Resolved: Trump is guilty, literally, of murder

[Distracted1]

Originally Posted by RedStapler

How? God emperor lied to the public and let people die, how does the fact that it is not murder hurt any argument against him?

It's a lot more complicated than "Hah hah, it's not murder, your whole argument is invalid"

How do claims that the Democrats are running a vast pedophile ring harm the credibility of arguments from the Right?
How did "Keep you government hands off my medicaid" fly?

Spouting hyperbolic nonsense as a form of argument makes the arguer appear ignorant and immature at best, and stupid or dishonest at worst.
Further (and more importantly to the people who find themselves on the same side as those who do engage in this technique), it detracts from the persuasiveness of the argument being made- doubly so when the person making the assertions sticks their fingers in their ears and screams "la la la- I can't hear you!!" in response to anyone pointing out the hyperbolic nature of the initial assertion.

[JoeMorgue]

Originally Posted by xjx388

Wow. I think you are completely out of line here. Hopefully you'll take a minute to rethink your tactics.

Again I'm comfortable being judged if "I'm not apologizing for Trump, I'm just going to jump up and down and scream about something else everytime criticism of him is brought up" is your answer.

You think you can hide behind distractions and pretend they anything other than defenses.

[Distracted1]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

********, it's the literal wording of the OP and fostered a legitimate argument, which YOU are trying to derail through screaming OMB and nothing else matters.

the equivalent of covering your ears and going "LALALLALALALALLA!" as loud a syou can. A child's reaction when they dont get their way.

I only read that after posting my own response.
Obviously, I am struck the same way by the argument.

[rockysmith76]

Originally Posted by RedStapler

So the Land of the Law is ruled by criminals, backing each other. (But for some reason quibbling over the exact crime is way more important to you)

You're arguing the wrong argument in the wrong thread. The OP made the distinction of literal murder, with regard specifically to Covid. Call guilt on the right crime for murder you have a point, the OP does not.

Want a thread to cry murder or accessory to murder? Start one about the Border camps or the incited riots. Make a valid case, otherwise you and the other guy are merely wanting mob justice.

[RedStapler]

Originally Posted by Distracted1

How do claims that the Democrats are running a vast pedophile ring harm the credibility of arguments from the Right?
How did "Keep you government hands off my medicaid" fly?

Spouting hyperbolic nonsense as a form of argument makes the arguer appear ignorant and immature at best, and stupid or dishonest at worst.
Further (and more importantly to the people who find themselves on the same side as those who do engage in this technique), it detracts from the persuasiveness of the argument being made- doubly so when the person making the assertions sticks their fingers in their ears and screams "la la la- I can't hear you!!" in response to anyone pointing out the hyperbolic nature of the initial assertion.

Funny, this is exactly what the whole "BUT IT WAS NOT MURDER" thingy is.

[RedStapler]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

You're arguing the wrong argument in the wrong thread. The OP made the distinction of literal murder, with regard specifically to Covid. Call guilt on the right crime for murder you have a point, the OP does not.

Want a thread to cry murder or accessory to murder? Start one about the Border camps or the incited riots. Make a valid case, otherwise you and the other guy are merely wanting mob justice.

There we go. Calling the god emperor out for being responsible for many deaths is now "wanting mob justice". What about the Land of Law you brought into this? Do you think god emperor should be arrested for being responsible for a very large number of deaths?

[rockysmith76]

Originally Posted by RedStapler

There we go. Calling the god emperor out for being responsible for many deaths is now "wanting mob justice". What about the Land of Law you brought into this? Do you think god emperor should be arrested for being responsible for a very large number of deaths?

If you're doing it without a specific set of valid charges, yes, its mob justice.

Past examples: Nazi war crime trials at Nuremberg vs. Mussolini swinging from the light poll.

1 was law and order, one was vigilantism, good, bad or indifferent.

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by Cain

The figures come from the NYT, and I don't see how they're inconsistent with the percentages you've cited, if that's what you're suggesting. Maybe Joe could explain it to you with an analogy.

