele dossier was raw intelligence, never released by the Clinton campaign, and much of it was accurate, specifically concerning how Russia was working to interfere in the election to Trump's benefit.


Again, not a constitutional norm. The original data was not provided to the press for months, and adulterated copies were circulated. Meanwhile, Hunter Biden is under federal indictment.


Where is that in the Constitution?


Not the first time that has happened. Penalties include disqualification from office. If someone leaves office before an impeachment trial can be concluded, then they could always avoid disqualification by resigning—unless they can be disqualified by the Senate as a private citizen.


That might be closer to a constitutional issue. States run the election for president. But the 14th Amendment appears to make it a congressional responsibility to enforce Section 3.


Mail-in balloting dates to the Civil War.


Actually, a violation of state campaign law, under New York Law § 17-152.


The civil crime was submitting false financial statements under New York Executive Law § 63-12. The law doesn't require a victim any more than there has to be a victim when you are ticketed for speeding. There are rules of the road that you are required to follow.


A jury of peers means representative of the community where the crime allegedly occurred. In the current trial, the jurors are from New York, where Trump lived and worked and allegedly committed his crimes.


The Clinton campaign was fined under federal civil law. To criminally convict Trump requires showing it wasn't just a mistake. Pecker's testimony is convincing evidence of intent. Pecker knew it was illegal and refused to cooperate on the Stormy Daniels issue. Cohen knew it was illegal and went to prison for it.


Nope. That's not the law.


Trump allegedly tried to pressure officials to falsify the results. That would be illegal.


That's legal.


That's legal, at least in many states.

Texan99: Agreed, it's very long, as usual.

∧ logical AND
∨ logical OR
⇒ implies

If an argument is of the form A ∧ B ∧ C ⇒ D, then it is only necessary to contradict any of the premised terms.

If an argument is of the form A ∨ B ∨ C ⇒ D, then it is necessary to contradict every premised term.

In this case, each example is intended to lend additional weight to the argument by showing a pattern. If one of the examples were weak, we wouldn't discount the whole argument. However, the large number of faulty premises undermines the argument. That's why the post was long.