It appears that TheInfantPoopingInHisPants has run through his bag of meth and is sleeping it off at this time. The other Autocrat-fluffers are still floating around in here, like little Alitos floating in the bowl.
It looks more and more as if the Drumpf money man has agreed to testify against Drumpf Crime Orgs as part of his plea deal, so we have that.
I said it upthread but I will continue to say it over and over: if you IN ANY WAY support the Orange Diaper-Wearing Demon you are an absolute scumbag. If you get what you want our democracy will be over. You are the equivalent to the brown shirts in 1931.
^^It is pretty amazing how riled up stupid people get when you disagree with them.
Anyone who whines about Trump while turning a blind eye to the crimes of their own party is a F'ing moron.
EVERYTHING you're pretending to be upset Trump supposedly did your own heroes literally did.
But can we at least agree that Trump is a criminal too?
Time may tell. I don't know enough to whether the Documents Caper is going to be a big problem for him or a big fail for the DOJ. And quite frankly, no one here or any of the folks commenting on the public record know yet either.
But I do know that even if he is in serious trouble, a good attorney may save his butt or at least ease the fall. And even if he isn't in serious trouble a bad attorney can make it worse for him. That leads in to something several of us have mentioned before: Trump is increasingly unable to engage excellent counsel. As one national news source wrote today: "The former president’s current legal team includes a Florida insurance lawyer who’s never had a federal case, a past general counsel for a parking-garage company and a former host at far-right One America News. ... Once again, Trump is struggling to find a veteran criminal defense lawyer with a strong track record of dealing with the Justice Department in a sprawling, multipronged investigation. ... Ordinarily, the prestige and publicity of representing a former president, as well as the new and complex legal issues at stake in this case, would attract high-powered attorneys. But Trump’s search is being hampered by his divisiveness, as well as his reputation for stiffing vendors and ignoring advice."
Top attorneys want a big case. But they want to look competent in working the case. A client that holds back information or tells lies, prevents an attorney from looking competent. And top attorneys, like everyone, want to get paid.
Meanwhile, you don't even know what Trump asked him to do..
Pray, tell...we would like to know what Pence was really disloyal about
88 state legislators wanted Pence to delay the count due to the irregularities in the voting.
Delaying the count isn't "subverting democracy" particularly when multiple states violated their own constitutions to ensure fraudulent votes would be counted.
I have better things to do. It is much easier to trigger you with emojis and articles that make fun of your . . .
1) You apparently don't have better things to do.
2) You might writing a coherent post once in a while, if only to demonstrate that you can. It is much easier to troll other and apparently you find it gratifying to "trigger" others, but from the other side you just look pathetic.
Haha! Engaging in whataboutism (Carmine's only "argument" ever) is bad enough C-level posting. But when you can't even get the whataboutism correct, you may have sunk to new internet lows.
We need a name for incorrect whataboutism. I mean other than lying. There has to be some name for it. Whataboutthisfantasyism?
Exposing double standards and hypocrisy is not what aboutism.
What aboutism is when confronted with horrific crimes against humanity by Israel, apoligists say why aren't you critiquing Saudi Araba (right after they call you a liar and racist).
Got it?
You are correct that exposing hypocrisy is not whataboutism. You are absolutely incorrect if you believe for a second that you ever engage in the former when you are endlessly doing the latter. My sense is that you are too nuts and illogical to distinguish the two.
There are significant differences between the two. Nonexclusive factors involved in such an evaluation include timing and placement, degree of nexus between the statements or positions (relevance), purpose (excusing or deflecting vs. actual exposing), detail (broad subjects are more likely whataboutyouism), and the actual principle involved that is claimed to be violated.
