US Politics The 2021 Former President Trump Thread - I look very much forward to showing my financials, because they are huge.

[TheLoveBandit]

Coming back to this faked impeachment a bit more. WHY would the Dems want witnesses (perhaps because their 'proof' was being manufactured)? And when Reps say YES the Dems fold immediately and rush to a vote? WHY? WHY not bring out more truth?



Ok, let's bring witnesses. Even 5 Reps vote in favor, including Lindsey Graham.










So, because there over 300 people willing to refute the fake premise of the impeachment....we better not call witnesses.

So, because Pelosi will be called out on knowing about the potential violence and her lack of security (Speaker is responsible for such things)....we better not call witnesses.


THIS is the leadership of the Dem party? Is THIS what we want?

It's ok, Reps aren't letting her off the hook that easy

https://twitter.com/RepSpartz/status/1361415703165771776?s=20

 

[alasdairm]

Jordan FuchsI don't understand the question. Can you rephrase it?

sure. on december 5th, trump called the georgia governor - brian kemp - and asked him to convene the state legislature for a special session to appoint electoral college electors who might be more likely to vote for trump than biden. kemp said no.

further, georgia deputy secretary of state - jordan fuchs - confirmed that trump also called georgia's lead elections investigator in december and pushed them to produce evidence of fraud. he invited them to "find the fraud" and promised they would be called a "national hero" for doing so.

given these two incidences of trump attempting to interfere with the election in georgia, do you feel they place the raffensperger call in a different light? that he was just asking for data?

What I'm saying here, is this was all bad faith, none of this was about election integrity, he wanted them to find enough missing votes, and only ones voting for him, to overturn the state.

That is election fraud. And presidents who use their office to place pressure on people to help them obtain a specific election outcome should be removed from office.

indeed.

This is a lie you should stop perpetuating.

i disagree.

i think it's also a little disingenuous to blame this on trump's poor use of language. i get mocked a lot for this making this point but many trump supporters claim a big reason they voted for him is that he's plainly or clearly spoken and that you always know what he means and exactly where he stands on an issue. i've always found that laughable nonsense.

alasdair

 

[TheLoveBandit]

i disagree.

i think it's also a little disingenuous to blame this on trump's poor use of language. i get mocked a lot for this making this point but many trump supporters claim a big reason they voted for him is that he's plainly or clearly spoken and that you always know what he means and exactly where he stands on an issue. i've always found that laughable nonsense.

You can disagree. Being wrong isn't a crime.

I agree with your call of 'nonesense' with so many saying he speaks the truth when I can't even listen to him due to the crap he spews. However, I just proved the lefts claim he said the neo nazis and white supremacists are 'good people' is false. And you deny this. Then I will respect your right to be wrong in the face of facts.

 

[alasdairm]

^ i read it differently @TheLoveBandit.

i was going to highlight the same section in the extended transcript to make my point but you highlighted it to make yours. so i agree to disagree.

thanks.

alasdair

 

[JessFR]

. i get mocked a lot for this making this point but many trump supporters claim a big reason they voted for him is that he's plainly or clearly spoken and that you always know what he means and exactly where he stands on an issue. i've always found that laughable nonsense.

alasdair

For what it's worth, I still find it funny pretty much every time you do that. :D

^ i read it differently @TheLoveBandit.

i was going to highlight the same section in the extended transcript to make my point but you highlighted it to make yours. so i agree to disagree.

thanks.

alasdair

And that right there is everything wrong in American politics right now. Both sides using the same evidence to make mutually exclusive arguments.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

For what it's worth, I still find it funny pretty much every time you do that. :D

It annoyed me for awhile. Now it's just background noise. But I'll give him credit for being persistent about it.

And that right there is everything wrong in American politics right now. Both sides using the same evidence to make mutually exclusive arguments.

No. You're WRONG. And I'll post a bunch of conspiracy posts from sites I invented just to prove you wrong.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

^ i read it differently @TheLoveBandit.

i was going to highlight the same section in the extended transcript to make my point but you highlighted it to make yours. so i agree to disagree.

thanks.

alasdair

Then let me highlight a different section just a line or so below

And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay?

 

[JessFR]

No. You're WRONG. And I'll post a bunch of conspiracy posts from sites I invented just to prove you wrong.

Nou!

 

[TheLoveBandit]

But wait! The riot incitement lives on past non-impeachment!

