Liz Cheney wasn’t defeated last night, she was humiliated. If it hadn’t been for Democrats crossing over to vote for her, I bet she wouldn’t have cracked 15%. As it was, with their votes, she inched up to 28%. This is a rejection not just of the Old Guard, but of the sort of Republican who will spend time attacking fellow GOPers based on the Democrat Narrative. That is important – there are reasons for intra-party battles. You can, under certain circumstances, speak ill of your fellow GOPer. But it has to be on our terms, not Democrat terms. The J6 Narrative that Cheney signed on for is based, ultimately, on the Steele Dossier…in other words, they’re still going with the underlying assumption that Trump is a Russian agent set upon the American people to turn us into a fascist dictatorship (how this helps Russia is left unexplained). The raid on Trump’s home was in furtherance of this (though I did read someone thinking that the raid was to recover Hillary documents that Trump had declassified: this rings a bit true). Brian Kemp in Georgia firmly rejected Trump’s contention that fraud caused the loss – I believe Kemp is wrong in this (and his actions in strengthening voter security indicate that even Kemp thinks he was a little wrong on this), but Kemp managed to do this while keeping the GOP base largely on his side. You can thread this needle – you can, that is, go against Trump (or any other competing GOPer) and still come out roses on the other end. But no longer can you do this if you betray the GOP Base.
And that is just the thing: we GOP voters were tired of being betrayed. We put up with Bushes and McCains and Romneys on the promise that while they’d trim their sails to the Left from time to time to retain electoral viability, when push came to shove they’d get done what we most cared about – and all these people ever did was betray us on what we think most crucial. So, we’re done with them – and, yes, we have now made Trump a litmus test. Some are very upset about this, but is has to be. We need a quick shorthand for whether or not someone will betray us – and joining Democrats to attack Trump is the bright red, flashing light that you’re a RINO Establishment creep.
There are tens of millions of people in the USA who don’t work – and I mean, like ever: they are permanently or semi-permanently on welfare. We also have a host of people who have office jobs which produce no value…HR people, diversity coordinators, extra layers of Administrative staff. Combined, I’ll bet these total about 50 million of our population. We can’t sustain this: these people will have to get real jobs. Any system we craft to replace the fiat money/debt/welfare/billionaire system we have now will have to address the economically useless – and make them useful. When we build a new economy (and we’ll have to as our old economy is completely wiped out: in many ways, we’ll be starting all over again from scratch), we must ensure that everyone physically capable of work does something useful. Nobody is allowed to skate – whether that skating be via welfare or working out a powerpoint on DEI. To bluntly speak it: we’ll have to compel them (at first) to work…and that might mean work projects like CCC from the Depression…at least get these people on to a job site and have them put some hours in. It is the best means of breaking the twin cycles of welfare dependency and bureaucratic empire building. I chipped paint in the Navy, guys. Did I like it? No. But I did it. Also washed dishes and cleaned bathrooms (bathrooms used by 30 men to get ready for the day, ya know?). It wasn’t humiliating: it was work. I did it and I did it well (those fricking sinks glowed when I was done with them). It taught me how to do physical work and to take pride in a job well done – any job well done. Everyone needs this as the basis of their work life no matter what else they do later.
They’re going after kids as young as two to start transition. This is frightening. The only two year old who is trans is the two y ear old with insane parents. I do believe that this push to transition kids, especially prepubescent kids, will one day be viewed with the same horror we view the Tuskegee Experiments and Eugenics.
Britain is still north of 80% white – and the RAF is pausing the hiring of white men in order to increase diversity. And think about this – allegedly, a Conservative party is in power in the UK right now. This is what is wrong with the world: it has gone full Marxist/Globalist/Moneybags and they all, regardless of stated beliefs, go one way on policy. This is why Trump is hated – it is also why Orban in Hungary is hated. Unpopular observation: it is why Putin is hated (they don’t hate Xi, even though for China he’s as much a patriot as any of these…but Xi provides a lot of money to the global elite, so he’s off limits). Don’t get me wrong: Putin is a bastard in his own right…but he’s also for Russia. As Orban is for Hungary and Trump is for the USA. We should never fear someone who is looking after their own people and trying to get them the most advantage…we just need leaders who will do that for us.
Blogs For Victory 
(though I did read someone thinking that the raid was to recover Hillary documents that Trump had declassified: this rings a bit true).
I’m betting there were a number of documents that the establishment of both parties do not want to see the light of day lest they get to hold a reunion in Leavenworth. I hope Trump kept some backup copies
I hope Trump kept some backup copies
Nothing would be funnier than the Dems smugly thinking they are safe because they got hold of those incriminating documents, only to have them surface again.
I think it is increasingly clear, as the stated reasons for the raid keep falling apart, that the real reason was a CYA move by the FBI to get those documents. After all, Trump specifically mentioned the Hurricane Crossfire docs in his declassification memo, which mean they were not longer safely protected by Classified status and became a ticking time bomb they had to recover.
The most misunderstood thing about Trump, is that it’s about Trump. It is not. Trump, the man, did an amazing job as President, but much more importantly, Trump opened the eyes of so many Americans to the corruption, self dealing, and incompetence of career politicians in both parties – and that’s his real crime and the reason why they lied and cheated to get him out. I told a colleague before the election that if Biden won, we would be at war within a year. And it happened. It was completely predictable, Put career politicians back in place and they immediately start serving the interests of the Military Industrial Complex, Big Pharma, Big Education, and of course their militant wing, the FBI. Career politicians no longer serve the interests of the American people, they serve the interests of permanent Washington, donors, and global interests and that is the reason MAGA is taking over.
I read one time not too long ago that upwards of 47% of all American households receive some level of government assistance. That is no bueno. And I suspect a lot of that is fraud. Speaking of fraud, did you hear that approximately $169 BILLION of the Covid relief money was obtained by fraud? Hey when politicians are on the dole, the American people just think, hey why not me?? We need to change the culture in this country.
I told a colleague before the election that if Biden won, we would be at war within a year. And it happened. It was completely predictable, Put career politicians back in place and they immediately start serving the interests of the Military Industrial Complex
Starting with George H. W. Bush, it seemed like Republicans said, “Democrats don’t have a monopoly on war, Republicans can do it too.” Prior to that a Democrat (Wilson) got us into WW1; a Democrat (FDR) got us into WW2; and a Democrat (Johnson) got us into Vietnam. Since then Republicans have been equal opportunity war mongers, and I think your average Republican voter is sick and tired of it. I know I am.
It’s beyond shameful how America’s ruling class and Military Industrial Complex just incite “conflicts” around the globe. I am beyond sick of it and so is MAGA. Fuck the rest of the world. I don’t give two shits about the violent white, anti gay pieces of shit in Ukraine. NO MORE WARS
What war are we currently in? Ukraine?
Not yet. But Pudding Brain has promised that will fully support Ukraine, and Taiwan, and has hinted at even going as far as nuclear support.
It’s funny how back during the Blogs For Bush days both you guys were cheering the Surge, lol. People change. I think Putin incited the war on Ukraine, not the US.
What’s really funny is how the same howlers about Darth Cheney and his warmongering are now lining up to give tongue baths to his daughter.
And my eyes were opened by Trump. Endless wars are just money grabs by the global elite at the expense of so many people. It’s an absolute crime. And they’re at it again. If Trump were POTUS, this wouldn’t be happening.
NATO started this war. It was completely avoidable. Putin is a nationalist and just wants to protect Russia and when NATO and America keep on insisting that Ukraine join NATO, what do you think is going to happen? What would happen if China weaponized Mexico? Think that we might have a problem with that?
It’s funny how back during the Blogs For Bush days both you guys were cheering the Surge, lol. People change.
That was 15 years ago. Of course people change. Getting lied to repeatedly will do that.