I'd like to see that article. If the US's CFR was around 6%, like it is in the EU, the true death toll would be over 400k right now as opposed to the ~197k deaths officially counted. How do they arrive at their figures?

Quote:

It's stupidity.

Potato-putahtoe.

[RedStapler]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

If you're doing it without a specific set of valid charges, yes, its mob justice.

Past examples: Nazi war crime trials at Nuremberg vs. Mussolini swinging from the light poll.

1 was law and order, one was vigilantism, good, bad or indifferent.

Wow, what a weird point. What does this have to do with god emperor knowingly letting people die?

Also: Poor Mussolini, siding with Hitler and they have the audacity to just hang this fine man by a light pole. Disgusting.

By the way, he was hanged only after he was shot. But the fact that you consider this "not right" says a lot about your political compass.

Poor Benito.

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by RedStapler

There we go. Calling the god emperor out for being responsible for many deaths is now "wanting mob justice". What about the Land of Law you brought into this? Do you think god emperor should be arrested for being responsible for a very large number of deaths?

Trump IS responsible for many deaths; it's just not "literally murder." No, he shouldn't be arrested any more than Clinton, Bush, Obama (and every other US President) should be arrested for the deaths they are responsible for. It's a futile line of argument that accomplishes nothing.

Get it now?

[rockysmith76]

Originally Posted by RedStapler

Wow, what a weird point. What does this have to do with god emperor knowingly letting people die?

Also: Poor Mussolini, siding with Hitler and they have the audacity to just hang this fine man by a light pole. Disgusting.

By the way, he was hanged only after he was shot. But the fact that you consider this "not right" says a lot about your political compass.

Poor Benito.

Damn you like to put words in others mouths. You just don't see it. You want to hold him responsible and not become the same sort of thing, you need the legit legal case, crying murder over Covid isn't it. Stick to the thread topic and enough with the OMB derail.

[RedStapler]

Originally Posted by xjx388

Trump IS responsible for many deaths; it's just not "literally murder." No, he shouldn't be arrested any more than Clinton, Bush, Obama (and every other US President) should be arrested for the deaths they are responsible for. It's a futile line of argument that accomplishes nothing.

Get it now?

I already agreed to that, several times. When was Hillary or Obama responsible for the death of almost 200k Americans? Don't worry, of course God Emperor won't be arrested.

[RedStapler]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

Damn you like to put words in others mouths. You just don't see it. You want to hold him responsible and not become the same sort of thing, you need the legit legal case, crying murder over Covid isn't it. Stick to the thread topic and enough with the OMB derail.

While, of course, crying "He is responsible for 200k dead Americans" absolutely is.

[Doghouse Reilly]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I think GW and all the people in on those Iraq lies (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz at a minimum) go above Trump in the murderer category. The thread title is needless hyperbole, IMO.

Absolutely. Vincent Bugliosi wrote a good book laying out an extremely convincing case for George Bush being guilty of murder in relation to the lies surrounding the Iraq war.

[Craig4]

I don't disagree that Trump is responsible for needless deaths. However, prosecuting a president for what was a policy decision is probably not a precedent we should set. The decision was morally bankrupt, stupid and demonstrated a callous disregard for the value of human life. However, it was his decision to make. A practice of the old regime being prosecuted by the new regime for decisions made in office is not a road we ought to go down.

[rockysmith76]

Originally Posted by RedStapler

While, of course, crying "He is responsible for 200k dead Americans" absolutely is.

That is.... debatable, moving past OMB, had there been a faster reaction to Covid yes, the number likely would be lower, but your logic here seems to suggest the number would have been zero, that is unlikely in a Nation of over 300 million. Lessened likely, zero, no. People still would have dies as even now we dont know everything about Covid.

