TRUMP CONVICTED

DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
BudmanTX said:
yeeeeaaaahhhhh this is gonna hurt......think we might have to move our bets up a few 100mil........

View attachment 5368384
Click to expand...
I figure the longer the delay the more it will cost Trump, so we can wait a spell for the big one. Let's hope for a double header a billion bucks and disqualification in February. If the SCOTUS doesn't take his appeal on immunity, he is going to prison, or he is going to the Whitehouse.

That is one reason why there is a constitution, to thwart the will of the majority, in case anybody is confused about disqualification or the protection of minorities. The constitution has mechanisms to protect itself, but it needs people who are loyal to it to do it and bring it alive and into force.
 
BudmanTX

BudmanTX

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
I figure the longer the delay the more it will cost Trump, so we can wait a spell for the big one. Let's hope for a double header a billion bucks and disqualification in February. If the SCOTUS doesn't take his appeal on immunity, he is going to prison, or he is going to the Whitehouse.

That is one reason why there is a constitution, to thwart the will of the majority, in case anybody is confused about disqualification or the protection of minorities. The constitution has mechanisms to protect itself, but it needs people who are loyal to it to do it and bring it alive and into force.
Click to expand...
i think this is gonna put an extra 200mil added to that 370mil price tag.....so plus or minus half a billion. Plus wisselbum going to jail for perjury at least for a little while.

as far as immunity imho i don't think scotus is gonna take it up, if you read the ruling it's pretty solid, and if the NY judge hits him, he won't have the money to go to scotus...

as far as disqualification, to me it immediate just as the constitution says, but i would like to hear the arguements they present, that ruling prolly won't hit till June, and there has been a couple of people calling on Thomas's recusal with this too
 
E

ec121

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Spare us having to click on orangecesspool dot com.
Click to expand...
True. Here it is - written like a 4th grader. I like how he just dipped his toes in with the second chance bit.


"Orange Jesus" said:
The Bud Light ad was a mistake of epic proportions, and for that a very big price was paid, but Anheuser-Busch is not a Woke company, but I can give you plenty that are, am building a list, and might just release it for the World to see. Why not, the Radical Left does it viciously to well run, Conservative companies - and people! Very nasty, but it’s the way they play the game! On the other hand, Anheuser-Busch spends $700 Million a year with our GREAT Farmers, employ 65 thousand Americans, of which 1,500 are Veterans, and is a Founding Corporate Partner of Folds of Honor, which provides Scholarships for families of fallen Servicemen & Women. They’ve raised over $30,000,000 and given 44,000 Scholarships. Anheuser-Busch is a Great American Brand that perhaps deserves a Second Chance? What do you think? Perhaps, instead, we should be going after those companies that are looking to DESTROY AMERICA!
Click to expand...
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
BudmanTX said:
as far as disqualification, to me it immediate just as the constitution says, but i would like to hear the arguements they present, that ruling prolly won't hit till June, and there has been a couple of people calling on Thomas's recusal with this too
Click to expand...
That needs to be settled carefully by the SCOTUS and they must set standards for disqualification with this precedent or red states would be disqualifying Biden, if it were up to individual states, but this is a federal election, as federal as they get, so national standards must be set with a disqualification. It appears to be a tough hill to climb, if some conservative justices want to let him off on disqualification and their written opinion would be an exercise in pretzel logic. The opposing opinion would make them look like fucking idiots and hypocrites, they have had federalist society briefs and historical ones, their two favorite outs have been blocked.
 
V

VaSmile

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Tax the churches, and require them to disclose every penny given to campaigns, special interest groups etc. Oh and tax them for the for-profit culture war lobbyists they are. Did I mention taxing them?
Click to expand...
While I am mostly in agreement with you I would like to take a moment to add some clarification and nuances.
We say "tax the church" because as westerners Christianity is the religion we are most culturally familiar with. What we mean is to remove the religious institution tax exemption on all houses of worship.
Houses of worship are nowhere near a monolith. Many(won't say most bc I don't have statistics) behave in accordance with the teaching of their faith, in they act as a pillar of their community providing valuable services (education, housing, food, community services, charitable fundraising ext) those HOW would still have minimal tax burden as all those services would represent deductions.

