I think we're going to see DOJ file charges. Between the 1/6 charges, the ongoing Georgia and NY investigations and potential charges, plus AZ and the files marked Top Secret (buh, buh, buh her emails), and the likely hood that all of those continue beyond the mid-terms and loss of the House and Senate, POOTWH becomes untenable as a 2024 POTUS candidate.
That said, I have no illusion that the SCOTUS won't rule on some aspect of an appeal(s) that throws everything aside. And if that happens, if you're ever charged with a crime, demand a jury trial and try to make contact with a juror. If that fails, claim delusion. I'm looking forward to POOTWH to start wandering around downtown Palm Beach in a robe and slippers in a feigned incompetent to stand trial bid.
“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” DJT
if he caused a death through his criminal plan, his supporters at least won’t care. However I always think of the example of the person who drives the getaway car getting charged with murder when his friends go rob the gas station and kill the clerk
doesn’t matter he didn’t know they were going to kill anyone and he wasn’t there, he still gets charged with murder. Stuff like that happens every day
Just curious if it’s accurate to say his own campaign manager called him a murderer, at least in an indirect way? At the very least, he said trump is responsible for the deaths that day.
To me it's the term 'murder.' Murder suggests premeditation and intent. Both of which were not there with Trump. (This is based on my Canadian understanding of the legal definition of murder.) I was equally puzzled when the state of Minnesota wanted or tried to pin murder on the other cops involved with George Floyd. Didn't make sense to me.
Trump's suggestion to ingest bleach possibly led to death as well... and certainly his mis-management and downplaying of the pandemic.. all of which don't equate to murder.
Ultimately... I do believe his incompetence, negligence, and maliciousness had led to multiple deaths. But that's not murder to me. Evil? Yes. Criminal? One would hope.
His intent has always been to keep and maintain power. And he hasn't cared what got in his way... up to and including people suffering and loss of life itself.
But there you are almost half of America... still supporting this greasy fuck. (hopefully less and less as the days go by.)
Interesting that’s exactly where the committee was going yesterday, premeditation. The campaign manager, Brad Parscale, reasoned that since he was throwing around civil war type comments to enrage his “troops” it was premeditated, and since civil war is lethal, that counts for intent as we..
…
WASHINGTON —
Then-President Trump’s call for his supporters to march on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was planned in advance, and he intended to go with them, evidence presented at Tuesday’s congressional hearing on the insurrection showed.
“He stoked their anger. He called for them to the fight for him. He directed them to the U.S. Capitol. He told them he would join them. And his supporters believed him, and many headed towards the Capitol,” said House Select Committee member Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.). “As a result, people died. People were injured. Many of his supporters lives have never been the same.”
…
“A sitting president asking for civil war,” Parscale said in texts to Katrina Pierson, a former Trump campaign official who was reportedly involved in organizing the pre-riot rally.
Screenshots of the texts were displayed during the select committee’s latest public hearing Tuesday afternoon, which focused largely on the involvement of domestic violent extremist groups in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
“This week I feel guilty for helping him win,” Parscale wrote.
Pierson replied: “You did what you felt was right at the time and therefore it was right.”
Parscale responded, “Yeah. But a woman is dead,” adding with apparent shock, “Yeah. If I was trump and knew my rhetoric killed someone.”
Pierson told him, “It wasn’t the rhetoric.”
But Parscale shot back: “Katrina. Yes it was.”
It's premeditation to cause havok sure.... but it would be a huge stretch to suggest that he fully knew someone was going to get killed.
Again... I'm very unfamiliar with state laws and american federal laws. But I recently watched a neat documentary about 'swatting' in America. And upon hearing about what it was I actually said to a friend of mine "someone's eventually going to get shot" and he responded by saying "watch the documentary... it already happened."
Story goes... a fellow called in a fake threat which caused the SWAT team to show up and they ended up killing an innocent victim.
The person responsible for calling in the SWAT team is responsible of course... but for premeditated murder? You would have to have some clear evidence that there was intention for someone to die.
With Trump... there is no chance he knew ahead of time someone would die and there is zero evidence thus far to show that he wanted someone to die.
With the swatting thing.. the fellow got 20 years for involuntary manslaughter. If we're gonna have the conversation about the legal culpability of Trump and what Parscale was saying... to me it's more in line with just that... involuntary manslaughter. Or perhaps negligence causing death. It's a way of saying: "Someone died because of what you did." As opposed to: "You intentionally tried to kill someone."
Well, trump not only knew the crowd was armed, but they some had military assault weapons. Trump also knew congress would have armed security and police. Trump knew the mob wasn’t a threat to him, but was a threat to congress. Trump also knew the mob would do whatever he said, and he sent them to the Capitol with civil war language, angry as hell, to fight for their country, with assault weapons. A little more going on here than calling in a swat team?