Donald Trump lies to you repeatedly yet you guys don’t seem to mind.
As I said before, most people I know who support Trump like what he did more than they like him but I’ll play along. What are some of the significant Trump lies that should have turned a reasonable person against him?
I always ask Libs to be specific when they bleat that Trump is a LIAR !!!!!
So far, no takers. At least not on anything more substantial than how many were at his inauguration. and lightweight stuff like that.
No Corn Pop lies. No stories of beating people up behind the gym. No claims of various skills or jobs in his past. But more significantly, no lies like how a recession isn’t really a recession, or how spending money saves money, or how the border is really secure. No lies to lead the American people into a national death spiral of bankruptcy, weak national security and so on.
OTOH, the lies told ABOUT Donald Trump have been numerous and egregious.
Mexico was going to pay for the wall.
He didn’t know anything about Stormy Daniels
Without any evidence, millions of illegals voted in the 2016 election denying him the popular vote. A commission was formed to research this an disbanded within a few weeks.
The 2020 Election Was Stolen from him.
His beautiful great health care plan was coming two weeks.
He was going to do an infrastructure bill.
TRUMP UNIVERSITY was a fraud scheme having pay out 25 million
Oh and the CFO of his company just pled guilty to tax fraud. He surrounds himself with criminals and cheats: Roger Stone, Mike Flynn, Paul Manafort, Steve Bannon, Michael Cohen, Elliot Broidy, George Nader, Rick Gates et al. You are a military guy doesn’t character count?
I have repeatedly said that the main reason the Left has to get rid of Trump, at any cost, is because he understands the danger of the Bureaucrat Class control over our government, that de facto fourth branch of government consisting of lifelong political appointees who have taken over the job of legislators and who make their own rules and regs without the participation or even oversight of Congress.
Think about how much our booming Trump economy was possible because he erased some of the most crippling regulations which had been in place for years—-and which had been PUT in place by bureaucrats, not by Congress.
He cut budgets, he cut staffing, and he was in the process of splitting up the tight little cadre of agency leaders. He moved the BLM to Colorado, he moved the Department of Agriculture to Missouri, and if left in office I am sure the other agencies would have been scattered around the country as well. While this was going on, he was lecturing Congress to “do your job”.
The Left had spent decades carefully building this structure that was taking over our country, and Trump marched in and started taking it apart. I believe this is why the Left panicked and why it was necessary to get rid of him in any way possible.
You don’t expend all this energy on someone who is merely a political opponent. No, this was and is an all-out war on the biggest threat the Left has faced in this country. My mental image is that of a Jenga tower of power, carefully constructed by the Left, and Trump was methodically pulling out one piece at a time. The Left had to get rid of him before the tower collapsed.
I think the whole 2016 election thing was just dirty politics, as usual. They wanted Hillary in the White House, so did what they do to try to rig the election. I don’t think the real war on Trump began until he started to attack their power base within the government, and that’s when they had to dig deeper—get a couple of states to change their election laws, for example. I’m not going so far as to say they created the pandemic, but they sure as hell used it to maximum effect, from blaming it on Trump to using it as the reason to do things like going to all mail-in voting.
I predict that at some time, hopefully in the near future, someone will chart the elaborate and intertwined strategies of the Left for managing the 2020 election.
Then Trump refused to go away, and they know that an enraged and vindictive bear in the White House will be even more dangerous to them, which is why they have shifted their strategy to keeping him off the ticket in 2024. It’s preemptive election rigging, and they aren’t even trying to hide it.
This gem.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-told-bob-woodward-he-knew-february-covid-19-was-n1239658
Weak, Fielding, really weak. If that’s the best you’ve got, you need to turn in your lie detector. Your efforts are reminiscent of this famous video clip.
Just because you think the LIES are weak doesn’t mean they aren’t lies. He’s a con-man and you don’t care, because you like the lies.
Just because you think the LIES are weak
I didn’t expect you to admit it. I rest my case.
He’s a con-man and you don’t care, because you like the lies.
Trump can’t hold a candle to Bill and Hillary Clinton in the grift department. I don’t like lies, and I don’t like liars. If you’ve been coming here as long as your comments seem to indicate, you know that about me. If we had a big reservoir of potential presidential candidates who never lie, life would be much simpler. Unfortunately, that’s not the case, so we have to pick candidates who we believe will solve more problems than they create. Trump is a problem solver; Biden is a problem creator. Oh, and Biden lies almost every time he opens his mouth.
Nah, your fine with liars.
you’re (i’m a dope)
I’m reminded of an email that was circulating just before the 2016 election.
Yes, Spook, if there are raccoons in the basement, most people would hire an expert to remove them. However, most people would not expect the expert to destroy their home in the process, or make a copy of their house key and give it to thieves who then burglarize their home, steal their personal belongings, deplete their savings account, use their credit cards to buy themselves new cars, then lie about it all even though it is documented on video. Most people would not hire such an “expert” ever again, regardless of the job.
This is the most unhinged and bizarre foray into delusion I have seen here for a long long time—-and I’ve been here a long long time.
What a murky and foul place your mind must be, to generate such vile crap
Most people would not hire such an “expert” ever again, regardless of the job.
Except 12 million more people voted for him the second time around. I guess a record number of people DID want to hire him again.
Don’t you find it ironic that such a horrible man was the first president, certainly in my lifetime, maybe ever, who kept virtually EVERY major campaign promise?
Also, most people, when choosing an expert to rid themselves of those pesky raccoons, would probably ask neighbors for recommendations, check online reviews, etc., before hiring someone. But of course, there are also people who get suckered in by the conman whose butt crack is showing because he talks a good game.
As for Trump’s promises, he didn’t keep them all. Not even close. He claimed he would invest hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure. Never happened, despite declaring “infrastructure week” over and over. He claimed he would grow the economy by 4%. Didn’t happen. He claimed he would repeal Obamacare. Didn’t happen. He claimed he would replace Obamacare with a “phenomenal” plan. Didn’t happen. I could keep going…
Clearly you have never dealt with raccoons. As my neighbor said, “skunks are thugs but raccoons are terrorists”. And your sappy “advice” about what “most people” would do is just dumb.
I’m sure you could “keep going”. It is obvious that Donald Trump holds so much power over you, even out of office, even undeclared as a candidate, that you marinate in your hatred for him, calling up your favorite stores about him to chew on like a cow regurgitating her cud.
What is your problem?
I was ardently anti-Trump before the primaries—ask anyone here. I supported him after he got the nomination, because there was no alternative. He turned out to be a wonderful surprise. I thought he did a great job as president, and I developed a lot of admiration for him.—especially as he did this under a constant barrage of frantic efforts to not just defeat him but to DESTROY him.
I am kind of an amateur student of history and I am not aware of any duly elected president who had millions of people, including people in Congress, openly declaring their intent to sabotage his presidency. Or have you forgotten #RESIST! I can’t think of another man, or woman, who could have accomplished what he did under these circumstances.
You people screeched interminably that he was not legitimately elected. (That wasn’t considered “insurrection” back then.) You lied incessantly. You twisted everything he said or did. You mounted two bogus impeachment efforts, both of them laughable if not for their toxicity and pure evilness. You tried to block literally everything he did or tried to do. You lied about what he did get done.
With the eager assistance of the Agenda Media, you persecuted him to a degree I could never have imagined until I saw it. I had always paid special attention to the tactics of the Left and it was distressing and, quite honestly, scary to see them coming to life in my own country as so many people tried to bring down a man who was, in spite of it all, doing a better job than any of his predecessors, and using the same tactics as the tyrannical Leftist bully-boys have always used.