He handled it badly yes, deserved derision for a **** response yes, but even now in your response you want it to be akin to war crimes and it isn't. Again, use the argument against teh border camps you have a point, here with Covid, no you don't. He simply isnt responsible for the outbreak, just the crappy handling of it, and yes, misinformation. Not murder, not direct responsibilty for it, just dereliction of his own.

[Cain]

Originally Posted by xjx388

I'd like to see that article. If the US's CFR was around 6%, like it is in the EU, the true death toll would be over 400k right now as opposed to the ~197k deaths officially counted. How do they arrive at their figures?

I don't see why this should be difficult to comprehend. The percentage only provides a meaningful comparison if the caseload is similar. It's like wondering how a Costco can haul in bigger profits than the nearby Korean liquor store despite much lower margins on staples like Doritos.

Anyway, the numbers come from Vox, not the Times (where the thought experiment originated; I saw the numbers in a post on Twitter): https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2...-canada-europe

[JoeMorgue]

Sam Harris once proposed an interesting thought experiment to differentiate between collateral damage and things like torture and hostage taking and terrorism.

Imagine hypothetical perfect weapon, one where they could press a button and have it so they people they want dead were killed with absolutely no risk of any collateral damage.

The difference, he argued, between say George Bush and Osama Bin Laden was that if given this hypothetical weapon to use on their enemies, all the civilians killed in the Afghanistan would still be alive, but the people in the Twin Towers would still be dead.

[theprestige]

Honestly? I don't subscribe to Horatius's interpretation of Trump's words. I don't think what he said, or the policies he's pursued on that basis, are murder, or even manslaughter. I think that the death toll in New York, for example, is more directly attributable to the government of New York, and more properly their responsibility. But I don't think even their decisions are murder, or manslaughter. Certainly not in the legal sense that Horatius has made a fetish of.

I also think there's no point in debating any of this here. This thread went on for several pages of people displaying their already made-up minds on these points, before I even bothered to look in.

This thread was never about debating anything. And that's okay. I think that this thread is working out pretty well. The people that want to rub the dog's fluffy tummy and tell him what a good boi he is are having fun. The people that want to scratch that one spot behind the ear that makes the dog's leg thump uncontrollably are also having fun. And since the thread isn't literally a dog, there's no question of animal abuse. So we're all good, right?

[Stacyhs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The problem is, people who didn't vote for him are dying thanks to the stupid people who did vote for him.

Originally Posted by Lurch

Those who are won't to minimize Drumpf's culpability in this case seem to regard the virus as almost some force beyond nature, which no one can properly grapple with, predict or control. And so such a manifestly craven act as knowingly lying about it while having an appreciation of the danger it poses is still too indefinite an act of willful disregard to warrant a charge of manslaughter.

How about, instead of an invisible virus, we were dealing with, say, a grizzly bear in a shopping mall. Drumpf knows the bear is there, but doesn't want business to slacken. And so he tells everyone it's safe to go shopping. People go, and someone becomes bear scat.

Is Drumpf legally culpable for that death?

I fail to see what your post has to do with my post but as you asked the question anyway, I'd say the grizzly example would clearly have a far better chance of being legally argued.

[shuttlt]

Originally Posted by xjx388

I'd like to see that article. If the US's CFR was around 6%, like it is in the EU, the true death toll would be over 400k right now as opposed to the ~197k deaths officially counted. How do they arrive at their figures?

Potato-putahtoe.

Italy and the UK have a CFR of 12%. Belgium has 11%. France has 9%. Germany has 4%. Portugal, Norway and Poland have 3%. Greece and Austria have 2%. The US has a CFR of 3%. I'm not sure what that is telling you. Different countries have different ways of measuring Covid deaths. Until recently the UK counted anybody who had ever tested positive, and then subsequently died due to any cause. Now I think the UK only counts people who die for any cause within 30 days. Other countries have different definitions of what a Covid death is.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52311014

Quote:

Does somebody need to have been tested for coronavirus to count towards the statistics, or are the suspicions of a doctor enough?