Sometimes things are best explained by example. You continually respond to posts condemning the Russian invasion of Ukraine and murder of Ukrainian citizens, by even actually saying "what about [insert Iraq, Vietnam, etc.]?" That is classic whataboutyouism. First, you fail to condemn the Russian invasion yourself (thereby condoning it and exposing your own failures) and are clearly posting just for deflectionary purposes. The timing and purpose of your posts have nothing to do with exposing hypocrisy. Second, the nexus between such broad topics as the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the US invasion of, e.g., Iraq is slim, indicating whataboutyouism. The subjects are simply too broad and have too many complicated and distinguishing details for such posts to ever be about exposing hypocrisy (and you ignore all the distinguishing facts anyway). Third, there is no specific principle involved that is being upheld and violated at the same time. "War is bad" is not a principle in this context.
An example of exposing hypocrisy would be pointing out that someone arguing that a political opponent should be incarcerated for illegally possessing classified documents, has also deliberately and illegally possessed classified documents at later date. That is not whataboutyousim. It is exposing hypocrisy with clear detail (two specific statements and actions), clear nexus -- same exact behavior, and same specific principle involved (whether illegal possession of classified documents is actionable or not).
In criminal law, motive is not needed for prosecution to move forward but back to the real world ... . Joe Six Pack sitting on a jury needs motive unless there is a harmed person or persons.
In this case:
A. No body.
B. It's not shown how D. J. T. profited by hoarding documents.
D. J. T. has a good criminal mind. [Not usually a trait to make one's mother proud.] He gets away with stuff. No motive and no one was hurt. This case will fade away.
Regarding A, the alligator infested pond near the 12th hole hasn’t been checked for DNA, for B, we don’t yet know what the evidence is and for C, Trump is an idiot.
We have been on a similar journey for 5 1/2 years. Some or many Democrats want D. J. T. prosecuted. Some or many Democrats pressured their Democrat U.S. Congresspersons to establish special prosecutor (or whatever was Mueller), committee hearings, impeachment x 2, civil suits, sexual assault cases, etc. So much media energy over the past 5 1/2 years! Results: D. J. T. had to write a few or several checks to settle civil law cases. I did not vote for D. J. T., but I can spot losing efforts when I see them. I believe some or many Democrats are afraid Biden isn't strong enough to defeat D. J. T. twice so here we are.
Regarding A, the alligator infested pond near the 12th hole hasn’t been checked for DNA, for B, we don’t yet know what the evidence is and for C, Trump is an idiot.
We have been on a similar journey for 5 1/2 years. Some or many Democrats want D. J. T. prosecuted. Some or many Democrats pressured their Democrat U.S. Congresspersons to establish special prosecutor (or whatever was Mueller), committee hearings, impeachment x 2, civil suits, sexual assault cases, etc. So much media energy over the past 5 1/2 years! Results: D. J. T. had to write a few or several checks to settle civil law cases. I did not vote for D. J. T., but I can spot losing efforts when I see them. I believe some or many Democrats are afraid Biden isn't strong enough to defeat D. J. T. twice so here we are.
You got some facts mixed up, I think. Mueller was not a special prosecutor appointed by Congress. He was appointed by Trump's Department of Justice and reported to that body, not Congress. And it didn't come after prolonged agitation from Democrats because the election was in November '16 and the DOF appointed Mueller in the Spring of '17. The civil/sexual assault suits were suits by private parties, although I have no doubt that many Democrats would have been happy to see the plaintiffs successful.
While I think Trump acted improperly in the Ukraine affair, I wouldn't have counseled impeachment for it (as usual, Trump made it a closer case via obstruction attempts). The January 6 case was stronger on the facts -- his behavior during the assault on the Capital alone was deleliction of duty -- but the little detail of him no longer being president gave some of the GOP Senators cover on voting 'no'.
I'm not aware of any known facts that make the case with respect to the documents stronger or weaker. Prosecutors usually take a long time to build their case because if they announce a prosecution, they want it to be very solid. Usually, if they don't think its a solid case, they end the investigation without bringing charges. A couple of weeks would be an unusually fast time for either charges or ending the investigation.
