Lock him up! Former PotUS Trump indicted

[Pontifex Maximus]

Last time I checked, I am not in court, on the prosecution or defense's side. And, apparently unlike yourself, I don't take political sides as to the legality of conduct. If someone does something illegal, they should be convicted of the crimes. If they didn't do it, they should be found innocent; easy as that. My post was about how Trump threw a tantrum because the judge wouldn't allowed him to break court procedure and read his prepared speech at an inappropriate time. Trump called the court corrupt for this, his followers agree, and, presumably, you agree with that sentiment as well. All because you guys base the legality of things on it's political outcomes.

Oh for pete's sake...He is saying that those things are unrelated to justifying Trump's conduct! He is calling you out on a whataboutism. Lawyer my ass...

And how is he doing? Pretty great. Meanwhile, you and the Trumpist Derangement Crowd are sperging out beyond belief. Trust and believe, we all normal people are laughing hysterically at your Trump Derangement Syndrome meldowns.

[irontaino]

except his power is weak and he's at odds with the majority of oligarchs. Russian problem aside, giving the likes of him power alone could weaken the existing oligarchs who don't even pretend to care about what people want but presenting themselves as the moral guide and their perspective as the sole truth, which I'd add is borderline brainwashing and fundamentally undemocratic.

He is still a powerful figure in the Republican party, as everyone is still trying to race to the bottom to get on his good side. All his bluster aside, he's been a pretty typical conservative...one of his first acts was free money for the wealthy and giant corporations. Oligarchs love him.

[The spartan]

And how is he doing? Pretty great. Meanwhile, you and the Trumpist Derangement Crowd are sperging out beyond belief. Trust and believe, we all normal people are laughing hysterically at your Trump Derangement Syndrome meldowns.

He is in multiple courts on multiple criminal charges... If you want to bring up anything I'VE said that is deranged or sperging, feel free. You sound a little sperg-y at the moment, especially if you imply MAGA are the "normal" people. Trump never won a popular vote in his life, my dude.

I understand you want your political opponents to be deranged, meme-people you've seen mentioned in your tightly knit Right-wing circles, but Trump is in actual court facing the actual US legal system. This isn't a Left-wing petition signed by overweight, multi-colored hair people with neo pronouns; this is Uncle Sam using real life legal standards.

[alhoon]

So you admit you're in favor of genocide, clubbing seals, and eradicating humanity because...Trump? You've admitted to being entirely insane by this, but if you have even a shred of good faith in you, I don't know, maybe we could have a convo?

Yeah maybe, idk, give me two examples of this behavior.

The fact you're defending Soros. Lol.

???
Read my post again. And if you still come to that ridiculous conclusion, read it again.
Considering that you able to write in English and post in a game forum, you are probably posting in bad faith if your mental gymnastics managed to turn what I posted to... what you say I am posting.
Your supposed presentation of my point completely misses the mark and it is utter rubbish.

[Pontifex Maximus]

He is in multiple courts on multiple criminal charges... If you want to bring up anything I'VE said that is deranged or sperging, feel free. You sound a little sperg-y at the moment, especially if you imply MAGA are the "normal" people. Trump never won a popular vote in his life, my dude.

I understand you want your political opponents to be deranged, meme-people you've seen mentioned in your tightly knit Right-wing circles, but Trump is in actual court facing the actual US legal system. This isn't a Left-wing petition signed by overweight, multi-colored hair people with neo pronouns; this is Uncle Sam using real life legal standards.

"We got him this time"

You have been trying, and failing, at this for almost a decade. When will you wake up?

It's almost laughable you still have any loyalty to your crusaders. Even if your political overlords truly believe and advocate for that which you have defined yourself of: it's been years and they can't deliver. For those of us who have actually been paying attention. the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA conspiracy theory disintegrated with little protest. It's just like...really? You really believe these absurd anti-Don conspiracy theories?

[The spartan]

"We got him this time"

You have been trying, and failing, at this for almost a decade. When will you wake up?

Wtf are you talking about? This is like projection, wrapped in an assumption, and drowned in partisanship. No one should "get him". Certain American institutions, like the courts, aren't supposed to be political sides trying to "get" each other. Trump should be treated justly under the law, do you really not agree with that? Do you really think he is above the law because he is on "your side"?

[alhoon]

Colorado ruled that Trump cannot be on the ballot following his attempts to overturn and delegitimize the election!

