Did the super-serious J6 Committee take a deep dive at any of this footage by any chance? Was the Capitol Police / FBI Agents that participated in these actions brought before the committee?
Nope.
And guess what? After the Big J6 Show was over…
Donald Trump won again.
Every single state lunged to the right. Every damn state (just about every county in every state too, if I’m not mistaken).
So remember that as you’re showing these MSM clips of J6, keep in mind the country saw them and said “LOL- yeah ok- F—- YOU!!” and delivered a resounding victory for Trump.
Let's all stop the bickering. We have a new president and let's get behind him. Biden - meh. He is gone soon. Trump assumes the presidency soon - let's get behind him. Support him. He will be a great president for the country.
That's what Germans were saying in 1933. Let's get behind the new guy. He will be great.
Judge Merchan has indicated that Trump will face no penalty for the 34 convictions against him. Yet Michael Cohen went to prison for doing Trump's bidding. Your justice system is a farce.
Let's all stop the bickering. We have a new president and let's get behind him. Biden - meh. He is gone soon. Trump assumes the presidency soon - let's get behind him. Support him. He will be a great president for the country.
That's what Germans were saying in 1933. Let's get behind the new guy. He will be great.
GREGG JARRETT: I think Merchan is desperate to stain the incoming president with the label convicted felon. And understand, under the law, Trump is not officially convicted of anything until he's formally sentenced, even though many in the media, of course, began immediately and incorrectly calling him a convicted felon when the jury verdict came in.
There are probably 20% of hardcore left and 20% hardcore Trumpers out there. It could be 25% for each. Either way, the vast middle of the country can be swayed to one side or another.
The problem is they are swayed by things like the cost of a dozen eggs and not the future of democracy. These flip-floppers are never going to go to war for either side. So neither side will have a permanent monopoly.
Even I, Nancy, am upbeat about the future of the USA despite having four years of Trump chaos staring us down.
There isn't a "vast middle" now. That was the political landscape of the past. The US is as divided as the parting of the Red Sea (and that isn't a deliberate pun, but could work as one). One of the more obvious indications is how Trump loyalties have divided families, who can no longer talk to one another or live with one another. That is the way the nation is going.
That would be true if that were true, but it’s not, so it’s not.
For example, in Nov 2024 the percentages based on whether people considered themselves a Republican, Democrat or Independent was:
30% (R) 26% (D) 42% (I)
In Nov 2004:
38% (R) 35% (D) 27% (I)
Some reports have Independents at 49% of voters.
The reason you are so wrong in your assumption is because Democrats don't read NEWSPAPERS!!!
That's what Germans were saying in 1933. Let's get behind the new guy. He will be great.
GREGG JARRETT: I think Merchan is desperate to stain the incoming president with the label convicted felon. And understand, under the law, Trump is not officially convicted of anything until he's formally sentenced, even though many in the media, of course, began immediately and incorrectly calling him a convicted felon when the jury verdict came in.
34 "CONVICTIONS" say you and Jarrett are idiots. How can they be "convictions" if he isn't convicted? Sentencing is not a conviction, you moron; it merely finalises the process with the imposition of a penalty. In this case the 34X criminal will receive none, even though his guilt is affirmed in each and every charge, and even though his stooge Cohen went to prison for his part in Trump's crimes. You have unmistakably arrived at a banana republic.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
There isn't a "vast middle" now. That was the political landscape of the past. The US is as divided as the parting of the Red Sea (and that isn't a deliberate pun, but could work as one). One of the more obvious indications is how Trump loyalties have divided families, who can no longer talk to one another or live with one another. That is the way the nation is going.
That would be true if that were true, but it’s not, so it’s not.
For example, in Nov 2024 the percentages based on whether people considered themselves a Republican, Democrat or Independent was:
30% (R) 26% (D) 42% (I)
In Nov 2004:
38% (R) 35% (D) 27% (I)
Some reports have Independents at 49% of voters.
The reason you are so wrong in your assumption is because Democrats don't read NEWSPAPERS!!!
The division isn't Republican or Democrat but member of the Trump cult and those who aren't. They are irreconcilable. These threads are perfect examples. You live in alternate realities.
GREGG JARRETT: I think Merchan is desperate to stain the incoming president with the label convicted felon. And understand, under the law, Trump is not officially convicted of anything until he's formally sentenced, even though many in the media, of course, began immediately and incorrectly calling him a convicted felon when the jury verdict came in.
34 "CONVICTIONS" say you and Jarrett are idiots. How can they be "convictions" if he isn't convicted? Sentencing is not a conviction, you moron; it merely finalises the process with the imposition of a penalty. In this case the 34x a criminal will receive none, even though his guilt is affirmed in each and every charge, and even though his stooge Cohen went to prison for his part in Trump's crimes. You have unmistakably arrived at a banana republic.
Instead of just blabbering, show me the law that states that a guilty jury verdict equates to a conviction. Everything I have read says nope. Quit blabbering and show me something concrete.