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,292
Really, with all that's coming out, the most amazing thing, regardless of outcome, is that so many people either don't care or don't believe it. With Watergate, I'm too young to remember but it seems that even Nixon's supporters (most anyway) eventually accepted the truth. And now he's a punchline. Too much media and too many echo chambers make this so much different and so much more dangerous. Watergate pales in comparison to January 6 (among a few traitorous Trump and GQP actions) but it'll never be recognized as such because nearly half the country either approves of it all, doesn't believe it, or doesn't even hear about it. Where's Hunter?
Very true. Pretty much everybody got it, even most republicans. I would say though, that with Watergate, the evidence was more solid the way a type written letter would be more solid than an email or a video would be more solid than a verbal description or a clear statement is more solid than mumbling (just trying to make some metaphors to illustrate my point). Not that I think 45 is innocent by any means, but I don't think it will be as easy to prove as Watergate was and I definitely don't think it will be as easily or widely accepted as that 1970s event. Part of that is due to a decline in both intelligence and critical thinking. The nation as a whole has dumbed down a lot since Watergate.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Really, with all that's coming out, the most amazing thing, regardless of outcome, is that so many people either don't care or don't believe it. With Watergate, I'm too young to remember but it seems that even Nixon's supporters (most anyway) eventually accepted the truth. And now he's a punchline. Too much media and too many echo chambers make this so much different and so much more dangerous. Watergate pales in comparison to January 6 (among a few traitorous Trump and GQP actions) but it'll never be recognized as such because nearly half the country either approves of it all, doesn't believe it, or doesn't even hear about it. Where's Hunter?
Very true. Pretty much everybody got it, even most republicans. I would say though, that with Watergate, the evidence was more solid the way a type written letter would be more solid than an email or a video would be more solid than a verbal description or a clear statement is more solid than mumbling (just trying to make some metaphors to illustrate my point). Not that I think 45 is innocent by any means, but I don't think it will be as easy to prove as Watergate was and I definitely don't think it will be as easily or widely accepted as that 1970s event. Part of that is due to a decline in both intelligence and critical thinking. The nation as a whole has dumbed down a lot since Watergate.
maybe dumbed down is too strong. I think its more willful ignorance which is worse imo. caught up on yhe emotional which overshadows the rational or logical.
I think a lack of personal responsibility plays a big role too.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,292
Really, with all that's coming out, the most amazing thing, regardless of outcome, is that so many people either don't care or don't believe it. With Watergate, I'm too young to remember but it seems that even Nixon's supporters (most anyway) eventually accepted the truth. And now he's a punchline. Too much media and too many echo chambers make this so much different and so much more dangerous. Watergate pales in comparison to January 6 (among a few traitorous Trump and GQP actions) but it'll never be recognized as such because nearly half the country either approves of it all, doesn't believe it, or doesn't even hear about it. Where's Hunter?
Very true. Pretty much everybody got it, even most republicans. I would say though, that with Watergate, the evidence was more solid the way a type written letter would be more solid than an email or a video would be more solid than a verbal description or a clear statement is more solid than mumbling (just trying to make some metaphors to illustrate my point). Not that I think 45 is innocent by any means, but I don't think it will be as easy to prove as Watergate was and I definitely don't think it will be as easily or widely accepted as that 1970s event. Part of that is due to a decline in both intelligence and critical thinking. The nation as a whole has dumbed down a lot since Watergate.
maybe dumbed down is too strong. I think its more willful ignorance which is worse imo. caught up on yhe emotional which overshadows the rational or logical.
I think a lack of personal responsibility plays a big role too.
Fair enough and that is all a part of it. But I still think three other factors here: lower quality education, lower expectations for students and lower I.Q.s
IQ scores are falling and have been for decades, new study finds
IQ scores have been steadily falling for the past few decades, and environmental factors are to blame, a new study says.
The research suggests that genes aren’t what’s driving the decline in IQ scores, according to the study, published Monday.
Norwegian researchers analyzed the IQ scores of Norwegian men born
between 1962 and 1991 and found that scores increased by almost 3
percentage points each decade for those born between 1962 to 1975 – but
then saw a steady decline among those born after 1975.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” DJT
if he caused a death through his criminal plan, his supporters at least won’t care. However I always think of the example of the person who drives the getaway car getting charged with murder when his friends go rob the gas station and kill the clerk
doesn’t matter he didn’t know they were going to kill anyone and he wasn’t there, he still gets charged with murder. Stuff like that happens every day
Just curious if it’s accurate to say his own campaign manager called him a murderer, at least in an indirect way? At the very least, he said trump is responsible for the deaths that day.
To me it's the term 'murder.' Murder suggests premeditation and intent. Both of which were not there with Trump. (This is based on my Canadian understanding of the legal definition of murder.) I was equally puzzled when the state of Minnesota wanted or tried to pin murder on the other cops involved with George Floyd. Didn't make sense to me.
Trump's suggestion to ingest bleach possibly led to death as well... and certainly his mis-management and downplaying of the pandemic.. all of which don't equate to murder.
Ultimately... I do believe his incompetence, negligence, and maliciousness had led to multiple deaths. But that's not murder to me. Evil? Yes. Criminal? One would hope.
His intent has always been to keep and maintain power. And he hasn't cared what got in his way... up to and including people suffering and loss of life itself.
