Far left communist indicts Trump.

[West]

29 minutes ago, Boges said:

Cite. Is he a member of the Communist party? Or is this just mouth-frothing hyperbole? 

His actions are the same as castro and stalin

[Boges]

Just now, West said:

His actions are the same as castro and stalin

Really? Where are the Gulags? 

[West]

13 minutes ago, Boges said:

Really? Where are the Gulags? 

He's locking up a leading candidate for a major political party over frivolous nonsense. 

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

[Boges]

1 minute ago, West said:

He's locking up a leading candidate for a major political party over frivolous nonsense. 

 

Is orchestrating the January 6th riots frivolous? Is evidence that he was pressuring people to fraudulently overturn the election frivolous.

I know it's not having stuff on a Private e-mail server, but you know. 

And if it is frivolous, that's why we have fair trials. . . unlike in communist countries. 

Quote

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

I'll help. 

Quote

 

com·mu·nism

noun

a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

 

 

[Aristides]

8 hours ago, West said:

No the lunatic who brought these charges is a far left communist. 

You can indict a ham sandwich at a grand jury

If it was that easy it wouldn't take months to compile the evidence needed to ask for an indictment. But don't worry, regular juries will decide wether to convict.

Edited August 2, 2023 by Aristides

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

1. Justice may only be applied in context of your partisanship. Your justice is not my justice.

2. Justice does not occur in a bubble. What I mean is, in one place, in what suits you politically. You celebrate finding the spec in my eye, while ignoring the log in yours. That is seen as injustice, and it simply increases the divide.

1. Everybody over the age of 12 should be familiar with such things.  What exactly is the implication in the real world, not the world where partisanship is non-existent ?  There is none.  

There is a social contract including a justice system and so it will be invoked.   You may believe that the Trump charges are meant to influence an election and nothing else, and well that is an interesting idea.

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.  

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

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, West said:

He's locking up a leading candidate for a major political party over frivolous nonsense. 

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

Not just frivolous nonsense: there are also a bunch of lies. 

[Boges]

27 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Not just frivolous nonsense: there are also a bunch of lies. 

A lot of it is on tape. 

[robosmith]

26 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Not just frivolous nonsense: there are also a bunch of lies. 

You've PROVEN you are UNABLE to identify lies, by continuing to CLAIM that Trump doesn't lie.

[WestCanMan]

38 minutes ago, Boges said:

A lot of it is on tape. 

1) There are a bunch of lies, like I said. 

2) Do you have a cite?

[Boges]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1) There are a bunch of lies, like I said. 

2) Do you have a cite?

 

[Rebound]

11 hours ago, West said:

No the lunatic who brought these charges is a far left communist. 

You can indict a ham sandwich at a grand jury

I don’t understand what you’re saying. Jack Smith charged Trump with 34 felonies for trial before a judge who Donald Trump appointed for life. If that judge doesn’t dismiss the charges, how can you say they’re unfair?  She obviously lives Trump and owes him a debt of gratitude. Since she hasn’t dismissed the case, then surely it’s legitimate, don’t you agree? 

[WestCanMan]

9 minutes ago, Boges said:

 

So he berated someone. Am I supposed to care?

Does that show him lying? Trying to incite a riot? Or does it show him believing the things he said? (ie, not lying)

[myata]

So by indicting the Idol one becomes a "far left communist"? The facts, the law, democratic institutions, the process and traditions that worked for centuries, Constitution itself does not matter for a simple reason that they contradict the word of the Idol.  This is a correct, factual illustration how these folks think, that we should see and understand for what it is. It has no relation to the democracy, it is the opposite of it. They use democracy to come into power - and then shut down all debate. On the first try the Clown did not succeed in undermining the democracy. If elected, no doubt he will redouble and multiply his efforts. Where it would lead and leave the country, impossible to tell.

Loud, authoritarian or totalitarian core, opposite and loathing democracy;

Easily influenced fraction of the population, especially in uneasy transition times;

A charismatic populist loudmouth;

This explosive mix works time after time after times. And the only way to stop it is to expose it for what it is and take a principled, personal stance, regardless of partisan interests and affiliations. This is the only way a democracy can work; and beyond it, only the dark past. No surprises.

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

So he berated someone. Am I supposed to care?

Does that show him lying? Trying to incite a riot? Or does it show him believing the things he said? (ie, not lying)

He told him to find 11,000 votes to let him win. 

This will likely result in yet another State indictment in Georgia. 

[WestCanMan]

1 minute ago, Boges said:

He told him to find 11,000 votes to let him win. 

This will likely result in yet another State indictment in Georgia. 

He quoted some data and the other guy said that he was wrong, then the video was edited at that point. FYI that's not a case of Trump lying, fool. 

There are other cases where Trump asked questions, which again, is not evidence of a crime.

I watched the video to the 1:47 mark and I didn't hear anything that proves Trump was lying or trying to get that guy to do something illegitimate. 

Is there a part of the video where Trump says something that he shouldn't have?

[Deluge]

19 hours ago, robosmith said:

FOS without evidence as usual

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

[Boges]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

He quoted some data and the other guy said that he was wrong, then the video was edited at that point. FYI that's not a case of Trump lying, fool. 

There are other cases where Trump asked questions, which again, is not evidence of a crime.

I watched the video to the 1:47 mark and I didn't hear anything that proves Trump was lying or trying to get that guy to do something illegitimate. 

Is there a part of the video where Trump says something that he shouldn't have?