A pre-dawn raid on an old man accused of a non-violent process crime, by a heavily armed SWAT team, being filmed by an compliant Agenda Media outlet—pure bullying, pure intimidation. Armed SWAT officers ostentatiously arresting another Trump associate in an airport, in public and in front of his family, hauling him out in LEG IRONS, instead of asking his attorney to have him report in. A 9-hour raid on a potential presidential candidate’s home, ostensibly to retrieve documents left there by the National Archives team, with his attorneys kept outside. The message from our new Stalin wannbes is clear—–get on the wrong side of the masters and you will pay a heavy price. In Biden’s America, political opponents now have to fear the dreaded knock on the door that has terrified so many people in other tyrannical nations.
His most important successes were not the ones that got the most attention from most people, but they were the ones that truly terrified the Left. That is, his efforts to dismantle the Bureaucratic State, that de facto fourth branch of government that, in defiance of the Constitution, was essentially running the country. And, I might add, running it into the ground. it was this Deep State that was implementing rules and regulations (which had the power of laws) without the participation or even oversight of Congress. Which is, by the way, the only LEGAL source of laws in this country.
It was his laser vision on this problem, on this undermining of our Constitution, that made him such a threat, that meant he had to be eliminated by any means possible. And because he has remained a potential threat, refusing to just disappear but appearing to be on the cusp of returning to the presidency, that has the Usual Suspects of howling jackals suddenly flooding sites like this with the same insane vitriol we saw when he was president.
What is it that you think you can accomplish by dumping these carefully nurtured piles of crap on this site? Do you think you can bully us into agreeing with you? Do you think you can dilute support for another Trump presidency? WHAT IS YOUR POINT?
If it is just to wallow in the spite and malice that define you, you can do that on your own. You can get your daily fix of nasty from Joey and the Bimbo, you can stroke each other’s pathologies in your Lefty circle jerk forums. So why do you come here?
Because I am seeing this kind of thing on other sites, I am thinking that the Leftist masters are getting very nervous, and trying to preemptively head off a successful Trump run for reelection. We are seeing it in the J6 hearings, which are admittedly designed to keep Trump from being able to run again. (It was that admission from Cheney that drove the final nail in her coffin.)
And look at this shit Fielding …
America pokes the dragon AGAIN: US says China will ramp up its military and economic ‘coercion’ of Taiwan ‘in the coming weeks’ after agreeing to trade talks with the island as USAF nuclear stealth bombers soar over the Pacific
The current ruling class in America is a clear and present danger to the world. And I am now thinking they will use the cover of war to prevent a free and fair election again in 2024.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11122371/US-Taiwan-agree-trade-talks-economically-meaningful-outcomes.html
Quote of the year, maybe of the century:
CDC Director Michelle Walensky: “In our big moment, our performance did not reliably meet expectations.”
Many of Trump’s lies are the type in which he grossly exaggerates something, typically something he claims to have accomplished. For instance, his most frequent lie while president was, “We also built the greatest economy in the history of the world.” As the Washington Post notes, “By just about any key measure in the modern era, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Lyndon B. Johnson and Bill Clinton presided over stronger economic growth than Trump.”
Similar exaggerations include “the largest tax cut in the history of our country,” his claim to have appointed a “record-setting number” of judges (in which he also exaggerates the number of judges he got appointed), unemployment numbers are “the best ever,” etc.
He lied to the American people about the seriousness of COVID-19 to them. He lied about the seriousness of his own COVID-19 illness. He lied when he claimed that the Coronavirus was “totally under control.” He repeated lied (and continues to lie) about the 2020 election. He lied when he claimed that he got the Veterans Choice program enacted (Obama signed it into law in 2014). We could go on and on. The Post documented 30,573 lies uttered by Trump during the course of his presidency.
His business dealings are largely built on lies. Trump University was a scam in which they lied to their customers. His family charity was fraudulent to the point that the State of New York barred him and his family from running a charity.
It doesn’t matter to people like Retired Spook. On the one hand, he claims to not like liars. On the other hand, he makes excuse after excuse to overlook the biggest liar ever to occupy the White House, as well as the lies themselves. When a specific lie is pointed out, it is “weak” and unworthy of serious discussion. Or someone else supposedly lied more. Or everyone lies, so lying doesn’t matter (even though he claims to not like liars). There is always an excuse.
It’s the same with Amazona. According to her, no one has ever been able to cite a Trump lie “more substantial than how many were at his inauguration. and lightweight stuff like that.” Every lie is minimized. She lives in a bubble in which Trump’s lies never penetrate.
So Allen Weisselberg, Chief Financial Officer of the Trump Organization, today pleaded guilty of fifteen felonies. Time to update the scorecard.
Campaign Manager – Prison
Campaign Chairman – Indicted & Pardoned
Lawyer – Prison
Deputy Campaign Manager – Prison
National Security Advisor – Prison
Fixer – Indicted and Pardoned
Inaugural Chairman – Indicted
CFO – Convicted felon, sentence pending
Campaign Manager – Prison What was the crime?
Campaign Chairman – Indicted & Pardoned What was the crime?
Lawyer –Prison What was the crime?
Deputy Campaign Manager – Prison What was the crime?
National Security Advisor – Prison What was the crime?
Fixer – Indicted and Pardoned What was the crime? And what is a “fixer”?
Inaugural Chairman – Indicted What was the crime?
CFO – Convicted felon, sentence pending
In what courts were these people tried and convicted?
Really fascinating to read this debate about who the biggest liar is. All y’all are really focused on what’s important so I’ll give you props for that. Meanwhile China continues to threaten the sovereignty of Taiwan and America due to Nancy’s photo op, hundreds of billions of dollars are being sent to prop up the corrupt puppet regime in Ukraine, migrant women and children are raped and trafficked at the border, inner city crime is worse it’s ever been in history, the CDC admitted they lied and caused many Americans their lives and careers, Supreme Court Justices are being threatened, and the gestapo FBI just raided the political opponent of the currently demented president who takes showers with his daughter and whose son runs pay for play schemes.
But Forty, please let me know more about the dangers of Trump. It’s always fascinating.
Trump attempted to overturn the presidential election in order to keep himself in power.
Yes, that’s what they have told you sweetheart. You’re such a loser I feel sorry for people like you. And you must like spaghetti
Probably time for you to go hit refresh and see if anyone has liked any of your tweets yet. I hear those likes are few and far between…
Meow
Who doesn’t like spaghetti? It’s delicious. Your screed is also packed with lies.
You could save a lot of typing time by just pasting the comment I AM TERMINALLY STUPID
But no, you have to ILLUSTRATE your stupidity—in this case, whining that “Trump attempted to overturn the election…”
Yet he did literally not one single thing to overturn the election. He tried to get it investigated so it could be determined who actually won. And who fought this tooth and nail, frantically, viciously, hysterically? The Left, of course. Which is what the Left always does when there is a search for truth. You all are still fighting it, which really just tells us that you are terrified of what would come out if we could actually do a real, serious, investigation.
It’s always been obvious that the whole frantic hysterical theater surrounding the election fraud issue has been defensive in nature, as offensive as it has been. It has been a panicky defense of your position which we believe is based on your awareness that it is a shaky position that would not hold up under serious scrutiny.
You people think that constantly raising the volume of your hysteria, constantly upping the ante of your rage and hate, will somehow distract from the rot that you are protecting. But all you are doing is calling attention to it.
A side does not rally its trolls and bots and send out new increasingly vicious and hysterical scripts if it’s not nervous. The thing is, the American Left is really stupid. It got cocky and in its hubris overextended itself and showed its true colors, and now has to recover the ground it has lost. The thing is, it is trying to recover that ground by repeating the stupidity that lost it.
And we point and laugh
“But Forty, please let me know more about the dangers of Trump.”
