Trump's Post Election Fallout: Legal & Obstruction actions

[commando]

2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Trump was pretty vocal about them too, right?

 

Sue that SOB for every nickel he claims to have!

yep...dominion has hit the jackpot.   there are dozens of targets they can sue for this.   

[Enhance]

11 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

That doesn't make sense where there is a long tradition of marching from the classroom to the lunchroom in protest. 

I don't necessarily find the analogy that convincing, either. But, how many pre-march rallies held on Pennsylvania Ave. include the phrase "trial by combat?" Perhaps one could argue that Trump, Giuliani and his cohorts didn't explicitly say to riot at the capitol, but they didn't NOT say that. And "trial by combat" is, objectively, the wrong and inappropriate thing to say to any large mass of people who are upset and frustrated with something... regardless of whether or not they have any factual reason for being upset.

 

As many of us know, political rallies are often more about emotion than they are facts.

 

I also think we need all need to be careful about the comparisons we make to the George Floyd protests and this attempted insurrection. I agree that there is often hypocrisy with these kinds of things, but the protests we saw over the summer were based off of human rights issues.

 

This insurrection was a made up of large group of radicals upset about an election result for which they had no evidence to prove was fraudulent to the levels they claim. Their arguments were based on lies and deceit. We can't objectively say the same thing about the summer protests.

 

5 hours ago, funhusker said:

What do lizard people eat? Like bugs and stuff?

 

Also, are your anti-America meetings in Russia, or do you hold them via Zoom?  Are you even allowed in Russia anymore after the incident in Putin’s stables?

This thread is not the place for stuff like this. Please don't do so again.

[teachercd]

Is Sasse going to make a move to run for President in the future?

[funhusker]

1 minute ago, Enhance said:

I don't necessarily find the analogy that convincing, either. But, how many pre-march rallies held on Pennsylvania Ave. include the phrase "trial by combat?" Perhaps one could argue that Trump, Giuliani and his cohorts didn't explicitly say to riot at the capitol, but they didn't NOT say that. And "trial by combat" is, objectively, the wrong and inappropriate thing to say to any large mass of people who are upset and frustrated with something... regardless of whether or not they have any factual reason for being upset.

 

As many of us know, political rallies are often more about emotion than they are facts.

 

This thread is not the place for stuff like this. Please don't do so again.

Sorry...I figured talking about nonsensical things was okay considering the people involved...

[whateveritis1224]

About impeachment, they would never get the votes for removal, but it sounds like a possibility for enough flips to get a majority. IIRC, If they can get a majority then that'll prevent an attempt at re-election in '24.

[RedDenver]

Just now, whateveritis1224 said:

About impeachment, they would never get the votes for removal, but it sounds like a possibility for enough flips to get a majority. IIRC, If they can get a majority then that'll prevent an attempt at re-election in '24.

Nope. Only conviction and the Senate sentencing to no longer holding political office would prevent that.

[FrantzHardySwag]

18 minutes ago, commando said:

yep...dominion has hit the jackpot.   there are dozens of targets they can sue for this.   

Trump could be sued once he leaves office, no? Trump was spouting off about Dominion quite a bit, and I would venture to guess that the leader of the free world slamming your product could do some damage to your bottom line. 

[RedDenver]

 

[Notre Dame Joe]

9 hours ago, Enhance said:

I don't necessarily find the analogy that convincing, either. But, how many pre-march rallies held on Pennsylvania Ave. include the phrase "trial by combat?" Perhaps one could argue that Trump, Giuliani and his cohorts didn't explicitly say to riot at the capitol, but they didn't NOT say that. And "trial by combat" is, objectively, the wrong and inappropriate thing to say to any large mass of people who are upset and frustrated with something... regardless of whether or not they have any factual reason for being upset.

 

As many of us know, political rallies are often more about emotion than they are facts.

[/quote]

Maybe if one of them had challenged Pelosi to a duel...  I have not heard that anyone in the mob brought weapons into the Capitol.  Nor can I recall from a 'coup' any time in history that was staged with only pointy flag polls.

 

But politicians do and always have used the most extreme rhetoric.  To claim one or another caused actual violence is just another form of extreme rhetoric.  I could pick out 100 D statements and claim they were why a Bernie Sanders lackey shot an R Congressmen.  And I would sound very dumb once people read it objectively. 

 

 

Quote

I also think we need all need to be careful about the comparisons we make to the George Floyd protests and this attempted insurrection. I agree that there is often hypocrisy with these kinds of things, but the protests we saw over the summer were based off of human rights issues.

 

This insurrection was a made up of large group of radicals upset about an election result for which they had no evidence to prove was fraudulent to the levels they claim. Their arguments were based on lies and deceit. We can't objectively say the same thing about the summer protests.

 

This thread is not the place for stuff like this. Please don't do so again.

 

The sincerity of the rioters is obvious even if it is wrong.  I take it for granted that anyone who takes over a city downtown and/or burn down a federal courthouse sincerely believes the government is killing black people without regard for their human rights.  And they can find evidence that confirms that belief, and ignore evidence to the contrary.  Likewise the maybe 100 people who broke into the Capitol can point to 50 election irregularities that 'proves' the 2020 election was stolen. I very much doubt they risked imprisonment and bullets thinking Biden actually won. 

 

In American both are human rights violations.   

[Notre Dame Joe]

9 hours ago, whateveritis1224 said:

About impeachment, they would never get the votes for removal, but it sounds like a possibility for enough flips to get a majority. IIRC, If they can get a majority then that'll prevent an attempt at re-election in '24.

 

9 hours ago, teachercd said:

Is Sasse going to make a move to run for President in the future?

I wouldn't mind if they rushed a 2nd sham impeachment into the last two weeks.  We could figure out which Rs are ineligible to be the 2024 nominee + which Congressmen need to be themselves 'primaried.' 

[commando]

1 minute ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

I wouldn't mind if they rushed a 2nd sham impeachment into the last two weeks.  We could figure out which Rs are ineligible to be the 2024 nominee + which Congressmen need to be themselves 'primaried.' 

yep..those who support trump will expose themselves as unworthy of anything.   glad we can agree on that.

[Born N Bled Red]

Notre Dame Joe (now Trump himself since Archy1221 gave him the login to that account) has threatened to sue me if I contue to expose these rumors other people are saying about the sock puppet accounts linked to hilary's emails that they are both associated with. I will not be silenced!!!

[Moiraine]

24 minutes ago, Born N Bled Red said:

Notre Dame Joe (now Trump himself since Archy1221 gave him the login to that account) has threatened to sue me if I contue to expose these rumors other people are saying about the sock puppet accounts linked to hilary's emails that they are both associated with. I will not be silenced!!!

 

 

What are you talking about?

[Notre Dame Joe]

4 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

What are you talking about?

[Scarlet]