Flagpole, you are way way out of line on here. Get a grip, will ya? Seriously, better yet, what are you going to do when Trump skates away on this on the 5th try for you guys? The name calling is completely inappropriate and Rojo or Wejo should ban you for life for that offense. Give up already. you can even think you are right, I do not care really, but he is never getting convicted of anything let alone doing a day of jail..get a clue. Really now. There are 1900 plus posts on here, 1200 pf them are from people who just don't want to pay their Student Loans.
Nope. I am not out of line at all. Trumpers are f*cking morons. There is no "thinking" that I am right. I am absolutely right. Trump is a criminal. He's an autocrat. He has created a cult of personality that believes his every lying word. He is no longer protected by being President, and he is no longer protected by the Senate. He is GOING to be indicted and convicted of multiple crimes. We shall see what the sentencing is, but his liberty will be taken from him, and I do believe it will end up with him in prison.
He STOLE top secret and classified items.
He was asked to turn them back in, and he only gave back less than half of what he stole.
He was asked again to turn them back in and he refused.
Subpoena issued, and he ignored it.
Talks with him and his lawyers went nowhere.
Second subpoena issued, and he ignored it, so the search warrant was issued.
He was treated with kid gloves here. Had you or I stolen classified material from the government, there would have not been any discussions. They would have broken our door down and put us face first on the ground.
He's a bad, bad man with no morals, no sense of how our government actually works. You should not cheer for him to not be held accountable. If he gets away with this, then anyone else can do so later.
Flagpole, you are way way out of line on here. Get a grip, will ya? Seriously, better yet, what are you going to do when Trump skates away on this on the 5th try for you guys? The name calling is completely inappropriate and Rojo or Wejo should ban you for life for that offense. Give up already. you can even think you are right, I do not care really, but he is never getting convicted of anything let alone doing a day of jail..get a clue. Really now. There are 1900 plus posts on here, 1200 pf them are from people who just don't want to pay their Student Loans.
POTD 😂
It clearly wasn't. Look at the downvotes. Ha!
You do not love America. It is impossible for you to do so and to be supporting Donald Trump. You are a damned fool.
Oh, I forgot to say...you Trumpers are dumb@ss mother f*ckers.
Yes, you sissy Bidenettes are dumb@ss mother f*ckers indeed. You love to bow down and worship to you Cult Leader, Bidenette...the B-iggest I-diot D-emocrat E-ver D-ominated!!!
That doesn't even make sense. You Trump f*ckers are the ones in a cult with your matching hats and flags and muscled images of Trump over the American flag and images of Jesus (and Charles Manson) behind him with his hands on him, and your stupid boat rallies.
Biden voters didn't do any of that sh!t. We just showed up on election day and voted Trump out.
Regarding A, the alligator infested pond near the 12th hole hasn’t been checked for DNA, for B, we don’t yet know what the evidence is and for C, Trump is an idiot.
We have been on a similar journey for 5 1/2 years. Some or many Democrats want D. J. T. prosecuted. Some or many Democrats pressured their Democrat U.S. Congresspersons to establish special prosecutor (or whatever was Mueller), committee hearings, impeachment x 2, civil suits, sexual assault cases, etc. So much media energy over the past 5 1/2 years! Results: D. J. T. had to write a few or several checks to settle civil law cases. I did not vote for D. J. T., but I can spot losing efforts when I see them. I believe some or many Democrats are afraid Biden isn't strong enough to defeat D. J. T. twice so here we are.
I don't know about all that stuff, but this Weisselberg stuff is problematic for Trump. As if he didn't have a big enough rat problem down at Mar-O-Skunko, now he's got this goddam Weisselberg creep up in NYC threatening to pull the dickens on him.
And Weisselberg is a plea-bargain rat, which can be more treacherous than a wire-rat like whoever narc'ed on the classified documents. Plea-bargain rats are bound contractually to rat, and you also can't call them up and talk things through, or you'll get fish busted for tampering. Ask any criminal lawyer which is worse, and 4 out of 5 will say a plea-bargain rat.