As president of the United States, he did absolutely nothing while the United States capital was attacked while all of Congress inside. Indefensible. A president that can’t defend the United States capital has no business being president ever.
What do you think he should have done? He tried to go to the scene and his Secret Service agents wouldn’t let him. The protesters and the rioters (two different groups) did not have internet access to receive messages. Now that you have educated us on the proper way to deal with a raccoon invasion, maybe you can tell us how the president could have influenced a riot.
As for defending the Capitol, he asked for National Guard troops to be present to keep the peace, but short of an actual national crisis he lacked the authority to send them on his own. And the mayor of DC refused to authorize this as did the Speaker of the House.
Maybe he could have gone to the white house press room and made a statement to his followers, (the rioters and the protesters),right prior to those dopes breaching the barriers. This statement would have been broadcast on all tv channels. But he waited and did nothing for 187 minutes, I think. He didn’t do it because he liked what those shitheads were doing.
Few things are funnier than the ignorant explaining what someone else “could” have done. Love the part about broadcasting on TV—surely we all remember the rioters and protesters watching TV during the chaos. This is even dumber than the explanation about how to deal with a raccoon invasion.
And then, naturally, we come to a staple of Leftist “thought”—-the Crystal Ball. In this case, it tells fielding what the president was actually THINKING.
Not saying it would have been effective, but he DID NOTHING for 187 minutes. Even as Hannity, Ingraham, Junior et al. begged Mark Meadows to get him to call those dipshits off. Once he did do his twitter statement at 4:17 pm there was video provided at one Jan 6 hearing of rioters viewing his statement and then heeding his call to leave.
Not saying it would have been effective but he should have done “something” anyway, because what matters is the symbolism, not the result. This is what we always get from you people. Monday morning quarterbacking from people who get their “information” from toxically biased sources like Joey and the Bimbo who then presume to lecture on what someone SHOULD have done.
It’s part of the whole package of wholesale attack mode, regardless of fairness or accuracy or relationship to reality. It’s like the lists of “LIES!!!!!” you people depend on, which are really just agendas that were not achieved in the first term.
A lie is a purposeful effort to deceive—it is not a statement of a proposed outcome that was not possible to achieve. Trump was not a king: He did not have total control over the government. For all your squealing about him being a “dictator” he did not have the power or authority to force Congress to support his reversal of Obamacare, for example.
But you people are so firmly in the grip of blind Trump hatred that you are happy to suspend decency in your mad pursuit of ways to express that loathing. For reasons sane people just can’t understand you have chosen to hand over control of your minds and emotions to Leftist masters who then exert that control, leading to you becoming slavish puppets.
A lie is a purposeful effort to deceive—it is not a statement of a proposed outcome that was not possible to achieve.
Well put. A promise that doesn’t come to fruition because of reliance on a third party over which you have no or limited control is just that — a failed promise. Now you can argue that a leader shouldn’t make such a promise in the first place, but what do you do when members of your own party who you counted on to support your promise stab you in the back. That happens a LOT MORE on the GOP side of the aisle than it does on the Dem side. A good contrast is “Mexico will pay for the wall” vs. “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor; if you like your health insurance plan you can keep you health insurance plan.”
I’m seeing the strategy of trying to drag us into morass of the bickering and name calling that passes for political discourse on the Left. It’s tempting to try to address the lies, the hysteria, the vicious and vile rhetoric, but it’s really just letting ourselves get sucked into their game.
There is a movement online, in various forums, of the old trolls and bots being called up to flood the sites with over the top Trump attacks, trying to provoke emotions. But it’s a scam, it’s a game, and I don’t think we should fall for it.
They want to drag us into their Identity Politics morass, where they have the advantage because they ae shameless. will lie with impunity, and are vicious. And for what?
We have had six years to analyze Donald Trump as a politician, as a candidate as president. We know his faults and his virtues. We are not blind to his defects nor are we convinced that they outweigh his abilities and talents. The howling, shrieking, jumping up and down in rage and fury, of the Same Old Same Old as they scurry in here with their scripts and their carefully cultivate outrage, are immaterial.
They have done this before, till they pushed so hard they got kicked off. I suggest just letting them howl, letting them throw their feces and climb the walls in their insanity. And then they’ll go away, and we will have been reminded of what the Left really represents—bullying, efforts to intimidate, determination to control what others think and feel. And we can keep rejecting it.
You know what’s really funny? In a “be careful of what you wish for” kind of way
If the howling Left succeeds in keeping Trump from running, the guy in the wings is a much bigger threat to them, and they are so focused on Trump I don’t think they really understand this. But they will pull out all the stops and educate the American voter about their depravity and dishonesty as they try to destroy—-and I mean literally DESTROY—-an opponent, so when they try the same dirty tricks on a new guy who has no baggage those tactics will have been exposed as vile and vicious and unfounded.
“It’s not just the Soviets who are masters of disappearing someone. Just look at Wyoming,” (a Time Magazine) piece argued. “It was a disappearing that would have made the Cold War Soviets proud,” apparently because voters and conservatives held Cheney to account for her actions through the Democratic process.
Of course, TIME also ignored the ongoing and decidedly more undemocratic attempts to make Trump ineligible to run for president again — looking at you, Liz Cheney — rather than letting voters decide whether they want him to lead the country. The use of a Pelosi-created partisan select committee to derail a potential future Trump bid for the White House is far closer to a “Soviet skill” than the people of Wyoming voting in a regular primary election, but that sailed over TIME’s narrow, partisan worldview.
I’m kind of surprised that the magazine would try to draw attention to Soviet-style politics, given the Biden administration emulation of his secret police chief, Lavrentiy Beria, who once said ““Anyone who attempts to raise a hand against the will of our people, against the will of the party of Lenin and Stalin, will be mercilessly crushed and destroyed,” and the distinctly Stalinist tone of Cheney’s J6 panel and adherence to Beria’s most famous quotation, the one most closely related to the J6 panel, “bring me the man and I will find you the crime”.
One of the most important posts to date over at Coffee & Covid.
Amazona wrote, “What do you think he should have done? He tried to go to the scene and his Secret Service agents wouldn’t let him. The protesters and the rioters (two different groups) did not have internet access to receive messages.”
I have to admit, I’m having a hard time believing you are this ignorant about the events of January 6. It is obvious that you didn’t watch the Congressional hearings. You might want to watch the hearing that took place on July 21, in which you can hear Trump’s own White House lawyers, staff, cabinet members, and even his daughter, testify about what he did and didn’t do on Jan. 6, and what he could have done.
At least you do know that Trump tried to get his Secret Service detail to take him to the capitol. It’s hilarious that you spin this as some noble effort on the part of Trump. He wanted to go after he knew (because he was told) that many in mob were armed. He said that didn’t matter because the mob didn’t want to attack him—meaning they wanted to attack the Vice President and Congress. Think about that for a minute. He wanted to align himself directly with an armed mob forcing its way into the United States Capitol.
You claim the protesters and rioters were two different groups, suggesting that the rioters were Antifa or some other rogue faction. And yet, in court proceeding after court proceeding, rioter after rioter has stated that they broke into the capitol and fought with police because President Trump called upon them to do so. So stop with this nonsense that the rioters weren’t Trump supporters. It just makes clear that you aren’t aware of what the rioters themselves have said caused them to do what they did.
You say the protesters and rioters did not have internet access. This is also not true. As Fielding mentioned above, when Trump finally did put out a video calling on the protesters and rioters to leave the capitol, they absolutely heard it. We know this because the protesters and rioters video recorded themselves watching and listening to Trump, and then spread the word to other rioters and protestors who weren’t on the internet at the time. Again, you should watch the hearings so that you don’t come off so ignorant.
