'22'
Since a 4x4 is a vehicle with four wheels all powered, a 2 + 2 would be two wheels, PLUS another power unit that could attach or not. One man with two feet pushing a dead motorcycle. ALSO it implies - People, kangaroos and Tyrannosaurus Rex.  I like this because now 2 bitcoins + 2 bitcoins equals 22 bitcoins. This is double proved using the language of an extinct tribe which had words for "1, 2, 3 and many." 2 + 2 is MANY.  |
|
|
|
'22'
Since a 4x4 is a vehicle with four wheels all powered, a 2 + 2 would be two wheels, PLUS another power unit that could attach or not. One man with two feet pushing a dead motorcycle. ALSO it implies - People, kangaroos and Tyrannosaurus Rex. |
|
|
|
Right up there with your global cooling, and Michael Flynn is innocent arguments.  |
|
|
|
it is actually irresponsible for any sane president to leave the whitehouse to the irrespeonsible and corrupt democrats and their puppet biden.
announcing a military dictatorship is the smaller ill than continueing democracy with america's crazy left
If Republicans keep the Senate, which looks likely, the Democrats will be forced to compromise and moderate how they govern. A military coup would probably not last long because so many institutions are already against Trump. I wonder if any of our allies would help if our democracy was being seized by an authoritarian. Probably not. Our military is sufficiently strong enough so that our military would win in a conflict. Most of the time that countries are seized by dictators, they will first be legitimately elected, and subsequently, make radical changes to the court system, such as packing the equivalent of the Supreme Court (cough cough). Once the courts are on the dictator's side, any other changes made are rubber-stamped by the courts and the Dictator can do as they choose. If you didn't use GOP talking point and language, I'd be sure you were talking about Trump. - Legitimately elected - Brags about how many judges he's had appointed and vocalized how he thought other judges weren't legitimate. - All but explicitly said he wanted to get the last SCOTUS seat filled because he might need the vote to win the next election. |
|
|
|
But let's take a step back, the entire Russia bullshit was started on the Steele Dossier which essentially was Russian disinformation that had no basis of being true. But apparently, that's all it takes to get a FISA warrant sign off at the Obama DoJ.
That IG report determined that the investigation was not started because of the Steele Dossier. It was Papadapolous bragging to an Australian intelligence agent that the Trump campaign knew that Russia had dirt on Clinton and would be using it (Trump campaign should have went to the FBI themselves at that point). In fact, when they became aware of the Steele dossier, the investigation was already under way, and Comey went personally to Trump Tower to tell Trump about it's existence. Also, Carter Page was already under FBI investigation (like Paul Manafort) before the Trump campaign even existed. We knew of Russian interference since 2016. It did not take a special prosecutor to uncover it.
Mueller uncovered exactly who did it and how - from the fake identities used to buy servers to the bitcoin transactions used to pay for them to the relationship between wikileaks and Russia. The details Mueller was able to figure out are impressive, all while being obstructed at every turn by the President of the United States. And that's only based on what's public. The President of a Country obstructing an investigation into a foreign adversary interfering in the election that he had just won. Think about that for a second. |
|
|
|
Only evidence that they Mueller went after Trump directly with though was in regards to interference though, right? All of this sounds so long ago but it really wasn't, which is an insane thing for all of us to think about. Yes some Trump people were indicted, but there was no ability of the Mueller investigation to prove direct links to Trump in terms of his knowledge or direct approval of what was going on, right? Let me know if I'm misremembering or something here, not trying to change the story or anything, just curious.
That's the thing, it wasn't a 'trump investigation' that's just what Trump made it seem like. It was an investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, which included ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. There was interference, and there were ties between the campaign and Russia. It was not a witch hunt. In the end, he did lay out several clear instances of obstruction that Trump would've likely been already charged with if he were not the sitting president - and left the door open for a few other charges. "it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available" -Mueller Although he'll probably have a few 'get out of federal prison free' cards, I suspect Muellers findings will haunt Trump long after he leaves office. |
|
|
|
(A) You're part and parcel of the nation that tortured Turing.
(B) By post modern historical revisionism you share that guilt
(C) Fuck you.
(D) Now STFU, go into the corner and meditate over your guilt.
....ad hominem deleted...
So you won't share the guilt of how England handled Turing, but you want to lecture others? >>>Incomprehensible word salad deleted >>> usually you seem to be one of the few that can hold a good worthy debate..... I've determined that when you are upset, you rant without making sense. Or is it if you don't have your pills? No matter. At this point it's firmly established that you do want to sternly lecture others on THEIR white guilt, but you don't want to acknowledge YOURS. ^ad hominem attack |
|
|
|
it is actually irresponsible for any sane president to leave the whitehouse to the irrespeonsible and corrupt democrats and their puppet biden.
announcing a military dictatorship is the smaller ill than continueing democracy with america's crazy left
If Republicans keep the Senate, which looks likely, the Democrats will be forced to compromise and moderate how they govern. A military coup would probably not last long because so many institutions are already against Trump. I wonder if any of our allies would help if our democracy was being seized by an authoritarian. |
|
|
|
I would refer you to the talk about "Russia" if you are concerned about disinformation and the integrity of the election.
The Russia investigation, which did not take place during the transition period, had strong evidence (it wasn't a witch hunt), interference was proven (yes actually proven), people were indicted (no not just for process crimes) and resulted in tons of valuable information that is being used to protect future elections (including this one). If his claims had merit it would be different, but Trump has presented no evidence that he won and he's encouraging the spread of misinformation that only serves to undermine the integrity of the election and country. We can let the courts decide if a particular lawsuit is "frivolous" or not. Everyone has the right to a vigorous legal team fighting for their rights in court. Putting pressure on law firms because of who they represent is indefensible.
