Jack Smith moves to dismiss cases

[kallend 2,026]

1 hour ago, billeisele said:

I'm glad that Biden, Harris, Obama, Bill or Hillary, Ted Kennedy, Blagojevich, Menendez, Weiner, Corrine Brown, Chaka Fattah, Jesse Jacson, William Jefferson, Schumer and AOC never lied. "You can keep your doctor" "I never had sex with that woman"

At least one party is honest.

 

Which one, the Greens?

Your hero beats all others combined.

https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2023/09/18/new-study-reveals-correlation-between-trumps-repeated-falsehoods-and-public-misperceptions/

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/10/politics/fact-check-trump-pennsylvania-speeches/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/11/nx-s1-5070566/trump-news-conference

https://theconversation.com/why-does-donald-trump-tell-such-blatant-lies-241192

 

[tkhayes 348]

1 minute ago, kallend said:

Which one, the Greens?

Your hero beats all others combined.

https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2023/09/18/new-study-reveals-correlation-between-trumps-repeated-falsehoods-and-public-misperceptions/

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/10/politics/fact-check-trump-pennsylvania-speeches/index.html

https://www.npr.org/2024/08/11/nx-s1-5070566/trump-news-conference

https://theconversation.com/why-does-donald-trump-tell-such-blatant-lies-241192

 

stop bringing facts to an ideological cult.....  It would not matter if trump was raping their children in front of the them, bent over their own couch.....  They would say 'well THAT guy raped people too!'

The level of their depravity and dishonesty about what they represent is truly a cult masterpiece.

[billeisele 130]

12 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Ah! a post using false equivalency to justify blatant lying.

Phil - I'm not justifying anything. No where did I say anything even close to that. Only pointing out that there are plenty of bad actors on both sides of the fence. Some seem to forget that fact and act like the D's are angels. 

I get it, Trump has done plenty of bad stuff. But he is the elected President. Folks can be mad about it all they want, it won't change the outcome.

No doubt he got a boost from the unsuccessful assassination, Obama's admonition to black males and Joe's timely garbage comment. One has to wonder if Joe did that on purpose. 
   
The shame is that there were two choices and they were both bad. 2.5 million more voters thought he was more capable despite his transgressions especially since he won all the swing states. One State I find most interesting is NC. They voted for Trump (51% - 48.7%) but every other state level position went Democrat. There were a whole bunch that voted split ticket. 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

18 minutes ago, billeisele said:

Phil - I'm not justifying anything. No where did I say anything even close to that. Only pointing out that there are plenty of bad actors on both sides of the fence. Some seem to forget that fact and act like the D's are angels. 

I get it, Trump has done plenty of bad stuff. But he is the elected President. Folks can be mad about it all they want, it won't change the outcome.

No doubt he got a boost from the unsuccessful assassination, Obama's admonition to black males and Joe's timely garbage comment. One has to wonder if Joe did that on purpose. 
   
The shame is that there were two choices and they were both bad. 2.5 million more voters thought he was more capable despite his transgressions especially since he won all the swing states. One State I find most interesting is NC. They voted for Trump (51% - 48.7%) but every other state level position went Democrat. There were a whole bunch that voted split ticket. 

What mattered most was she was a mixed race black female who smiled. That is, too colored, too uppity, too female, and too late to the party. Biden’s garbage comment was senile and harmful, Obama couldn’t say anything right to most of the right as if we white folks have the slightest inkling of the dynamic. But you are right, he will be our President but I doubt it will play out as his supporters imagined.

[Phil1111 1,149]

37 minutes ago, billeisele said:

... But he is the elected President. ...

I hope that everything works out. There is a possibility that Elon can cut some fat out of Washington. A smaller possibility that the direction of leadership will be traditional GOP, i.e. cut spending such that the deficit is reduced. Having said that there are many elderly and poor that are vulnerable.

I most closely identify with John McCain a compassionate conservative and one that looks for consensus.

