"After a day of holding its fire, the Biden campaign late Friday blasted Donald Trump as a ‘convicted felon’ — an indication the president’s team has decided to seize upon Trump’s conviction to question his fitness for the White House,” Axios reports.
“The broadside from Biden’s campaign — in a press release chiding Trump for his ‘unhinged’ rant earlier in the day — put President Biden in the same camp as many Democrats who are now mocking the ex-president.”
“It also marked a departure from Biden’s approach in remarks at the White House hours earlier, when he danced around the ‘convicted felon’ label while criticizing Trump’s attack on the U.S. justice system.”
Since I am not a criminal defense attorney, I was deferring to Mary McCord, 20 year AUSA, former Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security, currently a Visiting Professor at Georgetown Law.
She says he is not a convict until sentencing. I am open to being corrected.
https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpodcasts.apple.com%2Fus%2Fpodcast%2Fwe-have-a-verdict%2Fid1679657705%3Fi%3D1000657451213%3AL1PvzMrEtpvfC4zwFJUKN_XfAxw&cuid=2386
I would point out Merriam Webster says:
convict noun
Yeah, well Cambridge dictionary makes no mention of sentencing: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/convict
And my own lawyer says that sentencing is not required for someone to be considered a convicted felon under US federal law, it’s a status that applies as soon as a conviction is handed down in a Court.
It seems reasonable to defer the definition to someone who practices law, as opposed to us randoms online. Thanks for the link
This is subtle, but it’s actually definitional shift in the word “convict,” which is a shortened colloquialism that sounds like it should mean the same thing as “convicted felon,” but is used in a slightly different way. “Convict” is defined differently because that colloquialism took on the meaning of a person serving or served a sentence when in use.
“Convicted felon” on the other hand is a technical phrase to mean a person convicted of a felony, which is exactly, definitionally what Trump is after the jury… convicted him.
So if you’re arguing in good faith, I suggest conceding that you’re wrong to say he is not a “convicted felon,” if your only support is about “convict.”. Because, sorry, you are incorrect.
It’s funny that there is always someone ready here to tell you that you’re wrong. But, you go further and demand a admission you are right, which I find hilarious.
First, note that technical phases shift definition all the time.
Secondly, if it makes you feel better, I’ll admit that you’re right. I suppose the next thing you’ll do is ask for apology, so I’ll do that too.
Feel better?
“I suggest you concede” was meant empathetically. I’ve been wrong before and will be wrong again. I also see internet debates devolve into digging positional trenches to not be wrong. Again, I’ve done that before too.
Here, I thought you appeared to be falling into that pattern and I was trying to coax you to do the bigger thing, which is admit something difficult but true. Admitting being wrong is a different show of strength - it elevates you and reduces bad feelings all around.
Do the bigger thing?
So, you can’t take yes as an answer then.
Please take juvenile juggling elsewhere. That’s all you get.