But there you are almost half of America... still supporting this greasy fuck. (hopefully less and less as the days go by.)
Interesting that’s exactly where the committee was going yesterday, premeditation. The campaign manager, Brad Parscale, reasoned that since he was throwing around civil war type comments to enrage his “troops” it was premeditated, and since civil war is lethal, that counts for intent as we..
…
WASHINGTON —
Then-President Trump’s call for his supporters to march on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was planned in advance, and he intended to go with them, evidence presented at Tuesday’s congressional hearing on the insurrection showed.
“He stoked their anger. He called for them to the fight for him. He directed them to the U.S. Capitol. He told them he would join them. And his supporters believed him, and many headed towards the Capitol,” said House Select Committee member Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.). “As a result, people died. People were injured. Many of his supporters lives have never been the same.”
…
“A sitting president asking for civil war,” Parscale said in texts to Katrina Pierson, a former Trump campaign official who was reportedly involved in organizing the pre-riot rally.
Screenshots of the texts were displayed during the select committee’s latest public hearing Tuesday afternoon, which focused largely on the involvement of domestic violent extremist groups in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
“This week I feel guilty for helping him win,” Parscale wrote.
Pierson replied: “You did what you felt was right at the time and therefore it was right.”
Parscale responded, “Yeah. But a woman is dead,” adding with apparent shock, “Yeah. If I was trump and knew my rhetoric killed someone.”
Pierson told him, “It wasn’t the rhetoric.”
But Parscale shot back: “Katrina. Yes it was.”
It's premeditation to cause havok sure.... but it would be a huge stretch to suggest that he fully knew someone was going to get killed.
Again... I'm very unfamiliar with state laws and american federal laws. But I recently watched a neat documentary about 'swatting' in America. And upon hearing about what it was I actually said to a friend of mine "someone's eventually going to get shot" and he responded by saying "watch the documentary... it already happened."
Story goes... a fellow called in a fake threat which caused the SWAT team to show up and they ended up killing an innocent victim.
The person responsible for calling in the SWAT team is responsible of course... but for premeditated murder? You would have to have some clear evidence that there was intention for someone to die.
With Trump... there is no chance he knew ahead of time someone would die and there is zero evidence thus far to show that he wanted someone to die.
With the swatting thing.. the fellow got 20 years for involuntary manslaughter. If we're gonna have the conversation about the legal culpability of Trump and what Parscale was saying... to me it's more in line with just that... involuntary manslaughter. Or perhaps negligence causing death. It's a way of saying: "Someone died because of what you did." As opposed to: "You intentionally tried to kill someone."
Well, trump not only knew the crowd was armed, but they some had military assault weapons. Trump also knew congress would have armed security and police. Trump knew the mob wasn’t a threat to him, but was a threat to congress. Trump also knew the mob would do whatever he said, and he sent them to the Capitol with civil war language, angry as hell, to fight for their country, with assault weapons. A little more going on here than calling in a swat team?
You're speaking like a civilian on the streets. We all know what we know. We all understand what was going on through Trump's shitty mind.
In court, it's not about what you know, it's about what you can prove. Everything we're hearing through this committee has not been cross examined. It will be in a court of law... vigorously We're not talking about convincing me personally that Trump is evil and is responsible for death. We're talking about convincing a judge and jury that he is guilty of a crime... A specific crime.
Trump has two things working in his favour and will for a long time:
Innocent until proven guilty. Guilt must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt.
Toss in this whole "protect the institution of the presidency" and he has even more cards to play with.
I spent a lot of time studying those four words as it applied to criminal convictions: "beyond a reasonable doubt." Trump has had decades of legal teams telling him the same thing.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” DJT
if he caused a death through his criminal plan, his supporters at least won’t care. However I always think of the example of the person who drives the getaway car getting charged with murder when his friends go rob the gas station and kill the clerk
doesn’t matter he didn’t know they were going to kill anyone and he wasn’t there, he still gets charged with murder. Stuff like that happens every day
Just curious if it’s accurate to say his own campaign manager called him a murderer, at least in an indirect way? At the very least, he said trump is responsible for the deaths that day.
To me it's the term 'murder.' Murder suggests premeditation and intent. Both of which were not there with Trump. (This is based on my Canadian understanding of the legal definition of murder.) I was equally puzzled when the state of Minnesota wanted or tried to pin murder on the other cops involved with George Floyd. Didn't make sense to me.
Trump's suggestion to ingest bleach possibly led to death as well... and certainly his mis-management and downplaying of the pandemic.. all of which don't equate to murder.
Ultimately... I do believe his incompetence, negligence, and maliciousness had led to multiple deaths. But that's not murder to me. Evil? Yes. Criminal? One would hope.
His intent has always been to keep and maintain power. And he hasn't cared what got in his way... up to and including people suffering and loss of life itself.
But there you are almost half of America... still supporting this greasy fuck. (hopefully less and less as the days go by.)