[billvon 2,990]

1 hour ago, billeisele said:

Only pointing out that there are plenty of bad actors on both sides of the fence.

Ah yes.

Clinton lies about having consensual sex with an intern - "He must be IMPEACHED!  He does not deserve to be president!  He's a DISGRACE!  How can the left be so criminal?"

Trump rapes a women and is convicted of 34 felonies - "well, there are bad actors on both sides.  No biggie."

[metalslug 36]

On 11/27/2024 at 4:49 AM, tkhayes said:

I'm glad I am not the only one that recognizes this.  In a TV interview years ago when he was speaker, he was asked about something and told a bold face lie.  The interviewer said "But that's not true...."

Gingrich replied "That is what our/my people believe....".  

If the press had grown some balls and pushed the issue, it might have ended there, but then, maybe not. 

Gingrich was the first to systemically, and methodically tell absolute lies based on 'what people believe' (at the same time, promoting the narratives), which has lead us to where we are today.... absolute bullshit, no recognition of the truth, no acknowledgement of the truth, alternative facts and thus the end of the republic in a few years.

house of cards being deliberately dismantled by only one side of the populace, conservatives that believe their opinion is more valid than truth.

Such is the hubris of the hard-left; asserting their own 'truths' as; the laptop is a Russian fabrication, trump said supremacists are "fine people" ... that last one indeed repudiated by a renowned center-left factcheck site and yet many on the left will still assert their different belief of that as 'truth'. There are dozens more examples of these already debated to deadlock in other threads and often with the only discernible outcome being that your posts got more 'likes' than the other guy.  Absorbing this echo chamber and other left media or community bubbles gives you those assurances of 'your truth".  Have you wondered yet why the ratings of legacy left media (CNN, MSNBC) tanked hard after the election?  Viewers could then see the lies they had been told both in the polling and projected narratives.  

[tkhayes 348]

7 hours ago, metalslug said:

Such is the hubris of the hard-left; asserting their own 'truths' as; the laptop is a Russian fabrication, trump said supremacists are "fine people" ... that last one indeed repudiated by a renowned center-left factcheck site and yet many on the left will still assert their different belief of that as 'truth'. There are dozens more examples of these already debated to deadlock in other threads and often with the only discernible outcome being that your posts got more 'likes' than the other guy.  Absorbing this echo chamber and other left media or community bubbles gives you those assurances of 'your truth".  Have you wondered yet why the ratings of legacy left media (CNN, MSNBC) tanked hard after the election?  Viewers could then see the lies they had been told both in the polling and projected narratives.  

no one said the laptop was a russian fabrication.... I specifically asked "What happened with all that?" and am still waiting for an answer.  There was damning evidence of the Biden crime family, just like hillary's emails...... like the Biden Impeachment committee(s)..... so why has none of that been prosecuted?  Why did nothing come of it when Donald Trump was president and owned the DOJ?  He made it a campaign promise.... LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!

The Biden DOJ, NY, Georgia and other venues actually managed to bring indictments/convictions to Trump, Trump himself managed to convict a few dozen of his own associates while he was president under his DOJ.  is that hubris?

Which 'hubris' are you speaking of?  Because so far, it is the conservative republicans that appear to be the committers of crimes and yet, the accusations from the right continue, yet .... nothing, slience, zip zero nada nothing....  Trump never even managed to START an investigation into Hillary.  And then he had to go to Ukraine to try and start an investigation into the Bidens..... why was that?

So again, either their is NO evidence of crimes from say Hillary's emails, or Hunters laptop, or the Biden crime family..... or the conservatives are basically incompetent and cannot find it, all the while

Go ahead, I will even let you choose one...

Or the thrid option, Trump and the republicans understand EXACTLY how gullible you are and have been feeding you mouth foaming bullshit for years, and you appear to still be swallowing it.