34 "CONVICTIONS" say you and Jarrett are idiots. How can they be "convictions" if he isn't convicted? Sentencing is not a conviction, you moron; it merely finalises the process with the imposition of a penalty. In this case the 34x a criminal will receive none, even though his guilt is affirmed in each and every charge, and even though his stooge Cohen went to prison for his part in Trump's crimes. You have unmistakably arrived at a banana republic.
Instead of just blabbering, show me the law that states that a guilty jury verdict equates to a conviction. Everything I have read says nope. Quit blabbering and show me something concrete.
The guilty verdicts are convictions and have to be so, otherwise they couldn't be appealed as such. Trump's team was not appealing guilty verdicts but the convictions they give rise to. Similarly, he was asking the convictions be set aside and not the guilty verdicts as such. The only way the convictions are not "convictions" is if the judge had discharged them on the basis the jury got it clearly wrong - they didn't and so he dismissed that application - or if the convictions were reversed on appeal - and they have to be convictions to be overturned. Sentencing merely formalises the convictions with the imposition of any penalty and concludes the process. Your failure to understand any of this is that Trump's convictions will still stand even though there will be no penalty - he is sentenced to NOTHING, but will remain a convicted felon.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Instead of just blabbering, show me the law that states that a guilty jury verdict equates to a conviction. Everything I have read says nope. Quit blabbering and show me something concrete.
The guilty verdicts are convictions and have to be so, otherwise they couldn't be appealed as such. Trump's team was not appealing guilty verdicts but the convictions they give rise to. Similarly, he was asking the convictions be set aside and not the guilty verdicts as such. The only way the convictions are not "convictions" is if the judge had discharged them on the basis the jury got it clearly wrong - they didn't and so he dismissed that application - or if the convictions were reversed on appeal - and they have to be convictions to be overturned. Sentencing merely formalises the convictions with the imposition of any penalty and concludes the process. Your failure to understand any of this is that Trump's convictions will still stand even though there will be no penalty - he is sentenced to NOTHING, but will remain a convicted felon.
Dude - please quit blabbering. A defendant can be convicted and the judge can impose the sentence but suspend it.
Instead of just blabbering, show me the law that states that a guilty jury verdict equates to a conviction. Everything I have read says nope. Quit blabbering and show me something concrete.
The guilty verdicts are convictions and have to be so, otherwise they couldn't be appealed as such. Trump's team was not appealing guilty verdicts but the convictions they give rise to. Similarly, he was asking the convictions be set aside and not the guilty verdicts as such. The only way the convictions are not "convictions" is if the judge had discharged them on the basis the jury got it clearly wrong - they didn't and so he dismissed that application - or if the convictions were reversed on appeal - and they have to be convictions to be overturned. Sentencing merely formalises the convictions with the imposition of any penalty and concludes the process. Your failure to understand any of this is that Trump's convictions will still stand even though there will be no penalty - he is sentenced to NOTHING, but will remain a convicted felon.
Greg Jarrett is an attorney. Other attorneys agree with him. The law agrees with him. What exactly were your credentials again? You are a law professor where?
The guilty verdicts are convictions and have to be so, otherwise they couldn't be appealed as such. Trump's team was not appealing guilty verdicts but the convictions they give rise to. Similarly, he was asking the convictions be set aside and not the guilty verdicts as such. The only way the convictions are not "convictions" is if the judge had discharged them on the basis the jury got it clearly wrong - they didn't and so he dismissed that application - or if the convictions were reversed on appeal - and they have to be convictions to be overturned. Sentencing merely formalises the convictions with the imposition of any penalty and concludes the process. Your failure to understand any of this is that Trump's convictions will still stand even though there will be no penalty - he is sentenced to NOTHING, but will remain a convicted felon.
Dude - please quit blabbering. A defendant can be convicted and the judge can impose the sentence but suspend it.
You're finally starting to catch on. Yes - the judge can suspend the sentence or even impose none, but the CONVICTIONS still stand. That is why Trump is so angry. He will remain a convicted felon after sentencing even though there is no penalty. Judge Merchan has made it clear he has no intention of overturning the convictions. Trump will have to seek that outcome on appeal. You need to stop agitating your brain on this, Sally - it can't cope.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
That would be true if that were true, but it’s not, so it’s not.
For example, in Nov 2024 the percentages based on whether people considered themselves a Republican, Democrat or Independent was:
30% (R) 26% (D) 42% (I)
In Nov 2004:
38% (R) 35% (D) 27% (I)
Some reports have Independents at 49% of voters.
The reason you are so wrong in your assumption is because Democrats don't read NEWSPAPERS!!!
The division isn't Republican or Democrat but member of the Trump cult and those who aren't. They are irreconcilable. These threads are perfect examples. You live in alternate realities.
Sorry dude but you're just not getting it.
There are many millions of voters who voted for Obama, then Trump
Or Biden, then Trump.
Seriously. Couldn't be a more stark difference but millions did it.
Four years is a long time and people here in the USA are seemingly constantly looking for change. Maybe we can't pay attention or something, I dunno.