Removing said tax exemption would add very little to the treasury but it would put a near end to the televangelist, for profit mega churches and other said grifters preying on their community as a method of wealth creation as they would find better ways to make money once they were tax for what they are, a cooperation.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
VaSmile said:
While I am mostly in agreement with you I would like to take a moment to add some clarification and nuances.
We say "tax the church" because as westerners Christianity is the religion we are most culturally familiar with. What we mean is to remove the religious institution tax exemption on all houses of worship.
Houses of worship are nowhere near a monolith. Many(won't say most bc I don't have statistics) behave in accordance with the teaching of their faith, in they act as a pillar of their community providing valuable services (education, housing, food, community services, charitable fundraising ext) those HOW would still have minimal tax burden as all those services would represent deductions.

Removing said tax exemption would add very little to the treasury but it would put a near end to the televangelist, for profit mega churches and other said grifters preying on their community as a method of wealth creation as they would find better ways to make money once they were tax for what they are, a cooperation.
Click to expand...
A sound argument. Thanks.
 
C

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
VaSmile said:
While I am mostly in agreement with you I would like to take a moment to add some clarification and nuances.
We say "tax the church" because as westerners Christianity is the religion we are most culturally familiar with. What we mean is to remove the religious institution tax exemption on all houses of worship.
Houses of worship are nowhere near a monolith. Many(won't say most bc I don't have statistics) behave in accordance with the teaching of their faith, in they act as a pillar of their community providing valuable services (education, housing, food, community services, charitable fundraising ext) those HOW would still have minimal tax burden as all those services would represent deductions.

Removing said tax exemption would add very little to the treasury but it would put a near end to the televangelist, for profit mega churches and other said grifters preying on their community as a method of wealth creation as they would find better ways to make money once they were tax for what they are, a cooperation.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see the can of hairspray,bible belt,pomp masters who claim an exclusive channel to God himself open up their wallets,there are people who so badly pray for deliverance from their plight sending these clowns 20% or more of their already poverty stricken income.
 
C

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
Just a general thought.that a man like Mr. Orange would so gleefully tear down and trash our govt. at his advanced age while clearly benefiting from our legal system and leading a charmed life that this country has provided is SINISTER and a stab in the back of dear uncle Sam. His challenges concerning Presidential power and rule of law issues bring to mind a British saying that I hazily recall as "To the audacious go the spoils",in that the framers never considered such a simplistic,outrageous frontal assault that he has conducted. A moronic equating of a King to a President in pursuing autocratic power, a holier than thou immunity that excuses a President from mea culpa's up to and including murder of political rivals,or any dissenter in general.I just think Constitutional framers anticipated more cerebral,clever challenges when framing their language(CHESS over CHECKERS) and planned there of,assuming common sense prevailed.Don't think such a blunt,up the middle,unimaginative challenge that Agent Orange represents was in their purview as by their thinking it defies logic that such a simplistic,juvenile state of mind would afflict the challenger or the electorate in general.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
CCGNZ said:
Just a general thought.that a man like Mr. Orange would so gleefully tear down and trash our govt. at his advanced age while clearly benefiting from our legal system and leading a charmed life that this country has provided is SINISTER and a stab in the back of dear uncle Sam. His challenges concerning Presidential power and rule of law issues bring to mind a British saying that I hazily recall as "To the audacious go the spoils",in that the framers never considered such a simplistic,outrageous frontal assault that he has conducted. A moronic equating of a King to a President in pursuing autocratic power, a holier than thou immunity that excuses a President from mea culpa's up to and including murder of political rivals,or any dissenter in general.I just think Constitutional framers anticipated more cerebral,clever challenges when framing their language(CHESS over CHECKERS) and planned there of,assuming common sense prevailed.Don't think such a blunt,up the middle,unimaginative challenge that Agent Orange represents was in their purview as by their thinking it defies logic that such a simplistic,juvenile state of mind would afflict the challenger or the electorate in general.
Click to expand...
There’s another factor.
The framers were intelligent, moral men, but they were also men of their times. As a result they did not fully perceive the social injustices that were integral to their culture.