You ask, “What do you think he should have done?” The implication of your question is that he should have done nothing, or that there was nothing he could have done. He could have called Vice President Pence to determine if he was safe (and take steps to ensure his safety). At the time Pence was in hiding at the Capitol and his Secret Service agents were so fearful they might not survive that they were making calls to loved ones to say goodbye. Trump could have called the Pentagon and ordered military support to put down the insurrection (like Pence did). He could have called the Department of Homeland Security for support. He could have requested support from law enforcement support. He did none of these things, and this is the bare minimum that Americans should expect at a time that the capitol is under siege with all of Congress inside.
Instead, Trump sat in his Oval Office dining room for hours watching events unfold on Fox News while ignoring calls from his staff that he needed to say something, do something, to call off the attack. We know this because his own staff, lawyers and daughter told us so in their testimony under oath.
Trump’s behavior that day was a dereliction of duty and a violation of his oath to defend the Constitution.
As long as you have people like this on your side, then you’re going to have Donald Trump or someone like him on our side.
Your side has subscribed to the “ends justify the means” since before I was born. Well, two can play that game, and I think you’re just seeing the beginning of that fight. Even as recently as a couple of years ago I would not have agreed with the old Dick Cheney quote that’s making the rounds: “Principle is OK up to a certain point, but principle doesn’t do any good if you lose.”
We are in a knock-down, drag-out fight for the soul of this country. Given the chance, your side will sucker-punch us every chance you get. You will lie, cheat and steal to maintain power. Well, the gloves are off, and we’re going to give as good as we get. We are simply not going to let you win. That’s not a threat; that’s a promise, and I will lay down my life, if need be, to fulfill it. And it’s not just me. There are millions who will, without hesitation, lay down their lives for Liberty; not so many who will lay down their lives for tyranny.
Spook, stop with the “your side” bullshit and trying to associate me with some random podcast you come across. My side is the United States of America. You know, the side that believes in the tradition of free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power going back to George Washington. The side that believes that an armed mob assaulting the capitol is un-American. The side that understands that a president is duty bound to do something when the United States capitol is attacked.
And frankly, it is obvious from your post that you used to believe this, too. You know it. And the reason we know you know it is that you admit that you have renounced your own principles. For what? For Donald Trump, of all people.
I am curious, when did you become politically active?
You post this pious declaration, and on some level you may even believe it. So let’s take it a little farther.
Our side believes that our federal government must be restricted as to its size, scope and power. with most authority left to the states, or to the people, The other side believes that the size of the federal government and its scope of authority can be expanded at will to accommodate new desires of the citizens. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that the nation is best governed by keeping power in the hands of the people as much as possible. The other side believes in the consolidation of power in the hands of elites, who then impose their will on the people. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that the role of our federal government is restricted to providing an umbrella of protections and a national identity to allow international diplomacy and national defense, and that within these protections people are responsible for their own actions and decisions. The other side believes that the role of the federal government is to take care of the people and solve their problems. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that the rule of law is essential to good government. The other side believes that laws can be stretched, altered or ignored if this is considered to lead to a desired outcome. (An example of this is letting state legislatures ignore their own constitutions to change election laws and then accepting ballots cast under the changed laws as valid votes,) Which side is yours?
Our side believes that only the elected members of Congress can legally make laws. The other side believes that lifetime political appointees can make rules and regulations, which are then treated as laws, without the participation or even oversight of Congress. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that the proper role of the press is to objectively report news, so the people can have all the information they need to make informed decisions. The other side believes that the role of the press is to steer the people into desired beliefs and decisions. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that the role of the judiciary is only to apply the written laws as they are written, without bias or concern for outcome. The other side believes that the role of the judiciary is to shape the law, and resulting policy, to fit a certain agenda. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that wanting a Supreme Court “balanced” between conservative and Liberal is a declaration of the belief that its role is shape the law, not merely apply it as it is written. The other side sees the Court as a mechanism to change laws. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that the Constitution is the law of the land as it is written. The other side believes it is a “living document” that can be altered at will. Which side is yours?
Our side believes this nation was properly founded on the principles stated in our Declaration of Independence, that we are all entitled to life and liberty. The other side believes that the right to live can be and should be dependent on the decision of the person who benefits the most from ending a life. Which side is yours?
Our side believes in equal opportunity. The other side believes in equal outcome, enforced by the State if necessary. Which side is yours?
Our side believes that our law enforcement must be even handed and equal for all. The other side believes that violating principles like the right to a speedy trial or the extreme measure of solitary confinement can be applied differently to different people.
Our side believes this is a sovereign nation with the moral and legal right establish and defend its borders. The other side believes that borders are immoral and that all people should be free to come here without any restriction. Which side is yours?
This is a partial summary of the primary differences between the two sides. Which side is yours?
My side is the United States of America. You know, the side that believes in the tradition of free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power going back to George Washington.
That’s hilarious!
The caveat to this pious declaration must be written in invisible ink, but we know what it says.
” the peaceful transfer of power” as long as the Left is happy with it. Otherwise it can be dismissed as illegitimate, sabotaged with movements like #RESIST! and undermined at every opportunity.
“free and fair elections” as long as the Left is free to violate state constitutions to illegally change election laws at the last minute, count the ballots cast under these illegitimate new rules as legitimate votes, and make new rules as they go along.
“That’s hilarious.”
Which part? The part in which I believe in the tradition of free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power going back to George Washington? Or the part in which you gave up your principles for Donald Trump?
My side. Your side. Blah, blah, blah. And I love your characterizations of the two sides. The size of the federal government and its scope of authority can be expanded at will! AT WILL!! The Constitution can be altered at will! Get real. These are strawman arguments not even worth discussing. I’ll tell you what. If you want a legitimate response, stop framing the the questions as two sides in which you dictate what the two sides believe. And ask a question, get a response, then ask another one. I don’t respond to your blizzard of words approach, sorry.
Thanks for your candor. Of course, your opinions are in direct contradiction to the Constitution, which is the core difference between the two sides.
And yes, basically there are only two sides, when we talk about American political choices—the Constitutional model or the Leftist model. I’ve already seen Lefty heads explode when I say this. I’ve heard the outraged squeals that I just don’t understand ISSUES, I just can’t grasp NUANCE.
Pick an issue, any issue. It will always come down to, not the value of the issue but whether it should be addressed from the Constitutional perspective or the living document perspective. THAT is the core choice we are asked to make. Not Identity Politics, not personality, but the position on this one decision. The Constitutional model explained in the 10th Amendment or the expansionist model so feared by the Founders as they did their best to make it impossible.
I can’t tell if you grasp this essential point or are just emoting. Not that I really care. I think you have laid out your position pretty well.
In other words you lack the courage to answer these questions. Blame the format, blame the number of words used, come up with any excuse you want.
I made the questions simple and easy to understand. I’m sure if you took them one at a time you could handle them.
Look, you write post after post, and when I don’t respond to each and every point of each and every post, you claim I’m a coward. Hint: You write so many posts that I stop reading them, so I don’t even know what they all say. Like I said, if you actually want a dialog, slow down so that we can have one. Or not. Whatever.
But let’s take your first question: “Our side believes that our federal government must be restricted as to its size, scope and power. with most authority left to the states, or to the people, The other side believes that the size of the federal government and its scope of authority can be expanded at will to accommodate new desires of the citizens. Which side is yours?”
First off, do you know that the head writer of this blog no longer believes in laws? He was quite clear the other day in saying that he now believes in obtaining his political objectives by force of might—the antithesis of laws. So much for your side.
Second, no, I don’t believe the federal government and its scope of authority can be expanded by will. I don’t know what side that puts me on and I don’t really care.
Force of might is not the antithesis of laws. If this were true law enforcement would not be able to use any degree of force in apprehension. And I believe that punishment is an imposition of will on another.