Cannot answer the question?  Yeah, I thought so

Edited November 28, 2024 by tkhayes
typos

[jakee 1,489]

8 hours ago, metalslug said:

trump said supremacists are "fine people" ... 

Trump said that people attending a rally dedicated to preserving the public celebration of men who fought to maintain slavery, which was organised by white supremacists, and who decided to continue taking part when their own side was clearly littered with actual swastikas, Klansmen and various other Neo-Nazi paraphernalia, were very fine people. 

You don’t think that’s fucking outrageous?

[jakee 1,489]

8 hours ago, metalslug said:

 Viewers could then see the lies they had been told both in the polling and projected narratives.  

Lol, your media told you Putin gave a speech declaring how dangerous Trump was to Russia and you still believe them despite having been shown the actual speech where he says the exact opposite! 

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

34 minutes ago, jakee said:

Trump said that people attending a rally dedicated to preserving the public celebration of men who fought to maintain slavery, which was organised by white supremacists, and who decided to continue taking part when their own side was clearly littered with actual swastikas, Klansmen and various other Neo-Nazi paraphernalia, were very fine people. 

You don’t think that’s fucking outrageous?

Everyone seems to forget that 'one side' was composed ENTIRELY of KKK & Nazis.

Some are implying that there were 'non-Nazis' and 'non-KKK' among the "Unite the Right" marchers. 
That some were 'simply protesting the removal of the Confederate statues'.

Sure.
Right.

Uh-huh.

It was a White Supremacy event. 
It was organized and held by the Nazis & KKK.
To pretend that there were 'very fine people' among them is ludicrous.
 

[metalslug 36]

10 hours ago, tkhayes said:

no one said the laptop was a russian fabrication.... 

While "Russian fabrication" cannot be used as an exact quote; there was reasonable evidence that active efforts were made by the left to suppress the authenticity of it and thereby suppress the negative perceptions of influence peddling it contained at a critical time prior to the 2020 election. Another example would be AOC asserting the laptop was "half fake". Distortions of truth by the left.

In fairness I do not specifically recall you denouncing its' authenticity although, by the same measure, you might want to be aware that I have never made accusations regarding Hillary's emails. I am however aware of the truth of the FEC fines against her for concealing how campaign financing was spent on the Steele dossier, a dossier of which its' own author conceded "not everything in the dossier is 100% accurate". 

11 hours ago, tkhayes said:

So again, either their is NO evidence of crimes from say Hillary's emails, or Hunters laptop, or the Biden crime family..... or the conservatives are basically incompetent and cannot find it, all the while

Go ahead, I will even let you choose one...

Hunter was charged and convicted of a crime almost primarily from evidence on his own laptop, hence "evidence of crimes". I chose one.  Influence peddling is not directly a crime and concealing its' existence during an election to avoid appearances of impropriety is unlikely to be a crime either. Your statements were in regard to truth vs belief, not crimes. Your notion that the left is all about 'truth' is farcical.

11 hours ago, tkhayes said:

Cannot answer the question?  Yeah, I thought so

I just did. Your thought is once again your belief.

[airdvr 210]

21 hours ago, billvon said:

Ah yes.

Clinton lies about having consensual sex with an intern - "He must be IMPEACHED!  He does not deserve to be president!  He's a DISGRACE!  How can the left be so criminal?"

Trump rapes a women and is convicted of 34 felonies - "well, there are bad actors on both sides.  No biggie."

Funny that you think it was consensual. He used his position of power to take advantage of her. 
 

And his impeachment wasn’t about blowjobs, it was about perjury. 

[JoeWeber 2,720]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

Funny that you think it was consensual. He used his position of power to take advantage of her. 
 

And his impeachment wasn’t about blowjobs, it was about perjury. 

Monica stated in a Vanity Fair interview that it was in fact consensual and that any advantage he took of her with his power was in the cover up. So yes, for that he's a true asshole but the blow job was something else, obviously.

"Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship," she writes. "Any 'abuse' came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position...The Clinton administration, the special prosecutor's minions, the political operatives on both sides of the aisle, and the media were able to brand me. And that brand stuck, in part because it was imbued with power."

[nigel99 471]

1 hour ago, metalslug said:

While "Russian fabrication" cannot be used as an exact quote; there was reasonable evidence that active efforts were made by the left to suppress the authenticity of it and thereby suppress the negative perceptions of influence peddling it contained at a critical time prior to the 2020 election. Another example would be AOC asserting the laptop was "half fake". Distortions of truth by the left.

In fairness I do not specifically recall you denouncing its' authenticity although, by the same measure, you might want to be aware that I have never made accusations regarding Hillary's emails. I am however aware of the truth of the FEC fines against her for concealing how campaign financing was spent on the Steele dossier, a dossier of which its' own author conceded "not everything in the dossier is 100% accurate". 

Hunter was charged and convicted of a crime almost primarily from evidence on his own laptop, hence "evidence of crimes". I chose one.  Influence peddling is not directly a crime and concealing its' existence during an election to avoid appearances of impropriety is unlikely to be a crime either. Your statements were in regard to truth vs belief, not crimes. Your notion that the left is all about 'truth' is farcical.

I just did. Your thought is once again your belief.

Isn’t it a bit disingenuous to use the argument “It wasn’t an exact quote” regarding the laptop, but then argue against the message from Trump regarding “very fine people” as he didn’t specifically mention the white nationalists?

I’ve always been a little uncomfortable with how Trumps business crimes have been portrayed. It may be normal process in the US that federal convictions are counted per transgression. But calling him a 34 times convicted felon seems inflammatory. It was one crime, with 34 individual documents. 

If this was applied to all of his cases then the classified documents should be 100’s of felonies?

Don’t mistake this for me condoning his behaviour, he should have been prosecuted just as harshly and quickly as Edward Snowden and others.

[metalslug 36]

1 hour ago, nigel99 said:

Isn’t it a bit disingenuous to use the argument “It wasn’t an exact quote” regarding the laptop, but then argue against the message from Trump regarding “very fine people” as he didn’t specifically mention the white nationalists?

You're kidding, right? Have you never seen the actual quote?

Quote

 ...and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.

 

[nigel99 471]

7 minutes ago, metalslug said:

You're kidding, right? Have you never seen the actual quote?

 

Ok, so who at the event on the side of the neo nazis doesn’t fall under that umbrella term and why were they there?

I believe Trumps father had known links to the KKK. 

So let’s take Trump at his explicit word. Do you agree with him that the KKK has very fine people? 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally

Based on these groups who were at the rally can you suggest an example of a legitimate “fine person’ who would be there?

Edited November 29, 2024 by nigel99

[metalslug 36]

2 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

Ok, so who at the event on the side of the neo nazies doesn’t fall under that umbrella term and why were they there?

I’m happy for a hypothetical example. 

If you're asserting that they were all supremacists and nazis then burden of proof is on you. I'm not obligated to disprove it. Perhaps take some consolation then that if they were indeed all in that category then it can be inferred that he was condemning the lot of them. If you're still fixated on your preferred version then you might consider contacting Snopes to insist they correct their article.

[nigel99 471]

10 minutes ago, metalslug said:

If you're asserting that they were all supremacists and nazis then burden of proof is on you. I'm not obligated to disprove it. Perhaps take some consolation then that if they were indeed all in that category then it can be inferred that he was condemning the lot of them. If you're still fixated on your preferred version then you might consider contacting Snopes to insist they correct their article.

I simply asked for an example of someone who wouldn’t fall under that banner.

Snopes has the extremely narrow definition that you’re adopting. The same article points out the fact that the false statement is that Trump called all of them very fine people.

So do you agree with Trump that the KKK and militia groups have very fine people as they are differentiated from the 2 very specific groups he called out? 

Also Trump had dinner with one of the leaders after the event in 2022 

““Trump is really impressed with Nick Fuentes,” Ye said in the video.”