Ramaswamy the sycophant, the guy that clearly runs as Trump's sidekick for a position in the Trump White House, pulled out of the primaries in Colorado until Trump, the guy that is about 50% ahead of Ramaswamy in the polls, is re-instated.

[Lord Thesaurian]

It’s worth recalling Trump was acquitted on the charge of inciting insurrection by the Senate, neither has he been convicted of any current federal election-related charges to date. Judicial activists in Colorado are simply taking the next logical step in systematic efforts to ensure Trump is never again in a position to threaten the political establishment.

The state court (appointed in its entirety by Democrats) not only took it upon itself to reinterpret the constitution, but overturned a lower court ruling to do so. As usual these days, SCOTUS is the last line of defense. If the Colorado ruling is allowed to stand, dominant political factions will be able to disqualify rival candidates at will based on the mere accusation of corruption, conditions which naturally favor the liberal establishment. Once again, Democrats have exposed why they are so determined to abolish the nation’s highest court.

[irontaino]

It’s worth recalling Trump was acquitted on the charge of inciting insurrection by the Senate

Let's not pretend the Senate wasn't completely compromised. What would happen in any normal case were the defense to be seen openly conspiring with the jury to not even look at the evidence before reaching a not guilty verdict?

The state court (appointed in its entirety by Democrats) not only took it upon itself to reinterpret the constitution, but overturned a lower court ruling to do so. As usual these days, SCOTUS is the last line of defense. If the Colorado ruling is allowed to stand, dominant political factions will be able to disqualify rival candidates at will based on the mere accusation of corruption, conditions which naturally favor the liberal establishment. Once again, Democrats have exposed why they are so determined to abolish the nation’s highest court.

Funny thing is, this case was filed by six Republicans, and the court cited Gorsuch in their decision. With that said...he hasn't been convicted of anything, the Colorado Supreme Court absolutely jumped the gun here.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Let's not pretend the Senate wasn't completely compromised. What would happen in any normal case were the defense to be seen openly conspiring with the jury to not even look at the evidence before reaching a not guilty verdict?

Both impeachment efforts were completely compromised, partisan efforts. What would happen in any normal case where the prosecution was already busted using fabricated evidence hand crafted by the defendants’ political rivals determined to reach a guilty verdict on similar charges of conspiracy and treason?

Funny thing is, this case was filed by six Republicans, and the court cited Gorsuch in their decision.

The case was filed by the left wing equivalent of Judicial Watch against Trump, the Colorado Secretary of State, and the Colorado equivalent of the RNC. It doesn’t surprise me they found a couple Republican former state officials and their friends/spouses to act as plaintiffs, nor does it seem particularly relevant.

As for citing Gorsuch, Hassan was not born in the US, and the question of excluding him from the ballot on that basis is categorically different from the one being applied to Trump’s disqualification. If/when SCOTUS picks this up, Gorsuch will be in the unique position to decide whether or not Colorado Democrats have taken his reasoning out of context.

[irontaino]

Both impeachment efforts were completely compromised, partisan efforts. What would happen in any normal case where the prosecution was already busted using fabricated evidence hand crafted by the defendants’ political rivals determined to reach a guilty verdict on similar charges of conspiracy and treason?

Pretty sure trying to bribe a foreign head of state to get dirt on a political rival, attempting election fraud, and inciting a riot (both in attempts to overturn the election that he lost) are all impeachable offenses. The GOP has become a race to the bottom to see who can be the biggest Trump sycophant.

The case was filed by the left wing equivalent of Judicial Watch against Trump, the Colorado Secretary of State, and the Colorado equivalent of the RNC. It doesn’t surprise me they found a couple Republican former state officials and their friends/spouses to act as plaintiffs, nor does it seem particularly relevant.

Empty statement is empty.

As for citing Gorsuch, Hassan was not born in the US, and the question of excluding him from the ballot on that basis is categorically different from the one being applied to Trump’s disqualification. If/when SCOTUS picks this up, Gorsuch will be in the unique position to decide whether or not Colorado Democrats have taken his reasoning out of context.

He'll likely turn into a snivelling hypocrite. "State's rights...no not like that!"

[Lord Thesaurian]

Pretty sure trying to bribe a foreign head of state to get dirt on a political rival, attempting election fraud, and inciting a riot (both in attempts to overturn the election that he lost) are all impeachable offenses. The GOP has become a race to the bottom to see who can be the biggest Trump sycophant.