Interesting that’s exactly where the committee was going yesterday, premeditation. The campaign manager, Brad Parscale, reasoned that since he was throwing around civil war type comments to enrage his “troops” it was premeditated, and since civil war is lethal, that counts for intent as we..
…
WASHINGTON —
Then-President Trump’s call for his supporters to march on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was planned in advance, and he intended to go with them, evidence presented at Tuesday’s congressional hearing on the insurrection showed.
“He stoked their anger. He called for them to the fight for him. He directed them to the U.S. Capitol. He told them he would join them. And his supporters believed him, and many headed towards the Capitol,” said House Select Committee member Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.). “As a result, people died. People were injured. Many of his supporters lives have never been the same.”
…
“A sitting president asking for civil war,” Parscale said in texts to Katrina Pierson, a former Trump campaign official who was reportedly involved in organizing the pre-riot rally.
Screenshots of the texts were displayed during the select committee’s latest public hearing Tuesday afternoon, which focused largely on the involvement of domestic violent extremist groups in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
“This week I feel guilty for helping him win,” Parscale wrote.
Pierson replied: “You did what you felt was right at the time and therefore it was right.”
Parscale responded, “Yeah. But a woman is dead,” adding with apparent shock, “Yeah. If I was trump and knew my rhetoric killed someone.”
Pierson told him, “It wasn’t the rhetoric.”
But Parscale shot back: “Katrina. Yes it was.”
It's premeditation to cause havok sure.... but it would be a huge stretch to suggest that he fully knew someone was going to get killed.
Again... I'm very unfamiliar with state laws and american federal laws. But I recently watched a neat documentary about 'swatting' in America. And upon hearing about what it was I actually said to a friend of mine "someone's eventually going to get shot" and he responded by saying "watch the documentary... it already happened."
Story goes... a fellow called in a fake threat which caused the SWAT team to show up and they ended up killing an innocent victim.
The person responsible for calling in the SWAT team is responsible of course... but for premeditated murder? You would have to have some clear evidence that there was intention for someone to die.
With Trump... there is no chance he knew ahead of time someone would die and there is zero evidence thus far to show that he wanted someone to die.
With the swatting thing.. the fellow got 20 years for involuntary manslaughter. If we're gonna have the conversation about the legal culpability of Trump and what Parscale was saying... to me it's more in line with just that... involuntary manslaughter. Or perhaps negligence causing death. It's a way of saying: "Someone died because of what you did." As opposed to: "You intentionally tried to kill someone."
Well, trump not only knew the crowd was armed, but they some had military assault weapons. Trump also knew congress would have armed security and police. Trump knew the mob wasn’t a threat to him, but was a threat to congress. Trump also knew the mob would do whatever he said, and he sent them to the Capitol with civil war language, angry as hell, to fight for their country, with assault weapons. A little more going on here than calling in a swat team?
You're speaking like a civilian on the streets. We all know what we know. We all understand what was going on through Trump's shitty mind.
In court, it's not about what you know, it's about what you can prove. Everything we're hearing through this committee has not been cross examined. It will be in a court of law... vigorously We're not talking about convincing me personally that Trump is evil and is responsible for death. We're talking about convincing a judge and jury that he is guilty of a crime... A specific crime.
Trump has two things working in his favour and will for a long time:
Innocent until proven guilty. Guilt must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt.
Toss in this whole "protect the institution of the presidency" and he has even more cards to play with.
I spent a lot of time studying those four words as it applied to criminal convictions: "beyond a reasonable doubt." Trump has had decades of legal teams telling him the same thing.
I agree responsibility for murder would be difficult to prove in a court. Charges like witness tampering or obstruction of congress may be easier.
I just want the right to call him a murderer and crook in public. We know he is responsible, one six was all trump. But in court, with him having presidential privilege , difficult to prove
“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters,” DJT
if he caused a death through his criminal plan, his supporters at least won’t care. However I always think of the example of the person who drives the getaway car getting charged with murder when his friends go rob the gas station and kill the clerk
doesn’t matter he didn’t know they were going to kill anyone and he wasn’t there, he still gets charged with murder. Stuff like that happens every day
Just curious if it’s accurate to say his own campaign manager called him a murderer, at least in an indirect way? At the very least, he said trump is responsible for the deaths that day.
To me it's the term 'murder.' Murder suggests premeditation and intent. Both of which were not there with Trump. (This is based on my Canadian understanding of the legal definition of murder.) I was equally puzzled when the state of Minnesota wanted or tried to pin murder on the other cops involved with George Floyd. Didn't make sense to me.
Trump's suggestion to ingest bleach possibly led to death as well... and certainly his mis-management and downplaying of the pandemic.. all of which don't equate to murder.
Ultimately... I do believe his incompetence, negligence, and maliciousness had led to multiple deaths. But that's not murder to me. Evil? Yes. Criminal? One would hope.
His intent has always been to keep and maintain power. And he hasn't cared what got in his way... up to and including people suffering and loss of life itself.
But there you are almost half of America... still supporting this greasy fuck. (hopefully less and less as the days go by.)