Not a very strong condemnation.
 

Edited November 29, 2024 by nigel99

[metalslug 36]

49 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

I simply asked for an example of someone who wouldn’t fall under that banner.

You. You would not fall under that banner. Centre-right or 'mainstream' conservatives too.  But, since I cannot know with certainty that you were not at that protest I have to allow for the possibility that you were. It seems Trump did too.

49 minutes ago, nigel99 said:

So do you agree with Trump that the KKK and militia groups have very fine people as they are differentiated from the 2 very specific groups he called out? 

Again the premise of your question contains the unproven assertion that KKK and 'militia groups' (another made-up comparison) were the only people there. It's not answerable.

Edited November 29, 2024 by metalslug

[nigel99 471]

26 minutes ago, metalslug said:

You. You would not fall under that banner. Centre-right or 'mainstream' conservatives too.  But, since I cannot know with certainty that you were not at that protest I have to allow for the possibility that you were. It seems Trump did too.

Again the premise of your question contains the unproven assertion that KKK and 'militia groups' (another made-up comparison) were the only people there. It's not answerable.

Trump excluded those groups from his narrow definition. Considering it was a far right event, there doesn’t appear to be any logical and justified reason to be present and showing support for the cause.

Reframing the question, what valid reason or cause would a ‘very fine person’ have to support the cause of the organisers? 

[jakee 1,489]

6 hours ago, metalslug said:

While "Russian fabrication" cannot be used as an exact quote; there was reasonable evidence that active efforts were made by the left to suppress the authenticity of it and thereby suppress the negative perceptions of influence peddling it contained at a critical time prior to the 2020 election.

That link is hilarious, and it's hilarious that you would present it as if it should be taken seriously.

3 hours ago, metalslug said:

If you're asserting that they were all supremacists and nazis then burden of proof is on you. I'm not obligated to disprove it. Perhaps take some consolation then that if they were indeed all in that category then it can be inferred that he was condemning the lot of them. 

By calling them very fine people. Again, that's hilarious. Did you read the whole quote? We've already established you have serious difficulty understanding speeches.

These people turned up to a rally dedicated to celebrating the heritage of slavery, a rally 100% organised by white supremacists, they are still happy to join in and march alongside KKK members and swastika carriers when they are there, and Trump automatically assumes that they are very fine people, after one of them killed someone.

Really you're just drawing more attantion to how despicable and disgusting the comment was.

[kallend 2,026]

5 hours ago, metalslug said:

Blah

You are spending a huge amount of energy defending the indefensible.

[nigel99 471]

2 hours ago, jakee said:

That link is hilarious, and it's hilarious that you would present it as if it should be taken seriously.

By calling them very fine people. Again, that's hilarious. Did you read the whole quote? We've already established you have serious difficulty understanding speeches.

These people turned up to a rally dedicated to celebrating the heritage of slavery, a rally 100% organised by white supremacists, they are still happy to join in and march alongside KKK members and swastika carriers when they are there, and Trump automatically assumes that they are very fine people, after one of them killed someone.

Really you're just drawing more attantion to how despicable and disgusting the comment was.

When you have to split hairs further and further until you get to the atomic level to justify a comment you have a problem.

That doesn’t even touch on the fact that Trump invited one of the leaders of the groups that he allegedly renounced to a dinner. Then said he was very impressed by him. 

I’ve got more respect for the nazis and racists that have the backbone to stand behind their beliefs than I do for Trump and the apologists who share their views but don’t have the backbone to take the heat of standing by their convictions.

[kallend 2,026]

9 hours ago, airdvr said:

Funny that you think it was consensual. He used his position of power to take advantage of her. 
 

And his impeachment wasn’t about blowjobs, it was about perjury. 

Good job he wasn't a candidate this year then.  He would have deserved to lose.  Like Trump deserved to lose except he had locked up the moron vote.