Germany counts deaths in care homes only if people have tested positive for the virus. Belgium, on the other hand, includes any death in which a doctor suspects coronavirus was involved.

The UK's daily figures only count deaths when somebody has tested positive for the virus, but its weekly figures include suspected cases.

Also, does the virus need to be the main cause of death, or does any mention on a death certificate count?

Again, different countries do things differently. So, are you really comparing like with like?

So the EU number is the sum of a variety of different ways of defining a covid death. You can't really do the kind of comparison you are trying to do.

ETA: Even if you could get a good number for the number of deaths, you have the same issue with the number of cases. The testing regimes differ in each country so the relationship between the number of positive tests and the number of actual cases is going to differ.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

One one level I understand that.
But it should be obvious that it is mostly Trump supporters who end up getting hurt by his policies. It's like having an incontinent dog to annoy the neighbor by having him **** in his garden - but at the cost of having a house full of dog poo.
Us "credentials" are telling Trump supporters to stop beating themselves and the answer we get is: "I won't because the idea came from you".

There is just no scenario here in which supporting Trump is benefiting any of his "non-credential" supporters.

This! The ability of people to vote against their own best interests because they think they're spiting others never ceases to amaze me.

True story: My mom had my dad plant some bushes and put the pots where she wanted him to dig the holes. She watched him from the front window of the house. He moved each plant a few inches from the location she'd put them. When he came in after planting them, she asked him why he'd moved them. He looked at her and said, "Because I didn't like you telling me what to do."

[Venom]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

The fact that a term was used imperfectly can now be used as a hijack so we never actually get around to addressed Trump's failures.

That's the point of hijacks. It's always the point of hijacks.

Time out.

If we cannot discuss the appropriateness of the terms used then there isn't any special room for this thread in this subforum. It could just go into the 'US politics and COVID19' thread. We can talk about Trump's failures all day and I had a good little discussion the other day in that thread.

But if Horatius is making a claim, others should be able to critique it without being smeared as Trump apologists.

I know, I know, body of work and all that....but I don't think that's what's happened here, at least until the shouting match began.

[rockysmith76]

Originally Posted by Venom

Time out.

If we cannot discuss the appropriateness of the terms used then there isn't any special room for this thread in this subforum. It could just go into the 'US politics and COVID19' thread. We can talk about Trump's failures all day and I had a good little discussion the other day in that thread.

But if Horatius is making a claim, others should be able to critique it without being smeared as Trump apologists.

I know, I know, body of work and all that....but I don't think that's what's happened here, at least until the shouting match began.

I wasn't shouting I was right in pointing out the OP fallacy.

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Italy and the UK have a CFR of 12%. Belgium has 11%. France has 9%. Germany has 4%. Portugal, Norway and Poland have 3%. Greece and Austria have 2%. The US has a CFR of 3%. I'm not sure what that is telling you. Different countries have different ways of measuring Covid deaths. Until recently the UK counted anybody who had ever tested positive, and then subsequently died due to any cause. Now I think the UK only counts people who die for any cause within 30 days. Other countries have different definitions of what a Covid death is.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52311014

So the EU number is the sum of a variety of different ways of defining a covid death. You can't really do the kind of comparison you are trying to do.

ETA: Even if you could get a good number for the number of deaths, you have the same issue with the number of cases. The testing regimes differ in each country so the relationship between the number of positive tests and the number of actual cases is going to differ.

I'm not actually trying to do such a comparison. I think it's rife with inconsistency, inaccuracy as well as the natural differences that will exist in different populations. I'm trying to tease out where Cain (and his sources) get the figures that enable them to say: "If the U.S. had the same death rate as the EU, 80,000+ more Americans would still be alive. If the US had the same death rate as Canada, 100,000+ more Americans would still be alive."

[The Great Zaganza]

Come on!
He worked so hard to no create a panic that he forced himself to play even more golf than usual!

[Elagabalus]

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

This! The ability of people to vote against their own best interests because they think they're spiting others never ceases to amaze me.