I speak of slavery and the associated presumption of white supremacy as a matter of biology. Similarly a disregard of the natives that grew worse in the following century when there was land to grab.

Also, women had “their place” as men’s natural inferiors. Note that “all men” (male, white) were created equal.

Finally, they did not dissociate completely from the effect of Protestant oppression of gays, and of sex in general.

So their state had a set of prejudices baked in, and they still have traction. This was turbocharged after the Civil War when the South saw its genteel society dissolve after the foundation on the backs of chattel slaves was so rudely knocked out from under. To this day Southern whites piss and moan about their “disenfranchisement” in the classic assumption that social standing is a zero-sum proposition.

That is why critical race theory is such a direct target of those who still hold onto that edifice of hallowed injustice as a God-given hierarchy with them — rich/landholder white males — as its natural masters. Critical race theory, in its reckless pursuit of the philosophical refinement that all humans are of equal rights and dignity (and that American government and society has systematically worked against the realization of that simple precept), provides a challenge to their unspoken and often unexamined presumption of supremacy vouchsafed by God Himself (as preached by their proto-dominionist pastors).

Since Eisenhower’s time (Ike was generally a good guy, but civil rights were not a target of his administration, even as the pieces were put in place for the events of the following decade) the GOP and the money behind it have pursued a long game of harnessing white and evangelical grievance to power a counterrevolution to the civil rights movement.

Now the crisis is upon us. For the republic to endure, we have to vote the emergent fascists out, and publicly prosecute their criminal leadership.

* aside: another control mechanism was provided by the Calvinist idea that worldly wealth was an indicator of divine blessing. This meant that white male losers were banished to the underclass as shown by their being termed “white trash”, purifying and maintaining the moral sovereignty of the ruling élite.
 
Last edited:
printer

printer

Well-Known Member
Trump argues he should ‘not be charged’ in classified docs case if Biden isn’t
Former President Trump argued Friday night that he should “not be charged” in his federal classified documents case since a special counsel announced this week that President Biden would not face charges for Biden’s handling of classified materials.

“If Biden is not going to be charged, he said, that’s up to them, you know, look, if he’s not going to be charged, that’s up to them, but then I should not be charged,” Trump said speaking at an event for the National Rifle Association.

Special counsel Robert Hur was investigating Biden’s handling of classified materials and how documents from his time as vice president ended up at an old office space and his Wilmington, Del., home. Hur determined that Biden “willfully” retained the documents but did not bring forth any charges.

“It was just announced that Joe Biden’s Department of Injustice will bring zero charges against crooked Joe despite the fact he willfully retained, willfully retained, undisclosed droves of ultra-classified national security documents,” Trump said, according to The Associated Press. “Now, that’s not what I’ve been hearing and he’s not under the Presidential Records Act, which is a big thing, I am. It’s a protective act.”

Trump, who has used the investigation into Biden’s documents as a way to show the similarities between the two presidents, said the Department of Justice is “trying desperately” to spin the case to have a narrative that “wasn’t Trump worse by comparison?”

“Trump was peanuts by comparison,” he said.

Authorities collected 90 documents from Biden’s Delaware property, 50 of them contained classified markings. They also took handwritten notes.

Trump faces 40 charges claiming he mishandled classified records and tried to obstruct the government from retrieving them after he left the White House. The files allegedly contained national defense and weapons information, including some that had top secret markings.

The FBI searched his Mar-a-Lago property in August 2022 and he has pleaded not guilty. Trial is set to begin in May 2024, but a judge will reconsider a timeline at a March 1 meeting.

After Hur released his report on the inquiry into Biden’s handling of classified documents, Trump posted angrily online, deeming the decision “selective prosecution.”
thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4460164-trump-argues-should-not-be-charged-classified-docs-case-biden-is-not/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top