Hodad

Lying about it won't help you at the polls. Or are you just so isolated in your infobubble that you really think most of America thinks like you. They don't. And you're on the far extreme of even people who lean conservative. As I said, all three are majority positions--and they're moving the wrong direction for you. As before, you're losing in the marketplace of ideas, so you'll continue to drift away from democracy and conservatism and toward authoritarianism where you can get your way by oppressing the will and liberty of the majority. Pew on climate change Pew on abortion Pew on gay rights

You're a very silly person. Abortion rights, concern over climate change and gay rights are ALL majority positions. Your "everyone else" the minority. And if you're honest, that's why you support authoritarianism. Because forcing your views on others is the only way you're going to get what you want. You're losing handily in the marketplace of ideas and can't have your way in a democratic society. David Frum was, unfortunately, prescient: "Conservatives will always be with us. If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. The will reject democracy."

Yeah, even the garbage wingnut site took it down after it was debunked, but no amount of explaining seems to be able to get through to conservative posters here. Rather than admit the mistake, they will double and triple down on garbage. I think they like the flavor and lack capacity for shame, let alone remorse. ?‍♂️

Let's see... An inaccurate and unsupported title. The standard disparaging nonsense about Democrats The standard disparaging nonsense about the FBI Ignorant denial of the fact that by any metric things in the US are as good or better than they were 4 years ago--and miles better than when Biden took over Trump's dumpster fire. (Granted, fire was only partially of Trump's making.) Lame, evidence-free insinuations that there was impropriety in the last election and will be more in the coming election. Lame insinuations that Biden is somehow likely to repeat Trump's coup attempt. (This one is bizarre.) Overused, out-of-context image spammed once again. WTF is the point of this warmed-over, rehashed, Gish gallop of a thread starter? Is your algorithm programmed to recycle this material every few days? Jeebus, it does check the boxes.

No, goofus, no one gets charged based on accusations. They get charged based on evidence. The prosecutor thinks they did it. The prosecutor thinks they have the evidence to convince 12 people beyond a doubt that the accused did it. And then they bring charges. That should be obvious. The evidence of Trump's crimes is overwhelming. Hence, he is charged. The evidence of Biden's alleged crimes is non-existent. Hence, he is not charged. It's always possible that that could change some day, but until then, you just seem silly complaining about a lopsided justice system when it's the circumstances that are lopsided.

That's right. Donald Trump is so goddamn special that he doesn't have to follow the law or observe the required decorum in court. Rules are for everybody else. Oh, wait, that attitude is why he's in court in the first place. You subs just love a bad boy. ?

That's a massive stretch. Trump having the documents wouldn't have been a very big deal (aside from the hypocrisy). When Biden and Pence and their reps discovered classified documents they immediately took action to remediate the situation and, as always, no consequences beyond embarrassment. Trump, in contrast, lied, denied refused to return and even tried to hide the documents from authorities. All while showing them off to random people who had no clearance, seemingly to stroke his own ego. Trump isn't in trouble for the (apparently alarmingly common) mishandling of classified documents. He's in actual trouble for everything he did afterward. Hence the false equivalency.

? I suppose we should aspire to your 16K posts of useless twaddle? Scratch that, it's probably the same post remixed 16K times. If you've stayed awake through one, you've read them all.

So what she said was accurate, you just don't like the implication? Again, I'd say if you don't like the implication, why don't you tell us about some "good" concentration camps? A man who wants to be the President of this country is literally proposing that we round people up and put them in camps--that people go door to door (or whatever) and grab these people and take them to concentration camps. Your complaint is that pundits are making this sound bad? Seems like we're way past a messaging problem, but why don't you try to put a positive spin on concentration camps. Lay out for us how this is a good, humane, legal idea? What was the last positive use of concentration camps?

Literally, your position is that your feelings are what matters, not verifiable facts. That's not a rabbit hole. There's no conversation to be had there. You keep your faith. I'll stick with the facts.

I saw that this morning. Maybe someday they'll figure out that just shouting "Both sides!" doesn't actually make it true. False equivalency is the standard operating procedure for justifying Trump's egregious boundary-busting, norm-breaking behavior.

Did someone say "Nazi death camps"? Or is that your spin? --- I don't think there is any positive history of concentration camps, but you're welcome to tell us why these concentration camps will be different.

My verifiable facts from publicly available records aren't good enough? We should throw those out and go with feelings instead? Definitely sounds like religion. If you believe it hard enough, maybe it will come true. Maybe gravity is just angels holding our feet to the Earth.

Why did you start this thread? Does Trump plane to build these giant camps, round people up and put them there? If so (and every indication is that this is his plan) then what are you complaining about?

I actually would not bet that no jury will judge him not guilty. A lot of Republican America, at this point, are much more interested in the end than the means. Anything goes-- "win" at any cost. That's why they supported Trump in the first place, and why they support him even more when he violates the social and legal order. In other words, I have zero doubt that there are a LOT of people who would happily lie to get on a jury and then vote to acquit based on loyalty rather than on the facts. We saw exactly that play out in the impeachment trials. In both cases, there was no question about Trump's behavior. There was no question of guilt. The Republicans in the Senate--with the exception of a few people of conscience-- simply voted not to hold him accountable. They want the same ends, so the means cannot be wrong. So when a Jury gets involved it's never a sure thing. He may escape some of these cases. I think he probably won't escape all of them.