True story: My mom had my dad plant some bushes and put the pots where she wanted him to dig the holes. She watched him from the front window of the house. He moved each plant a few inches from the location she'd put them. When he came in after planting them, she asked him why he'd moved them. He looked at her and said, "Because I didn't like you telling me what to do."

Yes!!! Passive-aggressives untie!!!

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza

Come on!
He worked so hard to no create a panic that he forced himself to play even more golf than usual!

The sacrifices he makes for this country! Like we've never seen before! A true hero! He needs to give himself the Medal of Freedom!

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by Cain

I don't see why this should be difficult to comprehend. The percentage only provides a meaningful comparison if the caseload is similar. It's like wondering how a Costco can haul in bigger profits than the nearby Korean liquor store despite much lower margins on staples like Doritos.

Anyway, the numbers come from Vox, not the Times (where the thought experiment originated; I saw the numbers in a post on Twitter): https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2...-canada-europe

It seems they are using Deaths/Total population (the usually cited figure is Deaths/Million) to make their case. Not that they make that clear in the article, but that's the only "rate" that approaches those numbers. OK, I understand the methodology, but I'm not sure that's a definitive way of illustrating how bad the US response has been. The US, Canada, EU, Switzerland . . . those are all major countries/unions that have a Deaths/Million significantly over the world average and very significantly over the rates of countries like Japan, Singapore, Australia, South Korea, etc. If the US response is judged according to this figure, then there are very few countries in the developed world who have handled this situation well at all. Peru and Belgium must be run by murderous psychopaths!

No, these numbers, at this stage in the game, are not very useful for assessing response with enough granularity to say that Trump is guilty of murder while somehow not making the same claims about the leaders of every country who didn't keep deaths to the absolute minimum. If we compare Canada and the US to South Korea, for example, Justin Trudeau is maybe Jeffry Dahmer and Donald Trump is John Wayne Gacy. I mean, as long as we are going with the murder thing and using that particular figure to make the case.

[shuttlt]

Originally Posted by xjx388

I'm not actually trying to do such a comparison. I think it's rife with inconsistency, inaccuracy as well as the natural differences that will exist in different populations. I'm trying to tease out where Cain (and his sources) get the figures that enable them to say: "If the U.S. had the same death rate as the EU, 80,000+ more Americans would still be alive. If the US had the same death rate as Canada, 100,000+ more Americans would still be alive."

Apologies. There is no data out there that can justify the claim that had country X done a proper job they would have had Y deaths with any kind of confidence. I'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseam.... there are differences in data collection, differences in test distribution, differences in how much populations are exposed to the virus, differences in population sensitivity to catching the virus, differences in population sensitivity to dying from the virus. The game isn't even over yet. If we get a working vaccine soon the final tally will be different to if it takes a long time or never.

By the way, has anybody checked out the French numbers lately? Huge second wave of infections (bigger than the first wave and still climbing), next to no deaths.
https://www.worldometers.info/corona...ountry/france/

[shuttlt]

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2...-canada-europe

Quote:

If the US had Canada’s Covid-19 death rate, 100,000 more Americans would likely be alive today

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

[Sideroxylon]

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Sam Harris once proposed an interesting thought experiment to differentiate between collateral damage and things like torture and hostage taking and terrorism.

Imagine hypothetical perfect weapon, one where they could press a button and have it so they people they want dead were killed with absolutely no risk of any collateral damage.

The difference, he argued, between say George Bush and Osama Bin Laden was that if given this hypothetical weapon to use on their enemies, all the civilians killed in the Afghanistan would still be alive, but the people in the Twin Towers would still be dead.

Nice bedtime story for Americans.

[johnny karate]

This is all just a circle jerk.

We know Trump repeatedly lied to the American public about the danger we were in and then did next to nothing to protect us from it while being fully aware of the severity of that danger.

