Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

And so it has begun

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by revo View Post
    Well, the last four cases in Georgia were "voluntarily withdrawn" by the Trump Administration's lawyers on Friday when they realized their pressure tactics on the state, to try and get some kind of settlement, would not work and they would actually have to go to court and present their "evidence" under oath -- of which they know they have nothing but speculation and lies.

    Here's Brad Raffensberger again:
    "Rather than presenting their evidence and witnesses to a court and to cross-examination under oath, the Trump campaign wisely decided the smartest course was to dismiss their frivolous cases," Raffensperger said in a news release. "Even in capitulation, they continue to spread disinformation."

    And the acting US Attorney for Northern Georgia, Bobby Christine -- appointed by Trump himself last week after they fired the last US attorney, BJay Pak, for "not doing enough to back the election fraud" -- came out yesterday and said there's nothing in the least to the last two cases filed, and summarily dismissed them both.

    What I'm saying is if any Trump official has to present any "election fraud" evidence under oath, they won't be able to, because there isn't any factual evidence, just conspiracy theories, vague videos, drunken Trump supporters claiming to be experts, all showing nothing but speculative claims.
    Ah, if you're saying that election fraud can't be proven under a legal standard, then I agree. I thought you meant that Trump's "They stole the election" canard was causally linked to the riot and that Trump by making that statement, under law, caused the riot. That part, as I said, should he have a lawyer smarter than a potato or Rudy (and that might be insulting to the potato), will be an easy win for Trump in a court. I'm sure the Dems will still impeach him, but if someone tries to go after Trump in a real court of law, they'll get stomped like bug on that charge.
    I'm just here for the baseball.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by chancellor View Post
      Ah, if you're saying that election fraud can't be proven under a legal standard, then I agree. I thought you meant that Trump's "They stole the election" canard was causally linked to the riot and that Trump by making that statement, under law, caused the riot. That part, as I said, should he have a lawyer smarter than a potato or Rudy (and that might be insulting to the potato), will be an easy win for Trump in a court. I'm sure the Dems will still impeach him, but if someone tries to go after Trump in a real court of law, they'll get stomped like bug on that charge.
      wasn't a girl convicted of encouraging her boyfriend on social media to kill himself? Hasn't Trump encouraged violence on SM?
      If I whisper my wicked marching orders into the ether with no regard to where or how they may bear fruit, I am blameless should a broken spirit carry those orders out upon the innocent, for it was not my hand that took the action merely my lips which let slip their darkest wish. ~Daniel Devereaux 2011

      Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
      Martin Luther King, Jr.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by GwynnInTheHall View Post
        wasn't a girl convicted of encouraging her boyfriend on social media to kill himself? Hasn't Trump encouraged violence on SM?
        They had far stronger evidence in the suicide case - texts directly to the boyfriend, repeated, phone calls, and personal testimony. Causally linking his speech - and one point I do agree with revo on is the only possible tie is the "they stole the election" line - to the riots is a giant reach in the legal arena.

        To Biden's credit, he's handled this one well - basically told the Dems on The Hill that if they want to impeach, go ahead, but he's not pushing for it. It's pretty apparent he and/or his advisers see this as a political loser.
        I'm just here for the baseball.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by chancellor View Post
          They had far stronger evidence in the suicide case - texts directly to the boyfriend, repeated, phone calls, and personal testimony. Causally linking his speech - and one point I do agree with revo on is the only possible tie is the "they stole the election" line - to the riots is a giant reach in the legal arena.

          To Biden's credit, he's handled this one well - basically told the Dems on The Hill that if they want to impeach, go ahead, but he's not pushing for it. It's pretty apparent he and/or his advisers see this as a political loser.
          Are you saying that you don't think Trump caused/incited the riot, or just that you think he would get off legally on a technicality were he subject to the ordinary process of law?
          "Jesus said to them, 'Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.'"

          Comment


          • How is it a political loser when 57% want him removed from office? And Biden is a bit preoccupied to be wading in this cesspool.
            If DMT didn't exist we would have to invent it. There has to be a weirdest thing. Once we have the concept weird, there has to be a weirdest thing. And DMT is simply it.
            - Terence McKenna

            Bullshit is everywhere. - George Carlin (& Jon Stewart)

            How old would you be if you didn't know how old you are? - Satchel Paige

            Comment


            • The only thing saving Trump from criminal prosecution for any number of crimes he's committed while in office is executive immunity. The only thing potentially saving Trump from being impeached by the House is --- well, nothing. I bet he's fucked there (again). The only thing saving him from being removed from office after his trial by the Senate (or the Senate voting after Biden starts his term to complete the impeachment process with 2/3 vote) is the craven nature of the worthless Republicans in office. As of now, there is nothing saving Trump from crimes committed while not in office, assuming no statute of limitations issues.