Telling him to find 11,000 votes. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/21/1106472863/georgia-officials-fact-check-infamous-trump-phone-call-in-real-time

Quote

 

Here are some of the highlights from their exchange:

Trump raised the thoroughly debunked allegation that ballots were being transported in suitcases and that based on video footage they contained a minimum of 18,000 ballots all for Joe Biden.

Raffensperger confirmed that the U.S. Justice Department and the attorney general, as well as the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and his own office, had all found those claims to be false.

 

Quote

 

Trump claimed that roughly 5,000 dead people in Georgia voted.

The Trump administration claimed in its lawsuits that more than 10,000 dead people voted in Georgia, Raffensperger said — adding that neither of those numbers are accurate.

At the time that Raffensperger wrote his letter to Congress on Jan. 6, the state had found evidence of just two dead people having voted. They subsequently found two more.

 

Quote

 

Trump asked Raffensperger to "find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won this state."

"What I knew is that we didn't have any votes to find," Raffensperger said. "That was an accurate count that had been certified."

 

 

[West]

4 hours ago, Boges said:

Is orchestrating the January 6th riots frivolous? Is evidence that he was pressuring people to fraudulently overturn the election frivolous.

I know it's not having stuff on a Private e-mail server, but you know. 

And if it is frivolous, that's why we have fair trials. . . unlike in communist countries. 

I'll help. 

 

?.. 

Trump said to protest peacefully.. 

Frivolous and we all know big waste of money.. this far left communist is interfering in an election 

29 minutes ago, Boges said:

Telling him to find 11,000 votes. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/21/1106472863/georgia-officials-fact-check-infamous-trump-phone-call-in-real-time

 

This is what we refer to as "fake news". Communist scum do that

[WestCanMan]

38 minutes ago, Boges said:

Telling him to find 11,000 votes. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/21/1106472863/georgia-officials-fact-check-infamous-trump-phone-call-in-real-time

In a 67-minute phone call, which your own sources blatantly lied about several times (by pretending that Trump lied when he was merely asking questions about things which he believed to be true), there's one quick snippet in there which is lacking proper context.  

If they felt like that this one thing was so important, why is it below all of the other lies? Why wouldn't it be at the top of the page, in full detail? 

You're just getting sucked in again. It's all you do.

[Boges]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

In a 67-minute phone call, which your own sources blatantly lied about several times (by pretending that Trump lied when he was merely asking questions about things which he believed to be true), there's one quick snippet in there which is lacking proper context.  

If they felt like that this one thing was so important, why is it below all of the other lies? Why wouldn't it be at the top of the page, in full detail? 

You're just getting sucked in again. It's all you do.

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

[Boges]

22 minutes ago, West said:

 This is what we refer to as "fake news". Communist scum do that

Trump is recorded saying it. This would have been the biggest news the week of January 6th had Trump not incited a riot by claiming that Pence could do something illegal and falsely claiming the election was stolen from him. 

[West]

Just now, Boges said:

Trump is recorded saying it. This would have been the biggest news the week of January 6th had Trump not incited a riot by claiming that Pence could do something illegal and falsely claiming the election was stolen from him. 

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 

[WestCanMan]

Credulous leftards see this as all cut and dried. Their position is basically: "CNN debunked all of that stuff so Trump knew that he was lying when he talked about it" and that is just leftist stupidity.

CNN, the Dems and the FBI have made a lot of claims about Trump and the 2016 and 2020 elections which actually were known to be 100% false at the time that they made them. Why should anyone believe those guys when they say that something was debunked? That would be utterly ridiculous. Even a FISA court judge would say "Go fish".

For example: the FBI told MSM and social media giants that "Russian disinformation might be coming out about a Hunter laptop" when they knew that was a lie, because they had that very laptop in their possession for 11 months. Then 50 former intel officials signed a letter saying that it was Russian disinformation as well, but if they really had any information to divulge then they knew that they were lying as well. Either that or they were parroting the FBI's lie. In any event, lying and committing crimes to influence elections is what the FBI is known for now. Saying that you believe anything that they say is just incontrovertible proof that you're a credulous dolt.

With all of this as a backdrop, why should Trump believe that anything was "thoroughly debunked"? We all know very well that the people who said "thoroughly debunked" have been "thoroughly discredited", or even proven to be criminals (in the case of the FBI). 

[West]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Credulous leftards see this as all cut and dried. Their position is basically: "CNN debunked all of that stuff so Trump knew that he was lying when he talked about it" and that is just leftist stupidity.

CNN, the Dems and the FBI have made a lot of claims about Trump and the 2016 and 2020 elections which actually were known to be 100% false at the time that they made them. Why should anyone believe those guys when they say that something was debunked? That would be utterly ridiculous. Even a FISA court judge would say "Go fish".

For example: the FBI told MSM and social media giants that "Russian disinformation might be coming out about a Hunter laptop" when they knew that was a lie, because they had that very laptop in their possession for 11 months. Then 50 former intel officials signed a letter saying that it was Russian disinformation as well, but if they really had any information to divulge then they knew that they were lying as well. Either that or they were parroting the FBI's lie. In any event, lying and committing crimes to influence elections is what the FBI is known for now. Saying that you believe anything that they say is just incontrovertible proof that you're a credulous dolt.

With all of this as a backdrop, why should Trump believe that anything was "thoroughly debunked"? We all know very well that the people who said "thoroughly debunked" have been "thoroughly discredited", or even proven to be criminals (in the case of the FBI). 

They are just trying to get ahead of the real stories. Keep your eyes on what the perverts on the Democrats side are all about