Nisman Dead!

Weeellll...not quite true. I don't know about other countries, but the president in the US can be arrested. That office has no immunity from criminal charges as he is known and acknowledged to be a person like every other in the country. There are rules about who can arrest him and how, and the reality may be different if the president were to actually do something illegal enough for someone to go after him with criminal charges, but the president (nor congressmen, nor court members at any level) has no immunity and can indeed be arrested.

This was something that really surprised me when I learned that politicians here (and other countries in South America, at least) have immunity at least while in office. At the very least, makes it easier to do their looting and skip town at the end of their term if need be...maybe if they were concerned about being arrested while in office there'd be at least a little less corruption?

Yes it is true that even the President can be arrested for a crime, but a president cannot be arrested for performing actions within the scope of their official duties. In order for abuses of power carried out within the scope of said duties to be actionable, the abuses themselves must be defined as crimes. Otherwise, they are beyond the reach of both criminal and civil action. See the hubbub over Rick Perry's indictment for alleged misuse of his veto.

Still, even if one would concede the point that the Presidenta is indeed above the law even if her abuses of power were to be proven, to say that these therefore need not be proven or exposed, is to advocate for a paralyzed society. It is lawyerly sophistry.
 
We shouldn't be asking whether CFK could be arrested, but rather what evidence would justify her arrest.

Of course, that wouldn't exactly allow the media to push its agenda because so far there is no evidence.

Good point. There is no a single crime described on Nisman's complaint, it is all show.
 
Good point. There is no a single crime described on Nisman's complaint, it is all show.

Maybe there is no evidence but, even if unsuccessful, the attempt to impeach or indict the President would make a lot of potentially useful information available to the public.
 
Good point. There is no a single crime described on Nisman's complaint, it is all show.

Suck up Bajo suck up as hard you can because that is all you have.Just make sure to got a fresh moist towelette to clean all that brown stuff off your nose.
 
Had you read it? No.
Please, change your nickname for brainless, it is more accurate, it fits better to you.

Hey lets be fair just bribing the poor for votes in my mind should get the witch life in prison without parole. Of course given the corruption that has contaminated you I am sure that is far beyond anything you could even begin to comprehend.
 
Hey lets be fair just bribing the poor for votes in my mind should get the witch life in prison without parole. Of course given the corruption that has contaminated you I am sure that is far beyond anything you could even begin to comprehend.

Comming from someone who is obsesed with sucking a....es with sh...t and the President, should I ask if both obsessions are together? I mean, if you get hot dreaming with the President and her dirty a.....s?
Please Descerebrado, stop posting trash, it is boring.
 
Suck up Bajo suck up as hard you can because that is all you have.Just make sure to got a fresh moist towelette to clean all that brown stuff off your nose.

I don't like Cristina at all. In fact, I routinely tear down posters of her in my neighborhood. But my dislike isn't evidence of a crime. And without evidence of a crime she can't be brought before a court of law. Anything more is propaganda bull sh*t.
 
just bribing the poor for votes in my mind should get the witch life in prison without parole.

Could someone explain to me the concept of "bribing the poor for votes" ? I've heard this exp<b></b>ression many times, and I just can't understand the logic, except from a standpoint of absolute contempt for democracy. By what reasoning can it be wrong for a politician to promise poor people (or any citizens for that matter) that by voting for him or her, their conditions will improve?
 
The issue with buying votes is when the incumbent uses public funds for personal and individual purchases that do not benefit the country. Most voters would expect such monies to be used for public services, improvement of health, education etc but if that money is used to buy beer, fridges and other such items I recall from a video a few years back then that would be deemed abuse..unless you invite the rest of the nation over to have a beer and keep their fiambres and cheese in the aforementioned fridge.
 
Back
Top