              Edit: The lying moron has been impeached again by the House.

              Edit 2: If I had to guess whether he would be convicted on a charge of incitement based on the evil that a) always spews forth from his anus of a mouth or, b) the evil that spewed forth from his mouth on January 6th, I would guess that he would be acquitted. Still, that has nothing to do with whether he could or should be impeached.
              More American children die by gunfire in a year than on-duty police officers and active duty military.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by chancellor View Post
                Ah, if you're saying that election fraud can't be proven under a legal standard, then I agree. I thought you meant that Trump's "They stole the election" canard was causally linked to the riot and that Trump by making that statement, under law, caused the riot. That part, as I said, should he have a lawyer smarter than a potato or Rudy (and that might be insulting to the potato), will be an easy win for Trump in a court. I'm sure the Dems will still impeach him, but if someone tries to go after Trump in a real court of law, they'll get stomped like bug on that charge.
                Oh, just the election fraud nonsense. As far as proving if *he* caused the riots, I'm sure a crafty lawyer could get him out of it. The real question is, what lawyers would touch him? Seems like just the Rudy Giuliani/Lin Wood/Sidney Powell's of the world.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Kevin Seitzer View Post
                  Are you saying that you don't think Trump caused/incited the riot, or just that you think he would get off legally on a technicality were he subject to the ordinary process of law?
                  He'd get off legally. Wouldn't even be a technicality. Heck, if it were a jury trial, the judge would give a directed not guilty verdict.
                  I'm just here for the baseball.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by chancellor View Post
                    Heck, if it were a jury trial, the judge would give a directed not guilty verdict.
                    I seriously doubt that.
                    More American children die by gunfire in a year than on-duty police officers and active duty military.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DMT View Post
                      How is it a political loser when 57% want him removed from office? And Biden is a bit preoccupied to be wading in this cesspool.
                      Simple - he'll be removed from office in a week. And the case is a loser. Loser case, waste of time, gone before you know it. That's not a formula for political success.
                      I'm just here for the baseball.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by chancellor View Post
                        Simple - he'll be removed from office in a week. And the case is a loser. Loser case, waste of time, gone before you know it. That's not a formula for political success.
                        I don't think anyone is discussing political success. Ok someone was, lol
                        ---------------------------------------------
                        Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
                        ---------------------------------------------
                        The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
                        George Orwell, 1984

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by chancellor View Post
                          He'd get off legally. Wouldn't even be a technicality. Heck, if it were a jury trial, the judge would give a directed not guilty verdict.
                          The point of my question was to find out what you actually think about Trump's speech on January 6 and the events that followed at the Capitol, not for you to make a debate point. You make a lot of clever points in this forum, but I don't know what you actually stand FOR. I get that wordplay and cleverness is a thing we do here. I do it, too. Guys like Feral Slasher do a lot of it. But I also know what Feral cares about and what his principles are. I know, despite his "I disagree" schtick and other stuff like that, that he bemoans the extent to which our country worships the military and feeds the defense budget to the result of constant war and empire around the world, for instance.

                          I feel like during the Trump admin that you haven't talked here about what you actually believe in and care deeply about, that you've come to make clever points and little comments here and there. Which is fine if you want to engage with this forum that way. It isn't like Hot Button Topics is the United States Congress or the British parliament, or something of that import. But I don't know how to take your comments seriously when you don't ever take a stand for anything heartfelt or principled, and it's just about adding some little zinger or comeback to something someone else posted.
                          "Jesus said to them, 'Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.'"

                          Comment


                          • and two more off duty cops arrested for their part.
                            If I whisper my wicked marching orders into the ether with no regard to where or how they may bear fruit, I am blameless should a broken spirit carry those orders out upon the innocent, for it was not my hand that took the action merely my lips which let slip their darkest wish. ~Daniel Devereaux 2011

                            Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
                            Martin Luther King, Jr.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Kevin Seitzer View Post
                              The point of my question was to find out what you actually think about Trump's speech on January 6 and the events that followed at the Capitol, not for you to make a debate point.
                              First off, I apologize, since I apparently came off that way. I read your question as a pretty direct one and a pretty much either/or answer. I misunderstood, and my answer must have appeared snarky. That was not my intent.

                              You make a lot of clever points in this forum, but I don't know what you actually stand FOR.
                              You are correct that I post little in depth in here anymore. Stopped circa 2017 on that; the toxicity just wasn't worth it.
                              I'm just here for the baseball.

                              Comment


                              • he's just here for baseball




                                and snark.


                                If I whisper my wicked marching orders into the ether with no regard to where or how they may bear fruit, I am blameless should a broken spirit carry those orders out upon the innocent, for it was not my hand that took the action merely my lips which let slip their darkest wish. ~Daniel Devereaux 2011

                                Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
                                Martin Luther King, Jr.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X