Interesting that’s exactly where the committee was going yesterday, premeditation. The campaign manager, Brad Parscale, reasoned that since he was throwing around civil war type comments to enrage his “troops” it was premeditated, and since civil war is lethal, that counts for intent as we..
…
WASHINGTON —
Then-President Trump’s call for his supporters to march on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was planned in advance, and he intended to go with them, evidence presented at Tuesday’s congressional hearing on the insurrection showed.
“He stoked their anger. He called for them to the fight for him. He directed them to the U.S. Capitol. He told them he would join them. And his supporters believed him, and many headed towards the Capitol,” said House Select Committee member Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.). “As a result, people died. People were injured. Many of his supporters lives have never been the same.”
…
“A sitting president asking for civil war,” Parscale said in texts to Katrina Pierson, a former Trump campaign official who was reportedly involved in organizing the pre-riot rally.
Screenshots of the texts were displayed during the select committee’s latest public hearing Tuesday afternoon, which focused largely on the involvement of domestic violent extremist groups in the Jan. 6 insurrection.
“This week I feel guilty for helping him win,” Parscale wrote.
Pierson replied: “You did what you felt was right at the time and therefore it was right.”
Parscale responded, “Yeah. But a woman is dead,” adding with apparent shock, “Yeah. If I was trump and knew my rhetoric killed someone.”
Pierson told him, “It wasn’t the rhetoric.”
But Parscale shot back: “Katrina. Yes it was.”
It's premeditation to cause havok sure.... but it would be a huge stretch to suggest that he fully knew someone was going to get killed.
Again... I'm very unfamiliar with state laws and american federal laws. But I recently watched a neat documentary about 'swatting' in America. And upon hearing about what it was I actually said to a friend of mine "someone's eventually going to get shot" and he responded by saying "watch the documentary... it already happened."
Story goes... a fellow called in a fake threat which caused the SWAT team to show up and they ended up killing an innocent victim.
The person responsible for calling in the SWAT team is responsible of course... but for premeditated murder? You would have to have some clear evidence that there was intention for someone to die.
With Trump... there is no chance he knew ahead of time someone would die and there is zero evidence thus far to show that he wanted someone to die.
With the swatting thing.. the fellow got 20 years for involuntary manslaughter. If we're gonna have the conversation about the legal culpability of Trump and what Parscale was saying... to me it's more in line with just that... involuntary manslaughter. Or perhaps negligence causing death. It's a way of saying: "Someone died because of what you did." As opposed to: "You intentionally tried to kill someone."
Well, trump not only knew the crowd was armed, but they some had military assault weapons. Trump also knew congress would have armed security and police. Trump knew the mob wasn’t a threat to him, but was a threat to congress. Trump also knew the mob would do whatever he said, and he sent them to the Capitol with civil war language, angry as hell, to fight for their country, with assault weapons. A little more going on here than calling in a swat team?
You're speaking like a civilian on the streets. We all know what we know. We all understand what was going on through Trump's shitty mind.
In court, it's not about what you know, it's about what you can prove. Everything we're hearing through this committee has not been cross examined. It will be in a court of law... vigorously We're not talking about convincing me personally that Trump is evil and is responsible for death. We're talking about convincing a judge and jury that he is guilty of a crime... A specific crime.
Trump has two things working in his favour and will for a long time:
Innocent until proven guilty. Guilt must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt.
Toss in this whole "protect the institution of the presidency" and he has even more cards to play with.
I spent a lot of time studying those four words as it applied to criminal convictions: "beyond a reasonable doubt." Trump has had decades of legal teams telling him the same thing.
I agree responsibility for murder would be difficult to prove in a court. Charges like witness tampering or obstruction of congress may be easier.
I just want the right to call him a murderer and crook in public. We know he is responsible, one six was all trump. But in court, with him having presidential privilege , difficult to prove
precisely.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
Seems there's a concerted cover up that was in process. Question is, who authorized, directed or encouraged the deletion of the texts? Was it POOTWH or the Secret Service agent who was appointed a senior level staffer? Or someone else? And what or how do those text messages relate to (re)moving VP Pencil from the Capitol, if at all? I mean surely, if they were texting about college football's national championship game or where to get pizza, they wouldn't have been deleted, right? Sure.
As predicted, this committee is going to continue to investigate and hold hearings right up through the mid-terms, and not because there's some political hit job being conducted or because the bi-partisan committee is looking to damage the potential candidate so much as to make them unelectable but because this shit show of a clown car previous administration left behind a whole shit ton of dots to connect and mob boss wanna be's were operating outside the normal mobbed-upness of NYC.
Mmmmmmmmmm, dots, Who likes dots? Can't wait for that Indictments Incoming thread to get revived. Who's going to prison for POOTWH?
Seems there's a concerted cover up that was in process. Question is, who authorized, directed or encouraged the deletion of the texts? Was it POOTWH or the Secret Service agent who was appointed a senior level staffer? Or someone else? And what or how do those text messages relate to (re)moving VP Pencil from the Capitol, if at all? I mean surely, if they were texting about college football's national championship game or where to get pizza, they wouldn't have been deleted, right? Sure.
