Far left communist indicts Trump.

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, West said:

Trump is recorded as saying something totally different than what you claim. 

It's like the lunatics trying to link the javelin in Ukraine to the Biden investigation when the two were nowhere near each other in the conversation. 

Dishonesty like the vile communists used to do. I'm just disheartened by the amount of dishonest people like yourself out there who are okay with communism 

"Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. Gimme a break"

 

[West]

Just now, Boges said:

"Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. Gimme a break"

 

?.. 

Well he believes he won by more had you followed the conversation instead of being a dishonest communist

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Boges said:

So you're quibbling with the order in which the lies were presented? Nice. 

Things are normally arranged in "order of importance".

The fact that this one item (which on its face may have something to it) is at the bottom of a page full of known lies, is highly suspicious. The fact that they provide scant details of it is even more suspicious.

Your leftard sources do nothing but lie, either straight up or by omission, all the time. That item is on a page filled with lies.

If I was you I'd present information which might be correct on its own, unaccompanied by easily verifiable lies. 

[Boges]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

Things are normally arranged in "order of importance".

Or in order of appearance when they're breaking something down. 

3 minutes ago, West said:

?.. 

Well he believes he won by more had you followed the conversation instead of being a dishonest communist

And over 60 court cases told him he didn't. 

He's trying to influence an elected official to change the result of an election based on debunked conspiracies. 

[West]

9 minutes ago, Boges said:

Or in order of appearance when they're breaking something down. 

And over 60 court cases told him he didn't. 

He's trying to influence an elected official to change the result of an election based on debunked conspiracies. 

Another lie. Trump didn't bring 60 cases and 99% of the ones that were brought were thrown out due to "standing" not lack of evidenced

[Boges]

Just now, West said:

Another lie. Trump didn't bring 60 cases and 99% of the ones that were brought were thrown out due to "standing" not lack of evidenced

Yeah his co-conspirators did. The ones telling him how to try and overturn the election. 

Can you cite that 99% figure? Or is that more mouth-frothing hyperbole? 

SEALIONING!!!! 

[WestCanMan]

7 minutes ago, Boges said:

Or in order of appearance when they're breaking something down. 

What's the point of regurgitating a lie? Or a bunch of lies, just for the sake of chronological order? Who would do that?

The fact is that there are a bunch of easily discernible lies there and it's weird to even include those. It does the exact opposite of making their point. It just discredits them and makes you look like an ass for citing them. 

If I was writing about that call, I would choose to avoid lying about it and dial down firmly on the dirty truth if it was there somewhere, wouldn't you? (It was a rhetorical question, you definitely shouldn't answer that)

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

What's the point of regurgitating a lie? Or a bunch of lies, just for the sake of chronological order? Who would do that?

The fact is that there are a bunch of easily discernible lies there and it's weird to even include those. It does the exact opposite of making their point. It just discredits them and makes you look like an ass for citing them. 

If I was writing about that call, I would choose to avoid lying about it and dial down firmly on the dirty truth if it was there somewhere, wouldn't you? (It was a rhetorical question, you definitely shouldn't answer that)

Well if you assume everything written even direct quotes are a lie, why does it matter? 

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Boges said:

Well if you assume everything written even direct quotes are a lie, why does it matter? 

I never said that the direct quotes weren't "accurate", what I'm saying is "they're not examples of him lying". 

Your tard sources are saying things like "Trump lied about _______ ________ _______" when all he did was ask if that thing was true. Do you understand the difference between lying and asking if something is true because you legitimately believe that it is not?

FYI this isn't just semantics here, because calling someone a liar (which I absolutely do maintain about you) is very serious and it shouldn't be done without proof. 

Just because leftards instantly accepted the FBI's statement about something, or the Dems' statement about it, doesn't mean that Trump should also wholeheartedly accept those statements as established fact. Get it?

He has every reason to question whether or not any statements coming from the FBI are true. He'd be as stupid as a God-damned leftist if he didn't.

[West]

35 minutes ago, Boges said:

Yeah his co-conspirators did. The ones telling him how to try and overturn the election. 

Can you cite that 99% figure? Or is that more mouth-frothing hyperbole? 

SEALIONING!!!! 

Common sense/common knowledge doesn't need a cite. 

[WestCanMan]

49 minutes ago, West said:

Common sense/common knowledge doesn't need a cite. 

Leftards got a big jolt of excitement from this indictment but they're quickly realizing that what's recorded as established facts in the indictment is just a bunch of ill-formed opinions. 

Their quotes sound like: "Twump wied becawz he sed he di-int beweeve sum fings that we beweeved az sewn az we hewd them! Eveweebudy haz to beweeve wut we beweeve!!!!! They haf 2!!!! Ow ewse they'we a wacist and a buwwy! Thay need to go to jaow! ?"