You’re citing accusations that, in addition to being unproven, look sillier as time goes on. If these can be used to disqualify someone from office, Biden himself would be ineligible.

Empty statement is empty.

You brought it up, so you’re criticizing your own statements here.

He'll likely turn into a snivelling hypocrite. "State's rights...no not like that!"

Who knows. It would be an unnecessary position to take, given Colorado is applying a case about someone who was objectively not born in the US to someone who is accused of plotting an insurrection, for which the FBI has determined there is no evidence.

The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exc...es-2021-08-20/

Yet Democrats continue to insist Trump did a coup, just like they still insist he colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary. At this point, SCOTUS is the last line of defense against the latest Blue Anon conspiracy theory.

[irontaino]

You’re citing accusations that, in addition to being unproven, look sillier as time goes on. If these can be used to disqualify someone from office, Biden himself would be ineligible.

1. Logical fallacies 101: whataboutism

2. If you have evidence that Biden committed a crime, you should probably give it to the authorities. I'm sure the Republicans would love to see what you have.

[Quote]You brought it up, so you’re criticizing your own statements here.[\quote]

Aaaand reading comprehension fail.

Who knows. It would be an unnecessary position to take, given Colorado is applying a case about someone who was objectively not born in the US to someone who is accused of plotting an insurrection, for which the FBI has determined there is no evidence.

Yet Democrats continue to insist Trump did a coup, just like they still insist he colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary. At this point, SCOTUS is the last line of defense against the latest Blue Anon conspiracy theory.

Ah yes, the Supreme Court who's members have largely been bribed out by billionaires. They'll surely look out for their billionaire buddy.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Logical fallacies 101: whataboutism

2. If you have evidence that Biden committed a crime, you should probably give it to the authorities. I'm sure the Republicans would love to see what you have.

Whataboutism involves deflecting accusations with different accusations. It wouldn’t automatically apply to the acknowledgment that your criteria for disqualifying someone from political office, the existence of scandalous accusations under federal investigation, also apply to the only other relevant candidate in the race.

Ah yes, the Supreme Court who's members have largely been bribed out by billionaires. They'll surely look out for their billionaire buddy.

More politically motivated accusations.

[irontaino]

Whataboutism involves deflecting accusations with different accusations

Except that's exactly what you're doing

More politically motivated accusations.

So are you denying that Justices were receiving gifts from billionaires and not disclosing them?

[Lord Thesaurian]

Except that's exactly what you're doing.

It isn’t, for reasons I already explained. You began this discussion with what you call whataboutism you’re now using as a reason to avoid that same discussion.

So are you denying that Justices were receiving gifts from billionaires and not disclosing them?

I’m denying you know enough about any of the over 1,300 vacations/trips gifted to SCOTUS Justices since 2004 by private donors or the exceptions to the Court’s disclosure policy to make any of your accusations around bribery or bias relevant to this conversation.

[irontaino]

It isn’t, for reasons I already explained. You began this discussion with what you call whataboutism you’re now using as a reason to avoid that same discussion.

Not seeing what "but Biden" has to do with a compromised jury of sycophants aquitting their leader.

I’m denying you know enough about any of the over 1,300 vacations/trips gifted to SCOTUS Justices since 2004 by private donors or the exceptions to the Court’s disclosure policy to make any of your accusations around bribery or bias relevant to this conversation.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

[Lord Thesaurian]

Not seeing what "but Biden" has to do with a compromised jury of sycophants aquitting their leader.

I’m not sure what the presumed difference between a “compromised” Senate trial and a House impeachment led by Trump’s political opponents who made up nonsense about Russian collusion has to do with your suggestion that unproven accusations under federal investigation justify a political ban. Should I write off the “what about impeachment” as whataboutism?

[irontaino]

I’m not sure what the presumed difference between a “compromised” Senate trial and a House impeachment led by Trump’s political opponents who made up nonsense about Russian collusion has to do with your suggestion that unproven accusations under federal investigation justify a political ban. Should I write off the “what about impeachment” as whataboutism?

Pretty sure trying to bribe a foreign head of state to get dirt on a political rival, attempting election fraud, and inciting a riot (both in attempts to overturn the election that he lost) are all impeachable offenses.

[Lord Thesaurian]

As I said the first time you deflected to impeachment, the only relevance the Democrats’ accusations have to Trump’s disqualification from the ballot in Colorado is that Trump was never convicted. I couldn’t care less why you think being charged with crimes proves his guilt but being acquitted doesn’t count.