Whether or not you want to call that murder, he definitely has blood on his hands. And not in the sense that every president or political leader whose policy decisions cause collateral damage has blood on their hands. This is the blood of thousands of people who died needlessly and preventably while the guy in charge sat on his ass and rage-tweeted about ridiculous personal grievances.

There’s no slippery slope. There’s no equivalency. There’s no whataboutism.

What Trump has done to this country is uniquely and indisputably evil.

[Stacyhs]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

This is all just a circle jerk.

We know Trump repeatedly lied to the American public about the danger we were in and then did next to nothing to protect us from it while being fully aware of the severity of that danger.

Whether or not you want to call that murder, he definitely has blood on his hands. And not in the sense that every president or political leader whose policy decisions cause collateral damage has blood on their hands. This is the blood of thousands of people who died needlessly and preventably while the guy in charge sat on his ass and rage-tweeted about ridiculous personal grievances.

There’s no slippery slope. There’s no equivalency. There’s no whataboutism.

What Trump has done to this country is uniquely and indisputably evil.

Well put.

[xjx388]

Originally Posted by johnny karate

This is all just a circle jerk.



We know Trump repeatedly lied to the American public about the danger we were in and then did next to nothing to protect us from it while being fully aware of the severity of that danger.



Whether or not you want to call that murder, he definitely has blood on his hands. And not in the sense that every president or political leader whose policy decisions cause collateral damage has blood on their hands. This is the blood of thousands of people who died needlessly and preventably while the guy in charge sat on his ass and rage-tweeted about ridiculous personal grievances.



There’s no slippery slope. There’s no equivalency. There’s no whataboutism.



What Trump has done to this country is uniquely and indisputably evil.

What's funny is that I pretty much agree with you. I think the things you are saying here are perfectly valid interpretations of Trump's inaction. There's no doubt he is responsible for a certain amount of deaths.



The only thing I would quibble with is your idea that it's somehow different from collateral damage. If you bomb a neighborhood to kill 20 terrorists knowing that you will probably end up killing 100 civilians as well, it's the same kind of thing, "the blood of thousands of people who died needlessly and preventably." There has to be some level of indifference to the inherent value of human life to order that strike.


ETA: Clarified some words

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Honestly? I don't subscribe to Horatius's interpretation of Trump's words. I don't think what he said, or the policies he's pursued on that basis, are murder, or even manslaughter.

I am not a lawyer so my legal opinion might not hold any more weight than yours, but I agree. If Trump was running a business or robbing a bank he might be legally culpable of murder, but as president I don't think he is.

However the only way for find out for sure whether Trump is guilty would be to prosecute him and see what the courts decide. So the best we we can say about the OP is that his legal opinion is (in our opinion) wrong. But it's a fine legal point. The same response would be necessary if we were talking about O J Simpson or Osama bin Laden, as neither was found guilty of murder in a court of law.

But what if the OP is using the word 'literally' in a different sense? Depraved-heart murder is literally defined as where an individual acts with a "depraved indifference" to human life, which results in death. If Trump was the CEO of a large corporation then a good case could be made for murder, but this law doesn't apply to presidents. So someone could say that being president allows Trump to literally get away with murder - even though technically it's not murder.

Was O J Simpson literally guilty of murder? The facts say yes, but the courts say no. Trump has certainly acted with depraved indifference to human life, which has resulted in death. But his job permits him to do that. Just as many people were rightfully disturbed by O J Simpson's 'not guilty' verdict, so many of us are not happy with Trump being able to get away with what is 'literally' (ie. factually, even if not legally) murder.

The OP says "resolved:" - which of course means it isn't. The only way it could be resolved would be to prosecute Trump in court. But we know this won't happen because the DOJ considers that presidents are above the law, so they will never prosecute. Therefore whether he is actually (or as some would say, 'literally') a murderer will always only ever be an opinion.