That's why folks like Gary who are still crowing about the election will be very disappointed in 2 years when the House flips back to the Dems. For a huge chunk of the electorate, it's no longer about party, it's just about change. And there's always some reason to change. Covid, egg prices, immigration, on and on...
The division isn't Republican or Democrat but member of the Trump cult and those who aren't. They are irreconcilable. These threads are perfect examples. You live in alternate realities.
Sorry dude but you're just not getting it.
There are many millions of voters who voted for Obama, then Trump
Or Biden, then Trump.
Seriously. Couldn't be a more stark difference but millions did it.
Four years is a long time and people here in the USA are seemingly constantly looking for change. Maybe we can't pay attention or something, I dunno.
That's why folks like Gary who are still crowing about the election will be very disappointed in 2 years when the House flips back to the Dems. For a huge chunk of the electorate, it's no longer about party, it's just about change. And there's always some reason to change. Covid, egg prices, immigration, on and on...
You're right about the political landscape in 2008, 2012 or even 2016. But that no longer applies. It has dramatically changed since 2020. The "moveable middle" - which was never that big - has largely disappeared, such is the polarisation that has taken place, reinforced by the power of propaganda. The political divisions today are closer to those of 1860. There are historical scholars who say a second civil war isn't simply possible or even likely; it is inevitable.
This post was edited 13 minutes after it was posted.
That would be true if that were true, but it’s not, so it’s not.
For example, in Nov 2024 the percentages based on whether people considered themselves a Republican, Democrat or Independent was:
30% (R) 26% (D) 42% (I)
In Nov 2004:
38% (R) 35% (D) 27% (I)
Some reports have Independents at 49% of voters.
The reason you are so wrong in your assumption is because Democrats don't read NEWSPAPERS!!!
The division isn't Republican or Democrat but member of the Trump cult and those who aren't. They are irreconcilable. These threads are perfect examples. You live in alternate realities.
The guilty verdicts are convictions and have to be so, otherwise they couldn't be appealed as such. Trump's team was not appealing guilty verdicts but the convictions they give rise to. Similarly, he was asking the convictions be set aside and not the guilty verdicts as such. The only way the convictions are not "convictions" is if the judge had discharged them on the basis the jury got it clearly wrong - they didn't and so he dismissed that application - or if the convictions were reversed on appeal - and they have to be convictions to be overturned. Sentencing merely formalises the convictions with the imposition of any penalty and concludes the process. Your failure to understand any of this is that Trump's convictions will still stand even though there will be no penalty - he is sentenced to NOTHING, but will remain a convicted felon.
Greg Jarrett is an attorney. Other attorneys agree with him. The law agrees with him. What exactly were your credentials again? You are a law professor where?
He is a right wing attorney. That's why you approve of what he says. Like that other appalling piece of work, Allan Dershowitz.
Here's a very simple point, which means even you might understand it. If Trump had not been "convicted" by the jury verdicts then he could sued media for falsely claiming they were "convictions" - as they uniformly did. He hasn't. Guess why not?
The division isn't Republican or Democrat but member of the Trump cult and those who aren't. They are irreconcilable. These threads are perfect examples. You live in alternate realities.
The data says I’m correct.
Your data is selective. It isn't the bigger picture. The US is becoming two separate countries.
Greg Jarrett is an attorney. Other attorneys agree with him. The law agrees with him. What exactly were your credentials again? You are a law professor where?
He is a right wing attorney. That's why you approve of what he says. Like that other appalling piece of work, Allan Dershowitz.
Here's a very simple point, which means even you might understand it. If Trump had not been "convicted" by the jury verdicts then he could sued media for falsely claiming they were "convictions" - as they uniformly did. He hasn't. Guess why not?
After the jury verdict Trump could have fled the country and he would not have been a fugitive. He had not been convicted. A jury verdict of guilt IS NOT a conviction.
There are many millions of voters who voted for Obama, then Trump
Or Biden, then Trump.
Seriously. Couldn't be a more stark difference but millions did it.
Four years is a long time and people here in the USA are seemingly constantly looking for change. Maybe we can't pay attention or something, I dunno.
That's why folks like Gary who are still crowing about the election will be very disappointed in 2 years when the House flips back to the Dems. For a huge chunk of the electorate, it's no longer about party, it's just about change. And there's always some reason to change. Covid, egg prices, immigration, on and on...
You're right about the political landscape in 2008, 2012 or even 2016. But that no longer applies. It has dramatically changed since 2020. The "moveable middle" - which was never that big - has largely disappeared, such is the polarisation that has taken place, reinforced by the power of propaganda. The political divisions today are closer to those of 1860. There are historical scholars who say a second civil war isn't simply possible or even likely; it is inevitable.
I would add, members of the Trump cult - which is what "Republican" now means - aren't going to flip on the price of eggs or petrol; their whole sense of identity and their view of reality is founded on that allegiance. That is why the Democrat campaign had no real chance of winning any of them over. The US is long past that.