NAACP, House Homeland Security Committee chair sue Trump, Giuliani, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, alleging Capitol riot conspiracy

The NAACP and Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, on Tuesday sued former President Donald Trump, his lawyer Rudy Giuliani and two right-wing extremist groups, alleging they conspired to incite the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The lawsuit, which is expected to be joined by other Democratic lawmakers, cites the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act in accusing the defendants of conspiring to prevent Congress from confirming the election of Joe Biden as president.

That law was passed 15 years after the end of the Civil War in response to violence by the racist KKK and its intimidation of members of Congress from the South.

In addition to Trump and Giuliani, the defendants in the suit filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., include the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers groups, whose members are known to have been among the thousands of people who invaded the Capitol last month.

The suit comes three days after Trump was acquitted of inciting the riot at his second impeachment trial by the Senate. Only seven Republicans voted to convict Trump.
....

"among the thousands of people who invaded the Capitol last month." wait, wut? While there were thousands in attendance of his speech (he does that), I heard only hundreds stormed the capital and entered.

I can't imagine the defense will be able to find any videos of BLM riots, or the Dem support of them. It'll be great is we can get Pelosi on the stand. Maybe we can get access to some of the internal video footage that has for some reason NOT been presented at all regarding the 'insurrection' That could help address how much chaos or coordination there was, as well as the level of defense or acceptance security provided during this event.

 

[Noodle]

No amount of whataboutism or selective outrage is going to change the fact that the current Republican Party is moving in a very bad direction.

...worth the 18 minutes, if you care to make the time:

 

[Zephyn]

if i was president i would make up a test where you have to score a certain % on it to be able to vote. It would cover everything in life from economics science social issues work ethic crime war and to see if your a total braindead idiot.

You don't see how that would deny the impoverished (historically less educated) representation?

 

[JessFR]

The idea of a knowledge test in order to vote is always a terrible idea.

Because by doing that, whoever can control the test can pretty much decide the election. Just isolate what one side is more likely to be familiar with, and put it on the test.

The answer isn't to require education to vote, that's ripe for abuse and undemocratic.

Better option, improve education for everyone.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

This is the full list of 'how much is too much' from Ali's post about Trump statements or actions. In fairness, I had to return to it because I pushed back on the Charlottesville issue that I have shown is false. However, for the rest of this:

i've been asking myself for 4 years, jess, is this going to be where they - his supporters - draw the line? surely this is too much?

was it when, on day one of his term, he set the tone for his entire administration with the insane lie about the size of the inauguration crowd? nah, ok with that.

was it when he called some white supremacists "very fine people"? nah, they're ok with that.

was it when he fired his acting ag for refusing to defend his muslim travel ban? nope.

was it when he encouraged police officers to treat suspects roughly? no, that's fine.

was it when he attacked respected war veteran john mccain as a loser? no. of course they support the military but that's is ok.

was it when he told a sherriff he wanted to "destroy the career" of a state senator who opposed asset forfeiture? no. that's great.

was it when he revealed classified information to the russion ambassador? no. just fine.

was it when he retweeted anit-islamic videos from the deputy leader of the far-right group britain first? no. and by the way, he's not racist.

was it when he referred to other countries as shitholes? nope.

was it when he separated migrant children and families? no, c'mon how bad can that be?

was it when he had his protection pepper spray peaceful protestors for a bible-wielding photo stunt? no, he's a good christian (5 children from 3 different marriages).

was it when he said it was ok to sexually assault women by grabbing them by the pussy? no, that's just fine.

was it when he mocked a disable reporter? no, they're fine with that too.

that's just a dozen things off the top of my head. there are so, so many more.

so now he's pressuring state officials to magically find just enough votes to have him win a state election he lost. nothing wrong with that.

well, i got the answer to my question.

for some, maybe many of his supporters, there is nothing he could say or do which they consider problematic.

I gave no pushback because I believe it's all accurate, and should be part of anyone's evaluation of Trump as a President, or as a person. And he has been given a free pass by his supporters. I fully agree with the rest of Ali's statement.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

sure. on december 5th, trump called the georgia governor - brian kemp - and asked him to convene the state legislature for a special session to appoint electoral college electors who might be more likely to vote for trump than biden. kemp said no.

further, georgia deputy secretary of state - jordan fuchs - confirmed that trump also called georgia's lead elections investigator in december and pushed them to produce evidence of fraud. he invited them to "find the fraud" and promised they would be called a "national hero" for doing so.

given these two incidences of trump attempting to interfere with the election in georgia, do you feel they place the raffensperger call in a different light? that he was just asking for data?

No, it doesn't change what occurred in the phone call.