You sure have a goofy way of seeing things But then that is essential for you to remain in your bubble.
So far your answer, if true, means you are committed to the Constitutional model of restricted federal power. Interesting. Let’s see if you are consistent.
BTW, the old whine of “too many words” is a very poor excuse for not keeping up. Surely you can read faster than I can type.
“and what he could have done.” No, what they think he might have been able to do
“And yet, in court proceeding after court proceeding, rioter after rioter has stated that they broke into the capitol and fought with police because President Trump called upon them to do so.” OF COURSE they have, though as usual you misstate what anyone said.
The reason these people have all said they were there to support Trump is because the only people arrested were Trump supporters. And they didn’t fight with police, or say they were told to. The professional rioters, the agitators, the guys changing clothes to blend in with the Trump supporters, the guys who showed up with their regular riot gear, even those identified from other riots, all walked free. Did the J6 panel call on any of these people? The FBI knows who many of them are. Hell, we even know the name of one, who was seen all over the place conspiring with various violent people and inciting violence. His name is Ray Epps, and when Wray was asked about Ray Epps he got twitchy and refused to answer.
And you lie when you say “because President Trump called upon them to do so.” and that anyone said he did. Quotes, please, from reputable sources. Find those statements in transcripts. What you are saying is what you have been told by liars and demagogues and every time it passes through biased lips it loses veracity and gains dramatic license—which is a polite way of saying “lies”.
“so fearful they might not survive that they were making calls to loved ones to say goodbye.” Again, cite the actual statements from real live agents. This overheated hysterical hyperbole is so tiresome. Oh, I don’t doubt that there was concern in the building. There were seriously bad guys doing some seriously bad stuff. But only a few of them. The thing is, not one of the violent people has been linked to Trump. On another site someone has actually tried to support BS like yours by citing links, and when I go to the links I find all sorts of breathless details about what the Bad Guy did—and absolutely nothing tying him to Trump.
“Trump could have called the Pentagon and ordered military support to put down the insurrection” One, it was not an “insurrection” If you want to claim credibility don’t pepper your screed with lies. There is a legal definition of “insurrection”. There is case law defining “insurrection”. It is a violent uprising against a government with the intent of throwing it over and assuming its power. The only people who have ever talked about overthrowing the government were radicals who marched with hammer and sickle flags, and no one ever said a word about assuming the powers of the government. Ask any real Trump supporter and you will hear that they went to petition the government for a temporary delay in final certification, to allow for some investigation into some of the irregularities. That’s all. Period. And BTW, the right to petition the government for redress of wrongs is actually a Constitutional right.
Two, the only circumstance in which a president can call for military aid is if he declares a national emergency.
“Like Pence did”. ??? Pence called in the National Guard? Or “called the Pentagon and ordered military support”? Again, sources please. “He could have called the Department of Homeland Security for support. ” This is a new one. Please share with us the scope of HS power and their ability to handle a riot. Why didn’t they step up in Seattle? In Kenosha? In Portland? “He could have requested support from law enforcement support (sic).” So you think there were additional law enforcement officers just hanging around the precincts, waiting to be called?
There are always Monday morning quarterbacks explaining what THEY “would have done”. There are always armchair generals expounding on what they think would have been the RIGHT strategy. There are always people with fragmented and incomplete information who are still eager to explain the mistakes made by people who were there. In this case, this fragmented information has been spoon-fed by rabid partisans after being run through a few personal biases, and the critiques are always hate-based and not objective analyses.
I have no problem in looking back and thinking that Trump made mistakes. From the distance of time and information from many different sources it is easy to see where a different decision might have been more helpful
But I will tell you the real mistake Trump made, and it was a doozy. He should have known better than to call thousands of people to DC on that day. He should not have let his ego convince him that a massive rally to support him would sway the decisions of Congress as they evaluated the arguments made by Ted Cruz. He made a serious mistake, and will pay for it for the rest of his life. Everyone knew that this rally would be an irresistible magnet for every anarchist, every professional rioter, every recreational rioter, every Trump enemy eager to harm him, every screw-loose Loony Tunes from across the country. He was so gratified by the support he got for years from massive rallies he let that cloud his judgment, And he was wrong. It was a huge, massive, mistake.
When his effort to get National Guard troops in for crowd control were shot down by Dem radicals he should have had the foresight to see that he was being set up. Once he was deprived of a strong security force by people who he knew wanted to destroy him he should have recognized the ambush and called it all off.
I will never deny that Trump screwed up big time on January 6. I think there was a chance that Congress might have given us that ten day period to examine issues related to the election, just to create the impression it was impartial and dedicated to a legitimate election, and the effort to bulldoze them in that direction by having tens of thousands of people outside demanding it was unbelievably bad judgment. And it may have given us Pudding Brain and Cackles.
But the frantic effort to expand his culpability to treason and violation of his oath of office and all the other hysteria you people crave and spray around so freely is just wrong.
You claim to have seen video of people seeing Trump’s message to leave and then quietly leaving. Were these people rioting? That is, did they put down their weapons (whatever weapons they allegedly had) to check their phones? Were they in the process of attacking police officers, or tearing down barricades, or ?????
I haven’t seen these alleged videos, but I HAVE seen plenty of videos of average Middle America people milling around, even many who were invited into the Capitol building, who never gave a hint of violent intent. The claim that violent rioters who were engaged in all sorts of nefarious activities stopped to check their phones and then did a 180 and strolled off is just plain stupid.
Did you see the videos of men in black taking off black jackets and dumping them in trash barrels and putting on red hats? I did. One of them was part of the video of Ashli Babbit being murdered as she tried to get away from the crowd after trying to convince the blac bloc guys to be peaceful. I saw a video of several guys getting out of black pants and jackets and changing into red and blue, behind a line of trees, and then blending in with the Trump crowd.
I saw a video of a crowd surging toward barricades with law enforcement behind the barricades, and three or four guys were carrying a large sign in a metal frame, that had legs on it. Evidently they thought they would do something productive by getting this sign to the front of the crowd and somehow set up. They were being jostled by the crowd surging in behind them, and at one point part of the sign crossed the plane dividing the crowd from the cops, and a couple of cops seemed to think this might have been aggressive, but the sign handlers quickly pulled it back.
Then the crowd surged again and pushed a few people in front into the barricades, and one fence segment tipped a little. At that point some cops got very aggressive and shoved that fence segment violently into the people in the front of the crowd. And they pushed it back.
Not into the cop area, just back away from them. It was purely defensive. And in that video clip it was easy to see how nonviolent people could get caught up in situations that were never intended to be violent. Naturally the guys who had that fence segment shoved at them so aggressively when they had done nothing, with whatever the cops were yelling when they did this, were irritated. They had done nothing wrong. But none of the people in this encounter showed the slightest intent to injure anyone or become violent.
The determination to despise and condemn Trump at every opportunity, even an invented opportunity, is obvious and offensive. And if you think incessant howling about your rage and hatred is going to convince anyone you are right, well you are completely wrong. It just brands you as irrational haters.
Remember, you have been trying to pollute this blog with your irrational hatred for years, long before J6. It’s the same old same old, just with a different title.
You could trying watching the January 6 committee hearings instead of bloviating. They produced an excellent video depicting what the mob did, by the way, in addition to producing reams of testimony almost entirely from people withing the Trump White House.
Interesting statement: “They produced an excellent video depicting what the mob did, ” Was this unedited video taken of the event? Or was it produced? (the whole thing is run by a professional entertainment producer.) It’s either actual unedited video or it’s a fictional account of what the creator wants us to think.
Wow. Reams and reams and reams of testimony from people testifying that Trump had an opinion, and he expressed it, and they did or didn’t agree with it. All of this. by the way, is Constitutionally protected freedom of speech, which the Left is trying to criminalize.