As predicted, this committee is going to continue to investigate and hold hearings right up through the mid-terms, and not because there's some political hit job being conducted or because the bi-partisan committee is looking to damage the potential candidate so much as to make them unelectable but because this shit show of a clown car previous administration left behind a whole shit ton of dots to connect and mob boss wanna be's were operating outside the normal mobbed-upness of NYC.
Mmmmmmmmmm, dots, Who likes dots? Can't wait for that Indictments Incoming thread to get revived. Who's going to prison for POOTWH?
Seems there's a concerted cover up that was in process. Question is, who authorized, directed or encouraged the deletion of the texts? Was it POOTWH or the Secret Service agent who was appointed a senior level staffer? Or someone else? And what or how do those text messages relate to (re)moving VP Pencil from the Capitol, if at all? I mean surely, if they were texting about college football's national championship game or where to get pizza, they wouldn't have been deleted, right? Sure.
As predicted, this committee is going to continue to investigate and hold hearings right up through the mid-terms, and not because there's some political hit job being conducted or because the bi-partisan committee is looking to damage the potential candidate so much as to make them unelectable but because this shit show of a clown car previous administration left behind a whole shit ton of dots to connect and mob boss wanna be's were operating outside the normal mobbed-upness of NYC.
Mmmmmmmmmm, dots, Who likes dots? Can't wait for that Indictments Incoming thread to get revived. Who's going to prison for POOTWH?
A police officer has backed up testimony that Donald Trump fought with his Secret Service detail.
According to CNN, the officer told the January 6 committee he witnessed a heated exchange.
The testimony supports former the account shared by former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson.
A police officer has backed up the bombshell testimony that former President Donald Trump quarreled with his security team after they refused to drive him to the US Capitol on the day of the January 6 insurrection, CNN reported Thursday.
Citing a "source familiar with the matter," CNN reported that the officer, a member of the Metropolitan Police Department, was part of the presidential motorcade and witnessed a "heated exchange" between Trump and Secret Service agents. He shared his account with the congressional committee investigating January 6, according to the outlet.
So it seems that POOTWH just might get his wish to “set the record straight,” “offer an alternative set of facts,” or “explain to the American people what and why what happened on 1/6,” to the 1/6 unselect committee.
”Only the guilty plea the 5th.”
Odds POOTWH actually sits before the committee and testifies? Hillary has a bigger set than POOTWH.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
The biggest dot is, as trump announces he is running this fall, all of us who so see him as a maniacal killer, need to ask our Republican friends and colleagues, “so you are going to vote for a murderer and cop killer?”
The biggest dot is, as trump announces he is running this fall, all of us who so see him as a maniacal killer, need to ask our Republican friends and colleagues, “so you are going to vote for a murderer and cop killer?”
Murderer is quite dramatic....I'd advise against it.
Now - inciting violence that resulted in people dying.... 100%.
It would be very interesting to see where we would be if the pandemic had never happened...
1) Would trump have been re-elected? 2) If Biden had won....would the economy doing better have made 2024 more of a shoe-in?
There are plenty of reasons for a level-headed former republican (meaning pre-maga) to not vote for Trump. A crazy amount of reasons actually. And unfortunately there are also a crazy amount of reasons to not vote for Biden. For a conservative voter the issues where I see these guys losing votes are:
Trump: 1) The fact that he doesn't believe in American Democracy 2) The fact that he doesn't support our intelligence agency 3) His alignment with dictators and strong men
Biden: 1) It's the economy stupid 2) Abortion and some other cultural issues 3) Immigration
For me, it's a no brainer as if you lose American Democracy you eventually will lose many of the the other things that matter to you, including a varying number of your freedoms depending on who you are and what you believe. It's unfortunate that is the case, but that is how I see it.
It will be interesting to see what tRump's strategy is here with a 2024 announcement.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018) The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
It will be interesting to see what tRump's strategy is here with a 2024 announcement.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
If we have a 78 year old Trump vs an 81 year old Biden in 2024 it will be a very bad election.
It will be interesting to see what tRump's strategy is here with a 2024 announcement.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
Trump announcing this fall will be a gift to D's. I don't know that it keeps both chambers, but it makes Trump the focus of the mid terms, which makes Jan 6th the focus. None of that is good in federal elections for team R.
It will be interesting to see what tRump's strategy is here with a 2024 announcement.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
Trump announcing this fall will be a gift to D's. I don't know that it keeps both chambers, but it makes Trump the focus of the mid terms, which makes Jan 6th the focus. None of that is good in federal elections for team R.
Since he has already strongly suggested he is running, we may already be there as far as impact on midterms, unless he specifically announces he is not running. As bad as he is bad as he looks to some republicans now, he has proven he can get voters to the polls better than anyone else in his party. And since many gop primary winners believe the big election lie, one six should already be a big issue for most voters.
It will be interesting to see what tRump's strategy is here with a 2024 announcement.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
Trump announcing this fall will be a gift to D's. I don't know that it keeps both chambers, but it makes Trump the focus of the mid terms, which makes Jan 6th the focus. None of that is good in federal elections for team R.