He was requesting votes, but not fabricated votes. He wasn't asking Raffensperger to just make up votes. They were very specific where they wanted the votes to come from. They were asking for access to data so they could verify votes. They were asking for drop boxes to be investigated. They were asking for signatures to be verified.

TLB responded much more thoroughly to all of this than I am motivated to. Thanks for that, Bandit.

Look, I don't think Trump is a good guy. He's done and said some horrible things, but that doesn't mean he called white supremacists fine people and it doesn't mean he asked for votes to be fabricated.

Truth is important.

 

[JessFR]

Asking for them to find valid, legit votes, but ONLY for trump, so that trump wins, as was the implication trump made, is fraud.

I don't give a fuck that trump asked for legit votes, asking for them to find exactly enough legit votes to overturn the result, and no more, is fucking fraud.

It's like when trump said he wanted them to stop counting when he was still in the lead. Sure, all those votes were legit, but it would still have been fraud.

Just because he wasn't asking them to manufacture votes doesn't matter, the problem is he asked them to find just the votes needed for him to he the winner. That's still election tampering.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

I disagree. He wanted it all to be investigated. He clearly said in that phone call he wanted the entire Georgia election to be verified via multiple signature comparison. I don't see it as fraud. But, we're going round in circles.

I've said this before. Either respond to it or let's just stop having this discussion:

He said (paraphrasing) "we believe there are 20,000 votes here", "we believe there are 50,000 votes there", "we believe there are 200,000 votes there too"... "we'd like all of this to be investigated but all we need is 12,000 votes so if you just give us permission to properly investigate one of these avenues we will settle for that".

 

[JessFR]

It was not possible to do signature verification again and that had been and has been explained over and over and over again.

The signatures were verified twice to start with, them the signatures were separated from their ballots and could not be reverified. This is deliberate to preserve ballot secrecy.

It's all a bunch of crap.

It's not the place of the president to personally conduct an investigation of how a state conducted its elections anyway. That's improper in its own right.

There is NOTHING legitimate about trumps involvement. It's corrupt no matter which way you slice it.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

Didn't say it was above board or ethically okay... The doesn't mean he broke any laws during that conversation or requested fabricated votes.

It was not possible to do signature verification again and that had been and has been explained over and over and over again.

The signatures were verified twice to start with, them the signatures were separated from their ballots and could not be reverified. This is deliberate to preserve ballot secrecy.

You should probably explain that to Trump. Whether it is possible is irrelevant. He was clearly asking them to do it. If you ask me: Was he requesting something possible? I'd say sure. But if the question is did he request fabricated votes to be added to his count, my answer is no.

If he could fabricate votes, I'm sure he would... but he knows that's not going to work.

I'm not defending the man's integrity. I literally never have.

 

[JessFR]

I never said he asked them to fabricate votes. That's not the problem. The problem as I've repeatedly explained is that he asked them to specifically find votes for him, and only him, specifically with an aim for him to win.

And yes, asking election officials to do that is a very serious crime.

You absolutely can not ask election officials to selectively investigate the election to get only more of your votes but not someone else's as he suggested.

And the president should be held to a higher standard not a lower one.

Ffs how can you not understand this. How can you defend this?

This is the president of the United States, the people of the United States should not tolerate this kind of behavior.

I truly don't get it. It boggles me mind that so many people can somehow do mental gymnastics to justify what some part of them has to realize is fucking wrong.

Stop defending this. The president shouldn't be phoning up election officials specifically in the states he needs to win to win the election to ask them for help in changing the result. NO MATTER HOW HE PHRASES IT.

The president phoned up election officials in only the states he needed to win, accusing fraud that he was the one to invent to start with, specifically with an aim to overturn an election he lost, while also trying to go around the voters entirely through the state legislature.

AND MILLIONS OF AMERICANS ACTUALLY DEFEND IT!

Do you get why I can't help but become enraged? Because it's outrageous.

It's like I've woken up in a world where 30% of people have completely lost their senses. Where they can see the most blatantly obvious corruption and pretend it's not happening. It's just so fucking corrupt.

 

[birdup.snaildown]

It boggles me mind that so many people can somehow do mental gymnastics to justify what some part of them has to realize is fucking wrong.

1) I don't care about justifying anything.
2) I'm not saying what he did wasn't wrong.
3) He didn't request selectivity. Throughout all the entire election fraud bullshit, he has requested recounts and investigations. He cannot control whether or not these recounts or investigations turn up votes for him or for Biden.