Did anyone testify that Trump stated an intent—or even a desire—to overthrow the government and assume its powers? I didn’t think so, which is why the bogus “INSURRECTION !!!!” claim fell apart so fast.
Did anyone testify that Trump ever instructed anyone to engage in violence on January 6? I didn’t think so, which is why the bogus “INCITEMENT !!!!” claim fell apart so fast.
So they are left with trying to convince people that having an opinion is a crime and expressing it is a crime if this upsets people who hate him. This is why all they can do now is try to convince people that if others did not agree with him that means his opinion is criminal and must be punished.
I notice that you are dodging the question of whether you are impressed by an actual video of an actual event or by a production of a dramatization of the event designed to steer watchers to a certain conclusion.
Can you find a record of an identified Trump supporter being found guilty of actual violence against police officers? I went looking and insider.com claims to have tables showing all the accusations and all the guilty pleas.
Here is the partial table on the web site of the heinous crimes to which Trump supporters pled guilty
Table with 3 columns and 363 rows. Currently displaying rows 1 to 15.
NAME ACCEPTED CHARGES NOTES
Loammi Yazdani-Isfehani Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building Agreed to let law enforcement agencies review their social media accounts and interview with them
Troy Sargent Civil disorder; assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers; entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds; act of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings
Tina Logsdon Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building
Christopher Logsdon Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building
Thaddis Johnson Jr. Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building Agreed to interview with law enforcement agencies and let them review his social media accounts
Iraj Javid Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building Agreed to interview with law enforcement agencies and let them review his social media accounts
Jennifer Horvath Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building Agreed to let law enforcement agencies review their social media accounts and interview with them
Nicholas Hendrix Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building
Troy Faulkner Destruction of government property Agreed to interview with law enforcement agencies and let them review his social media accounts
Nathaniel DeGrave Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; assaulting resisting, or impeding certain officers
Matthew Council Civil disorder; assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers; entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds; disorderly conduct in a Capitol building; parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building
Jonas Buxton Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building Agreed to interview with law enforcement agencies and let them review his social media accounts
Tammy A. Bronsburg Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building Agreed to let law enforcement agencies review their social media accounts and interview with them
Steven Billingsley Disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds Agreed to interview with law enforcement agencies and let them review his social media accounts
Mark Roderick Aungst Parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building
I found two in this list of 15 who pled guilty to a vague nonspecific cluster of offenses: assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers. So did they assault, or did they resist, or did they impede? Go ahead and look up the whole list and scurry on back to us with a breathless account of the severity of the attacks.
But oh, the PARADING! All that PARADING! You know a crime is serious when the penalty is a review of social media accounts. Bringing down the hammer!
“Can you find a record of an identified Trump supporter being found guilty of actual violence against police officers?”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/05/02/webster-guilty-police-assault-jan6/
From another article written at the start of his trial: “In an interview with the F.B.I. in February 2021, Mr. Webster told agents that he had gone to Washington on Jan. 6 to show support for President Donald J. Trump and to protest what he believed was a stolen election.”
I can’t read the article because I refuse to support the WaPo by subscribing to it.
So tell us did Mr. Webster say that President Trump ordered, or even asked, him to engage in violence to express his feelings? And what was the nature of his “actual violence”?
Here’s an article you can read:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/retired-nypd-officer-found-guilty-jury-felony-charges-actions-related-capitol-breach
And by the way, nice try changing the goal posts.
Also by the way, just reading the Sentencing Memorandum for January 6 defendant Steven Thurlow, who pleaded guilty to one count of 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G). In his interview with the FBI he said he would define the events of January 6 as an “insurrection” because the word “riot” did not adequately describe what happened.
Oh.
Click to access gov.uscourts.dcd.236311.38.0.pdf
Do you people even read the links you reference? I doubt it and think you just copy and post links you are told support your howling. I say this because every time I go to a link supplied by a troll or blog vandal I find information that contradicts their position.
Here, we are supposed to put the opinion of a rioter over that of legal case law, and use this to redefine the very important and legally defined term “insurrection”. I guess we are supposed to assume both knowledge of the law and superior intellect as the basis for this supposedly superior interpretation of the law, in spite of Thurlow’s admission (as quoted in the link) that he only entered the Capitol because he is, to use his own word, “stupid”
But what else is in the link?
Let’s start with the government’s assessment of the seriousness of his offenses. I think the sentence gives us a pretty clear idea of that: the government requests that this
Court sentence Defendant Steven Daniel Thurlow to 30 days incarceration, three years of
probation, 60 hours of community service, and $500 in restitution. But he said he was part of an insurrection, an effort to overthrow the government and assume its powers!
As explained herein, a sentence of home detention is appropriate in this case So how seriously did the court take the claim of “insurrection”?
Thurlow’s participation in the riot that actually succeed (sic) in halting the Congressional certification combined with his entry into the Capitol through the North Senate Wing Door, repeated chanting, and travel to the lobby outside the Senate Chamber renders a home detention sentence, rather than simply probation, necessary and appropriate in this case. Oh, CHANTING. They should have led with that. That’s probably as serious as all that PARADING the other defendants were found guilty of.
He posted a photo of himself wearing a “Boogaloo” patch, and the report offers its own definition (are we seeing a pattern here?) of Boogaloo: “Boogaloo” is a term referencing a violent uprising or impending civil war.” Yet, in his own words, He described the “Boogaloo” as a mindset and not a membership group, and he thought it was not about overthrowing the government
He admitted he knew at the time he entered the Capitol that he did not have permission to enter the building and he paraded, demonstrated, or picketed inside the building
On May 9, 2022, pursuant to a plea agreement, Thurlow pleaded guilty
to Count Four of the Information, charging him with a violation of 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G),
Case 1:21-cr-00615-PLF Document 38 Filed 08/19/22 Page 15 of 66 16
Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in the Capitol Building More of that deadly parading. It’s a wonder the entire government did not fall.
The entire document is internally contradictory, full of extravagant declarations of the alleged seriousness of the riots and packed with personal opinions, but when it comes right down to it there is the tacit admission that it was really not that big a deal. It is 37 pages of bloviating, but with the final decision that this guy was obnoxious and should have to stay at home for a while and pay $500.
Try reading your own links before passing them off as supporting of your contentions.
Since this is supposed to be some kind of proof of horrible, dangerous and nation-threatening activities by “Trump supporters” note that nowhere in this entire 37 pages is Trump mentioned. Not as a motivator, not as an instigator, not as an inciter.
And I suggest you take a close look at your link, starting at Page 39, for Table 1: Cases in which the government recommended a probation sentence without home detention1followed by Table 3: Cases in which the government recommended a sentence of incarceration One interesting thing about Table 3 is the difference in so many of the cases between the recommendation and the actual sentences.
I think the actual records, stripped of the grandstanding and overheated rhetoric of “threats to democracy” blah blah blah, show the real level of seriousness of these offenses. I also point out that they are far more onerous than sentences for serious rioting which burned buildings, killed or blinded law enforcement officers, and even tried to burn officers alive.
A corollary of “play stupid games, win stupid prizes” is, here on this blog, “dump words on the blog, get answered with lots of words”.
You asked if I could find a record of an identified Trump supporter being found guilty of actual violence against police officers. I easily found one. There are many more.
You “easily found one” but the question is, did he or she testify that his or her actions were incited by Trump? And just who is this “Trump supporter” you say you found? Steven Daniel Thurlow was not charged with violence against a police officer. Who do you mean?
Are you referring to your link citing the sentencing of Thomas Webster? Well, I read that link, too (see my comment on the foolishness of linking to stories that don’t support your contentions) and there is not a word in it about Trump. Not about being in the riot to support Trump, or being influenced by Trump, or getting messages of any sort from Trump.