? Did you actually read that article? Every paragraph mentions a lack of evidence. In other words, the Republicans are making plenty of accusations, but have provided almost nothing to support them. And it seems like every time they invite someone to testify (like Archer) it ends up completely undermining the allegation. Anything is possible, but so far they've got nothing. And yes, Trump has broken multiple laws in serious ways. The most obvious is taking, hiding, refusing to return and lying about the possession of classified documents. He knew it was wrong--boasted that he shouldn't have them while showing them to people not cleared to see them. He did it anyway. Like most of Trump's transgressions, it was willful. And yes, you can break the law by "just talking." I don't think there was any confusion on the part of the crowd. They knew exactly what Trump meant when he told them to march right now to the capital and fight like hell to "stop the steal" or they wouldn't have a country anymore. He posed to them an existential crisis, and they acted accordingly. The token use of the word "peaceful" doesn't erase the rest of what he said, and it certainly didn't fool the crowd. They did exactly what he wanted them to do. And you can be certain it was what he wanted because he sat and watched the insurrection unfold on TV and didn't lift a finger to stop it until it had mostly run its course. And he did it while those advisors closest to him told him over and over that he had to condemn and stop it. And yes, the fake elector scheme broke the law in multiple ways, and at least 3 of the fake electors have given testimony that they took part in the scheme because Trump directed them to do so. It's really sad that you support a man not for being good, or right, or just, but because he's done so much that is objectively wrong and has managed to escape accountability for those actions. I'm certain that you haven't read the indictments--particularly the federal indictments. They go to significant effort to disarm the "just talking" defense. They state specifically that it is fine for Trump to challenge elections, that it was even fine for him to lie about winning the elections, but that the enumerated actions detailed in the document constitute felony crimes. He's not being prosecuted for simply speaking, but rather for actions.

1. Let no one accuse you of taking the high road. 2. You're really just lying here. It's possible Joe lied, but there is not evidence, let alone proof. According to everyone involved, including Devon Archer, Joe never talked (or was observed to have talked) business with Hunter. And there certainly are not a record of millions of dollars going to Joe. Again, anything is possible, but you're going to need some evidence to make a plausible case, and evidence amounting to proof to justify consequences. You currently have neither. 3. Jeebus, yes there is considerable evidence--amounting to proof. The Eastman memo (aka the coup memo) was drafted and discussed at length. Many people told them it was illegal. Eastman acknowledged that it was illegal and asked for a pardon ahead of it. Then they actually tried to put it into action. People tried to deliver fake elector ballots to Mike Pence during the certification. While outside the Capitol Trump was continuing to apply enormous pressure to Mike Pence to declare him the winner--to the point that the crowd that marched to insurrection were chanting "hang Mike Pence." That's all a matter of public record at this point--and indeed, much of it conducted in public. And as Trump's cronies continue to flip we're going to hear more and more of this testimony, which goes not just to the facts already in evidence, but the state of mind, the deliberateness of what they tried to do.

In a nation of laws, that means the reaction to crime is punishment. Not throwing a fit about being held accountable and going on a revenge mission targeting anyone who would dare hold you accountable. Hunter Biden? Because Joe hasn't been tied to anything significant. He could be someday, who knows. I'm not like you cultists with your dogma of Trumpal infallibility. If Joe Biden has broken the law he should be held accountable like everyone else. And it would be wrong for him to use the powers of his office to exact vengeance on those upholding the law. One can only hope. But that's not what you actually want. You want power. You want spite. You want vengeance. You want to "win" at any cost, even unto the end of the republic. <-- This is not hyperbole. If you stop and think you'll agree. You've already supported an attempted coup that everyone involved knew was illegal. You've already supported the enactment of widespread fraud to win the next election. The constitution, at this point, is just an inconvenience.

See, if you don't rely on evidence and dispense with debate it's not about facts or truth, it's just religion. You simply have faith that your tubby orange demi-god could not possibly have lost an election--despite all data and forecasts pointing to a probable loss. Seems like you're too far gone to escape the gravity of the cult, so my advice is to pray. Pray to Trump that he might be politically reborn and will smite your "foes." Because you're sure as hell not capable of winning the argument.

Eh, you're even wrong about this.^ We can agree this definitely isn't debate. Debate sets an expectation of logical, well reasoned arguments supported by facts and evidence. This is just you doing evidence-free ranting.

You're a true kook. Of course Biden won in a fair election. Again, it's the most scrutinized election in history, recounted, audited, forensically audited and challenged in court SO MANY TIMES by you sore losers that if there had been anything untoward it would have been discovered. There's not even any reason to suspect any illegal activity at a meaningful scale. You can wish it and hope it, but it doesn't make it real. I knew a crazy person once who insisted that her house was infested with bedbugs. No evidence of bites or damage could be found. Multiple family members tried to help her. No bedbugs could be found. They brought in multiple exterminating companies and none of them could find bedbugs. Some even fumigated "just in ca$e" and still, the infestation remained as it always had, squarely in her mind. That's where you're at mentally, but instead of seeing phantom bedbugs you see phantom voter fraud. And just like her, you get pissed and lash out any time someone tries to tell you that there's no bedbugs and this is all in your head.

It is amazing how some people can't grasp even the basics of logical thought and debate. They just go around tossing out conspiracy claims and think the rest of the world should waste their time trying to prove a negative. Sigh.

Hey, look. Another Gish gallop from our resident fiction-bot. It's a rare talent to be constantly saying so much without managing to say anything that's true.

The rest of the post is pure crap, but on this point we agree. Those ideas are vile and repulsive. A 6th-grade goth might very well concoct such plans-- or perhaps a bitter failed artist. The problem is that Americans who share your views want to make that bitter lunatic the most powerful person on the planet.

Maybe you should stop using completely fictional "election cheating"--a claim which you cannot substantiate in any way--as an excuse for all sorts of lawlessness and vindictiveness. For the record, it's not okay to attack police, smash one's way through the US Capitol and hunt down terrified legislators. Regardless of whatever fantasies you've concocted.