Law firms can also decide if a case is worth it or not. Here's what a federal judge said about a case yesterday in PA: “This Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence, In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more.” It wouldn't make sense for any reputable law firm to present a case like this in federal court, there would be immediate damage to their reputation and possibly legitimacy. |
|
|
|
 I think that's as close to a concession as we're going to get. Honestly I'm impressed. When I heard she signed it I thought for sure the next story would be about Trump firing her and trying to undo her approval. |
|
|
|
Some disbarments are more likely than this getting past SC, You are obviously not a lawyer. You have no idea what the standards for disbarment are. Please stop opining from total ignorance—or else hit up West/Lexis, and show some case law applicable to any circumstance even remotely similar. Every state has mountains of published opinions about its rules of professional conduct for attorneys. Have fun with that. Assuming 'some disbarments' means some lawyers involved in Trumps election lawsuits getting disbarred in the near future and 'getting past SC' means the Trump campaign receiving a favorable SCOTUS ruling, while both are unlikely, I think a favorable SCOTUS ruling is clearly less likely, mostly because of Rudy. I know it's rare that disbarments happen, but this is a pretty unique situation. Check out why Nixon, his VP and about a dozen other lawyers were disbarred (or worse) after Nixon left office. |
|
|
|
Actually law firms have decided to not represent the Trump campaign because of public pressure against these law firms and their other clients. The pressure campaign to get law firms to drop the Trump Campaign as a client should be condemned in the strongest way possible. Everyone has a right to legal representation. Representing a client is not an endorsement of their alleged actions or viewpoints. Representing a client is a means to ensure their rights are not violated and that the law is properly enforced. You'd be right if we were talking about a criminal case. Even the worst murderers deserve a vigorous defense, but these are frivolous lawsuits that the Trump campaign is using as a vehicle to raise money, spread disinformation and undermine the integrity of the election. |
|
|
|
The lower court rulings are not going to matter. You should expect at least one PA case to make it to the SCOTUS. Trump is challenging the election results in court. Expect there to be multiple lawsuits and SC rulings. The lower court rulings are a pretty good indicator of whether or not there's a valid legal argument being made. In most cases, it doesn't appear there is - the arguments are basically nonsense. I doubt SCOTUS even bothers with most of the ones that haven't been dropped and the lower court rulings will stand. The lower court rulings have nothing to do with how higher courts will rule. Case in point, how many lower (and appellate) courts ruled against Trump regarding his travel ban? How many times has the SC struck down lower courts who have ruled against Trump in the last 4 years? If one judge thinks a case is bonkers its a pretty good indicator that another judge will think the case is bonkers. |
|
|
|
The lower court rulings are not going to matter. You should expect at least one PA case to make it to the SCOTUS. Trump is challenging the election results in court. Expect there to be multiple lawsuits and SC rulings. The lower court rulings are a pretty good indicator of whether or not there's a valid legal argument being made. In most cases, it doesn't appear there is - the arguments are basically nonsense. I doubt SCOTUS even bothers with most of the ones that haven't been dropped and the lower court rulings will stand. |
|
|
|
....
EG with racist republicans.. for 100years not addressing their racism.. it continued... it continued....
Well, that's a fascinating alternate history. The history of the real world is one in which American Republicans squared off against American Democrats who were the racists. But lying liars will do as lying liars want. It can be confusing since the progressive party used to call themselves Republicans and the party that resisted progressive ideas/change were called the Democrats - now it's the other way around. |
|
|
|
|
Sell it to someone that knows how to create a website and then donate the money to his campaign (I assume you can donate to campaigns in India, but I'm not sure).
|
|
|
|
2012:
Obama: 65,915,795
Romney: 60,933,504
Total: 126,849,299
2016:
Trump: 62,984,828
Hillary: 65,853,514
Total: 128,838,342
2020:
Trump: 73,698,667
Biden: 79,683,304
Total: 153,381,971
*data from Wikipedia
Try to look at the total number of votes as it has abnormal growth in 2016 -> 2020. Based on this reason alone, if Trump's score is legitimate, he won by a landslide.
It's true. If we subtract 14 million votes from Biden, and subtract zero votes for Trump, Trump won in a landslide. lol. Wait...you mean the Biden voters were supposed to only vote once? https://amgreatness.com/2020/11/20/dominion-voting-systems-lawyers-up-abruptly-backs-out-of-pa-state-house-fact-finding-hearing/Dominion Voting Systems ‘Lawyers Up,’ Abruptly Backs Out of PA State House Fact-Finding Hearing
By Debra Heine
November 20, 2020
Dominion Voting Systems Thursday night abruptly backed out of attending a fact-finding hearing that was set for Friday morning with the Pennsylvania House State Government Committee.
At a press conference Friday morning, State Govt Committee Chair Seth Grove said the 1.3. million Pennsylvanians who used Dominion’s voting machines have been “hung out to dry and slapped in their faces.”
Pennsylvania lawmakers had scheduled the hearing with the voting machine manufacturer “to help identify and correct any irregularities in the election process,” according to the House Republican Caucus.If suddenly I was at the center of a qanon level crazy conspiracy and millions of delusional Trump followers were convinced I was helping Hugo Chavez make America Communist by changing millions of votes...I wouldn't be making any public appearances for a while either. No matter what I said or did or proved, if it's critical of Trump - it's bias fake news, witch hunt, etc. If it's critical of Trumps enemies, it's 100% true and oh so obvious. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