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Deluge said:

Of course, dipshits like robosmith think evidence is a woketard's opinion, so naturally Trump is guilty on all past, present and future charges.

Evidence is evidence and there is NONE in this thread to prove that a "far left communist" was behind the indictment of Trump. Duh

Only an lDIOT believes that a "far left communist" works for the DoJ.
 

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, Boges said:

Well if you assume everything written even direct quotes are a lie, why does it matter? 

Why argue about lies with WCM when he doesn't even know what they are?

He will twist anything like a pretzel when the meaning is OBVIOUS.

Hundreds of raindrops were a "drizzle" which is NOT rain according to WCM. LMAO

[OftenWrong]

10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. I am talking high-level here and it seems that the only way going forward with addressing what you say is to delve into examples.  But I'm not interested in talking about the specifics for the 10 millionth time on here so I guess we're at an impasse.  

3. I think it will impact his election chances on some level, you don't appear to.

I know. I was only explaining to others.

3. I personally don't think he'll be back as president. But then, I didn't think he was ever gonna BE the president in the first place either. After that the whole country got discombobulated by the shocked left reaction. Whose echoes we still are hearing today. This is the sound of fear, great fear. The kind that got Napoleon banished to a faraway island. And Trump is already in exile in a way.

But whether he becomes the next president or not, will his political brand still continue? As you see it does resonate with 47% of the popular vote. In other words Trumpism is a thing and may continue.

Irregardless

[OftenWrong]

13 hours ago, Boges said:

Great and independents and Swing voters will see the only Defense Trump has is that lying about the result of an election to a large angry mob you assembled is protected under Free Speech. 

In my opinion the liberal war-mongers want the Ukraine war to continue, so they will go with Biden.

Trump said he would put a stop to the war.

End of story.

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

In my opinion the liberal war-mongers want the Ukraine war to continue, so they will go with Biden.

No one wants the war to "continue," but it's important that Putin NOT be rewarded for his illegal invasion.

3 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Trump said he would put a stop to the war.

End of story.

Yes, Trump would have Ukraine surrender to his buddy Putin. ?

[Hodad]

On 8/2/2023 at 9:23 AM, West said:

 

If that's not what communists do I don't know what is

Yeah, it's pretty well established that, indeed, you don't know what communists do.

A coup is not trivial or frivolous. He tried to end the republic. That was a bridge too far for even his otherwise lapdog VP. 

There isn't even a question that he tried to illegally seize power, and you can't even bring yourself to acknowledge the fact, let alone condemn it. 

I can't imagine what it must be like till be so worshipfully devoted to a politician. Gross.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Hodad

[Boges]

10 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

In my opinion the liberal war-mongers want the Ukraine war to continue, so they will go with Biden.

Trump said he would put a stop to the war.

End of story.

Because he's bought and sold by Putin. 

[OftenWrong]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

Because he's bought and sold by Putin. 

Esoteric, even if true.

In other words so what then, even if true. Which it likely ain't.

For example, Russian dominance or Chinese dominance... hmm

Those young Russian women are really cute...  

[Nationalist]

On 8/2/2023 at 12:21 AM, Aristides said:

Four years in power and Trump couldn't even get an indictment against Hillary let alone "Lock Her UP". What a loser.

Hmmm...so you want to see revenge? Good.

[Deluge]

15 hours ago, robosmith said:

Evidence is evidence and there is NONE in this thread to prove that a "far left communist" was behind the indictment of Trump. Duh

Only an lDIOT believes that a "far left communist" works for the DoJ.
 

There is no such thing as evidence in your world.

There IS such a thing as manufactured evidence, however, and you sociopaths are all over that shit.

Edited August 3, 2023 by Deluge

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Hmmm...so you want to see revenge? Good.

Nope, just that Trump was and is, full of shit. The difference is much of Trump's shit is criminal and you will accept any of it.

[Aristides]

It's amazing how many people are legitimizing any future candidate trying to overturn an election by any means possible.

If Trump can do it, anyone can.

[impartialobserver]

Modern politics has this unique dynamic.. If you are on the right.. then everybody who does not fall in line with 100% is not only a leftist but they are far left, radical, communist, pedophile.. If you on the left, then again anyone who is not in line with you is not only conservative but far right, radical, in favor of theocracy or autocracy, etc. A bit unrealistic to say the least but hence why certain folks come here...

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

There is no such thing as evidence in your world.

Yes there is. SWORN TESTIMONY (which I cited FOR YOU) is ACCEPTED as EVIDENCE IN COURT.

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

There IS such a thing as manufactured evidence, however, and you sociopaths are all over that shit.

The sworn testimony I cited is 90% from Republicans that worked in Trump's WH.

And those who turned on Trump are NOT the "sociopaths." That would be those who still defend him like YOU.

Edited August 3, 2023 by robosmith