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by shuttlt

Apologies. There is no data out there that can justify the claim that had country X done a proper job they would have had Y deaths with any kind of confidence. I'm sure this has been discussed ad nauseam.... there are differences in data collection, differences in test distribution, differences in how much populations are exposed to the virus, differences in population sensitivity to catching the virus, differences in population sensitivity to dying from the virus. The game isn't even over yet. If we get a working vaccine soon the final tally will be different to if it takes a long time or never.

That's right, the 'game' isn't over yet.

But that doesn't mean there is no data out there to justify claims. Some countries have poor data collection etc., but others are very good. Trump says the US is doing very well, unlike New Zealand. This is clearly a lie, because we know that New Zealand's figures are very accurate and its 'population sensitivity' is not much different to ours, but their death rate is vastly lower.

And just because the number of deaths can't be predicted with pinpoint accuracy doesn't mean they can't be estimated with a degree of confidence. Trump himself predicted a range of deaths, then had to revise it upwards several times. But others predicted the actual death count much more accurately, simply by factoring in Trump's actions.

When the 'game' is finally over, we will be able to see with higher confidence which countries did a proper job. But even now it is clear that this list won't include the US, or France, or any of the other countries which had appallingly high death tolls. The 200,000 dead we have now won't ever be coming back life.

Quote:

By the way, has anybody checked out the French numbers lately? Huge second wave of infections (bigger than the first wave and still climbing), next to no deaths.
https://www.worldometers.info/corona...ountry/france/

As you say, the game isn't over yet. So I'm confused about what you think the low death count means. Deaths usually trail infections by weeks to months, so there hasn't been enough time to see the true impact of this latest increase. But hey, why not try to have it both ways?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

I am not a lawyer so my legal opinion might not hold any more weight than yours, but I agree. If Trump was running a business or robbing a bank he might be legally culpable of murder, but as president I don't think he is.

I doubt even then.

Quote:

However the only way for find out for sure whether Trump is guilty would be to prosecute him and see what the courts decide.

Here I strongly disagree.

A trial just tells us if the state meets the standard of proof to justify infringing on his rights. We can read the law, look at the evidence, and decide for ourselves if we think it's a crime.

[johnny karate]

Originally Posted by xjx388

What's funny is that I pretty much agree with you. I think the things you are saying here are perfectly valid interpretations of Trump's inaction. There's no doubt he is responsible for a certain amount of deaths.



The only thing I would quibble with is your idea that it's somehow different from collateral damage. If you bomb a neighborhood to kill 20 terrorists knowing that you will probably end up killing 100 civilians as well, it's the same kind of thing, "the blood of thousands of people who died needlessly and preventably." There has to be some level of indifference to the inherent value of human life to order that strike.


ETA: Clarified some words

Thus the inclusion of the word “needlessly”.

Not that the collateral damage of civilian deaths is necessarily acceptable, but at least their is a purpose trying to be achieved, debatable though its value might be. You could make the argument that killing those 20 terrorists saves the lives of countless others.

There was no purpose to what Trump did. No higher goal to be achieved. No greater good to be attained.

Thousands upon thousands of people have died, our economy has been destroyed, and this country is a shell of its former self.

And for what? Why?

Because Donald Trump sat back and let it happen.

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by theprestige

We can read the law, look at the evidence, and decide for ourselves...

Sure, but it's still only an opinion with no legal standing.

Quote:

...if we think it's a crime.

Sure, just like the OP. But what you think is a crime is only your opinion.

You may think that acting with a depraved indifference which results in death doesn't rise to murder (even if the law says differently). Or you may think Trump's actions don't amount to depraved indifference, or that it wasn't the cause of those deaths. But none of that is any more valid than the OP's opinion. The facts speak for themselves. Trump admitted on tape that he was indifferent to the deaths he knew would occur as a result of his minimizing the virus's lethality. And we know for a fact that this did result in thousands of unnecessary deaths. So the only question is was his indifference 'depraved'? That's where the opinion part comes in.

But of course you have another reason for pretending Trump's actions are not 'depraved' - it has to do with that 'R' next to his name. It's not really about Trump, it's about the political ideology you identify with.