Since he has already strongly suggested he is running, we may already be there as far as impact on midterms, unless he specifically announces he is not running. As bad as he is bad as he looks to some republicans now, he has proven he can get voters to the polls better than anyone else in his party. And since many gop primary winners believe the big election lie, one six should already be a big issue for most voters.
He can also get Democrats to the polls better than anyone else, as well.
It will be interesting to see what tRump's strategy is here with a 2024 announcement.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
Trump announcing this fall will be a gift to D's. I don't know that it keeps both chambers, but it makes Trump the focus of the mid terms, which makes Jan 6th the focus. None of that is good in federal elections for team R.
Since he has already strongly suggested he is running, we may already be there as far as impact on midterms, unless he specifically announces he is not running. As bad as he is bad as he looks to some republicans now, he has proven he can get voters to the polls better than anyone else in his party. And since many gop primary winners believe the big election lie, one six should already be a big issue for most voters.
He can also get Democrats to the polls better than anyone else, as well.
this. I'm hoping that after roe v wade and all the other supreme court bullshit, democrats and independents will see the road the US is headed and be very motivated to vote, no matter how hard R's try to suppress their way to another 4 years.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
The biggest dot is, as trump announces he is running this fall, all of us who so see him as a maniacal killer, need to ask our Republican friends and colleagues, “so you are going to vote for a murderer and cop killer?”
Murderer is quite dramatic....I'd advise against it.
Now - inciting violence that resulted in people dying.... 100%.
It would be very interesting to see where we would be if the pandemic had never happened...
1) Would trump have been re-elected? 2) If Biden had won....would the economy doing better have made 2024 more of a shoe-in?
There are plenty of reasons for a level-headed former republican (meaning pre-maga) to not vote for Trump. A crazy amount of reasons actually. And unfortunately there are also a crazy amount of reasons to not vote for Biden. For a conservative voter the issues where I see these guys losing votes are:
Trump: 1) The fact that he doesn't believe in American Democracy 2) The fact that he doesn't support our intelligence agency 3) His alignment with dictators and strong men
Biden: 1) It's the economy stupid 2) Abortion and some other cultural issues 3) Immigration
For me, it's a no brainer as if you lose American Democracy you eventually will lose many of the the other things that matter to you, including a varying number of your freedoms depending on who you are and what you believe. It's unfortunate that is the case, but that is how I see it.
I think the calculus for that changed after Hutchinson's testimony. Trump knew in advance his people had weapons, guns, spears and bear spray, trump brought them to dc and sent them to congress armed and loaded. Trump literally sent an armed militia to congress with the full knowledge they were armed and dangerous. He should have also known they also had explosives and military assault weapons in advance, as that became public knowledge on Jan 7.
For people willing to limit this now to “inciting violence” is unfair to the truth. People need to be held accountable for how they vote. And we have the right to speak honestly about that. If trumps own campaign manager says these deaths are fully and completely the responsibility of trump, by all logic the man is a maniacal killer, and we have the right to call him that. Publicly.
I predict he announces after the midterms and then floods the zone with shit. None of the networks will ignore him as he is great for their ratings and bottom line.
For the other cultural issues I was referring mostly to the gender and sexuality debate and the "what's taught in school" type stuff. Meaning these are some of the issues I see as to why some conservatives have a hard time voting for Joe and Dems. And not as hard a line as you think...usually fine with lots of progress in those places, but also wonders where that finish line is. Just my assessment from the people I know, could be off base.
And shit...I forgot Guns....not sure how I forgot that issue. Way too many conservatives have been scared into thinking common sense laws are an infringement on their rights and can't get past it.
For the other cultural issues I was referring mostly to the gender and sexuality debate and the "what's taught in school" type stuff. Meaning these are some of the issues I see as to why some conservatives have a hard time voting for Joe and Dems. And not as hard a line as you think...usually fine with lots of progress in those places, but also wonders where that finish line is. Just my assessment from the people I know, could be off base.
And shit...I forgot Guns....not sure how I forgot that issue. Way too many conservatives have been scared into thinking common sense laws are an infringement on their rights and can't get past it.
You think any dem can appeal to cons? And what is “taught in school?” CRT? Finish line? Turning your kids gay and eliminating the white race. Cons ain’t Joe’s audience.
Comments
"Contempt and disdain for the President."
"Now you know what I deal with every day."
"Pussies." For not violating the Constitution and breaking the law. My, how far has "America's Mayor" fallen?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
That said, I have no illusion that the SCOTUS won't rule on some aspect of an appeal(s) that throws everything aside. And if that happens, if you're ever charged with a crime, demand a jury trial and try to make contact with a juror. If that fails, claim delusion. I'm looking forward to POOTWH to start wandering around downtown Palm Beach in a robe and slippers in a feigned incompetent to stand trial bid.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Very true. Pretty much everybody got it, even most republicans. I would say though, that with Watergate, the evidence was more solid the way a type written letter would be more solid than an email or a video would be more solid than a verbal description or a clear statement is more solid than mumbling (just trying to make some metaphors to illustrate my point). Not that I think 45 is innocent by any means, but I don't think it will be as easy to prove as Watergate was and I definitely don't think it will be as easily or widely accepted as that 1970s event. Part of that is due to a decline in both intelligence and critical thinking. The nation as a whole has dumbed down a lot since Watergate.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
IQ scores are falling and have been for decades, new study finds
IQ scores have been steadily falling for the past few decades, and environmental factors are to blame, a new study says.
The research suggests that genes aren’t what’s driving the decline in IQ scores, according to the study, published Monday.
Norwegian researchers analyzed the IQ scores of Norwegian men born between 1962 and 1991 and found that scores increased by almost 3 percentage points each decade for those born between 1962 to 1975 – but then saw a steady decline among those born after 1975.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
In court, it's not about what you know, it's about what you can prove. Everything we're hearing through this committee has not been cross examined. It will be in a court of law... vigorously We're not talking about convincing me personally that Trump is evil and is responsible for death. We're talking about convincing a judge and jury that he is guilty of a crime... A specific crime.
Trump has two things working in his favour and will for a long time:
Innocent until proven guilty.
Guilt must be shown beyond a reasonable doubt.
Toss in this whole "protect the institution of the presidency" and he has even more cards to play with.
I spent a lot of time studying those four words as it applied to criminal convictions: "beyond a reasonable doubt." Trump has had decades of legal teams telling him the same thing.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
I just want the right to call him a murderer and crook in public. We know he is responsible, one six was all trump. But in court, with him having presidential privilege , difficult to prove
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
As predicted, this committee is going to continue to investigate and hold hearings right up through the mid-terms, and not because there's some political hit job being conducted or because the bi-partisan committee is looking to damage the potential candidate so much as to make them unelectable but because this shit show of a clown car previous administration left behind a whole shit ton of dots to connect and mob boss wanna be's were operating outside the normal mobbed-upness of NYC.
Mmmmmmmmmm, dots, Who likes dots? Can't wait for that Indictments Incoming thread to get revived. Who's going to prison for POOTWH?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I like dots.
https://www.dippindots.com/
A police officer has backed up the bombshell testimony that former President Donald Trump quarreled with his security team after they refused to drive him to the US Capitol on the day of the January 6 insurrection, CNN reported Thursday.
Citing a "source familiar with the matter," CNN reported that the officer, a member of the Metropolitan Police Department, was part of the presidential motorcade and witnessed a "heated exchange" between Trump and Secret Service agents. He shared his account with the congressional committee investigating January 6, according to the outlet.
DC police officer confirms Trump had 'heated exchange' with Secret Service over going to the US Capitol, backing up Cassidy Hutchinson's bombshell January 6 testimony: CNN (msn.com)
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
”Only the guilty plea the 5th.”
Odds POOTWH actually sits before the committee and testifies? Hillary has a bigger set than POOTWH.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Now - inciting violence that resulted in people dying.... 100%.
It would be very interesting to see where we would be if the pandemic had never happened...
1) Would trump have been re-elected?
2) If Biden had won....would the economy doing better have made 2024 more of a shoe-in?
There are plenty of reasons for a level-headed former republican (meaning pre-maga) to not vote for Trump. A crazy amount of reasons actually. And unfortunately there are also a crazy amount of reasons to not vote for Biden. For a conservative voter the issues where I see these guys losing votes are:
Trump:
1) The fact that he doesn't believe in American Democracy
2) The fact that he doesn't support our intelligence agency
3) His alignment with dictators and strong men
Biden:
1) It's the economy stupid
2) Abortion and some other cultural issues
3) Immigration
For me, it's a no brainer as if you lose American Democracy you eventually will lose many of the the other things that matter to you, including a varying number of your freedoms depending on who you are and what you believe. It's unfortunate that is the case, but that is how I see it.
I have been saying that I don't believe he would run. Now I'm starting to think that he will announce that he is running so that he can play the victim card to enrage his base (again).
tRump is a giant piece of shit. Him announcing that he is running might be the best thing for the midterms and 2024 even though I do not think he will actually be on the ticket. He'll bale out before then.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
What’s virtual signaling again? Lil help here.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
-EV 8/14/93
still early but I like this...
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
For people willing to limit this now to “inciting violence” is unfair to the truth. People need to be held accountable for how they vote. And we have the right to speak honestly about that. If trumps own campaign manager says these deaths are fully and completely the responsibility of trump, by all logic the man is a maniacal killer, and we have the right to call him that. Publicly.
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jul/14/steve-bannon-audio-trump-declare-victory
We all knew this was the strategy but to hear him straight up spell it out is amazing.
The Golden Age is 2 months away. And guess what….. you’re gonna love it! (teskeinc 11.19.24)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana; 2025: Pitt1, Pitt2
And shit...I forgot Guns....not sure how I forgot that issue. Way too many conservatives have been scared into thinking common sense laws are an infringement on their rights and can't get past it.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©