On the other hand, there are many references from other sources to the fact that the rally attracted people who, for various reasons, like to be part of riots. Webster is an asshat, but he’s not a Trump asshat.
Oh for God’s sakes. That wasn’t your question. I responded to the question you asked at the time. And I wasn’t talking about Thurlow. I brought him up later because I found it amusing that he stated that he wasn’t involved in a riot but an insurrection. Changing the question after the fact, picking out details from the wrong case, and so on, is just part of your m.o. I don’t really see any reason to respond further. You can do your own research if you’re actually interested in finding answers to your questions.
Well, who WERE you talking about? You keep skittering from one thing to another. But nice effort to find an excuse to fail to provide an answer. I don’t really see any reason to respond further. Of course not. Actually, though, to be more accurate, you really don’t see a reason to keep trying to defend the indefensible because I won’t let you get away with it.
My “m.o.” as you call it is to follow linear thinking. And to point out the silliness of blatantly silly comments, such as your effort to claim that the opinion of a rioter who admitted to doing stupid things is more compelling than legal opinions and actual case law.
You claim you found a Trump supporter who was also violent, yet I don’t remember any specifics other than the link you provided, which BTW disproved your effort there. And even if you did, that doesn’t mean he engaged in violence, such as it was, because Trump told him to, asked him to, send him psychic messages to, or in any way communicated a desire that he do so.
I asked “who do you mean?” and that is when you turned tail and ran. Such a surprise.
Trump’s behavior that day was a dereliction of duty
I’ll tell you what dereliction of duty is: it’s remaining silent while Chinese fentanyl floods through our southern border, now disguised as candy to target children. Anything Trump did on January 6th (I agree with Amazona that the whole day was a huge mistake) pales in comparison to the deaths caused by the wide open southern border. The President’s (and the government’s) NUMBER ONE responsibility is to protect the American people. Biden gets an F. If there was a grade lower than F he would get that.
And yet the opioid overdose deaths continued to rise during the Trump administration. This after Trump promised in October 2016, “We are going to stop the inflow of drugs into New Hampshire and into our country 100%.” Another promise not kept.
And just what does this have to do with open borders allowing even more drugs into the country? Does this excuse open borders? Does this justify the vast increase in fentanyl deaths due to our border policies?
There isn’t even a nod to the idea that if Trump had been able to finish the border wall he would have been much closer to shutting down most of the drug trade.
There is something profoundly toxic about someone who supports stopping an effort to accomplish something and then points to the lack of accomplishment as someone else’s failure.
Actually drug overdoses in general leveled off in 2018, and 2019, only increasing dramatically in 2020 as a biproduct of the Covid lockdowns.
Conservatives have spent a lot of time talking about Liberals and trying to figure out what has twisted them so, and I think most of us have given up. I think my theory is probably the closest we will get. Similar to Thomas Sowell’s Conflict of Visions, in which he explains that the vision of some people is that humanity is by its very nature flawed and prone to error so it is necessary to mitigate the dangers of this through processes, while the other vision is that some people are just so special they should be given great power and not held to the restrictions of having to follow processes.
My version is this: That some people are inherently made to respect objectivity and rationality and reject control by emotion, and others are the opposite, giving emotion great if not full control over what they think. A corollary seems to be the nature of these emotions—those choosing to turn over their thought processes to emotion also seem much more hostile, more angry, more volatile, more intolerant of opposing points of view. That is, that their emotional choice seems to define them as persons. so contracting their positions feels to them like personal attacks. Which, of course, justifies what they feel is counter-attacking.
I am not emotionally invested in my support of Donald Trump. I feel that I have evaluated his strengths and his weaknesses and made my decision based on my approval of the job he did as president. If I were to learn that I have been wrong, I’d be a little disappointed, but it would not shatter me. If I were to learn that I have misjudged him in areas I find important, it would just be one of those things.
I don’t freak out about being wrong. An example: There was a period of time when I believed that a great Republican presidential ticket would be Mitt Romney (for his business acumen) and John Bolton (for his international experience). When I realized how wrong I was, it did not make me depressed or angry. Because this was an IDEA, this was an objective analysis of what I knew or thought I knew at the time. I was not emotionally invested in it, any more than I am emotionally invested in my preference for Ford vehicles.
Similarly, I am not emotionally involved in my belief that Donald Trump did a very good job as president, under pressures that should have crippled his ability to get anything done at all. The closest I come to an emotional aspect of my support for Trump is a sense that he has been treated so unfairly.
BUT….I truly believe that it is completely impossible for the anti-Trump fanatics to ever, under any circumstance, admit to being wrong about him. This is because they are so deeply emotionally linked to their passionate, overwhelming, controlling hatred and rage that these emotions form part of their actual identity. They obsessively collect details they then lovingly polish so they can be brought out as part of their melodramatic denouncements. I truly believe that if every Trump opponent and attacker were to go on live television and admit, in detail, to lying about him, sabotaging him, setting him up, creating elaborate scenarios in which he was falsely portrayed as a villain, these people would still refuse to admit they were wrong. They are truly addicted to their hate. Abandoning it would be like cutting the string on a kite—-they would lose a major part of their very selves and be unmoored. Their obsessive hate is what tethers them to the world.
That’s sad and creepy enough, but on top of that these melodrama addicts and haters, seeing life only through their own distorted lenses, are incapable of understanding that we are not like them. We truly do not have this kind, or level, of emotional commitment to the people we support. They project their own twisted emotional dependence on us, because that’s the only frame of reference they have.
So, fielding and forty, this is why you have no credibility here. or in any gathering of conservatives. We see you as irrational, shrill and out of control—and profoundly dishonest. There is just nothing there to respect.
Unfortunately, most of what you write is not supported by what you folks do. ” We truly do not have this kind, or level, of emotional commitment to the people we support.” This is an amazing statement given that so many Republicans actually think Trump was sent by God to be our president. The “emotional commitment” you folks have demonstrated to Trump is unmatched by any politician in my lifetime, and probably in the history of the United States. People like Spook admit that they have renounced their own principles for the man. That’s quite a commitment if you ask me.
Oh, and by the way: in•sur•recªtion. noun a violent uprising against an authority or government.
You can find loose “definitions” of this word, just as you can find loose definitions of “recession” i if you need to shore up a shaky argument.
Insurrection refers to an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. It is a violent revolt against an oppressive authority. Insurrection is different from riots and offenses connected with mob violence. In insurrection there is an organized and armed uprising against authority or operations of government whereas riots and offenses connected with mob violence are simply unlawful acts in disturbance of the peace which do not threaten the stability of the government or the existence of political society.
The following is a case law defining Insurrection:
Insurrection means “a violent uprising by a group or movement acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers. An insurrection occurs where a movement acts to overthrow the constituted government and to take possession of its inherent powers.” [Younis Bros. & Co. v. Cigna Worldwide Ins. Co., 899 F. Supp. 1385, 1392-1393 (E.D. Pa. 1995)]
You need to realize that when you lie to us about what we have said, or not said, you are instantly identified not just as a liar but a crazy liar.
“This is an amazing statement given that so many Republicans actually think Trump was sent by God to be our president.” This is a vicious distortion of the religious beliefs of many people, that the hand of God is present in everything. Feel scorn for faith, express your contempt for people of faith, but don’t lie about what they say or believe.
The “emotional commitment” you folks have demonstrated to Trump is unmatched by any politician in my lifetime, and probably in the history of the United States. This is typical of the overheated hysterical rhetoric that seems to form the very identity of people like you. Your melodramatic overstatements and wild-eyed exaggerations have nothing to do with us and everything to do with the mind that generates them.
People like Spook admit that they have renounced their own principles for the man. This is another lie. We notice that as you get pressed on the irrationality and dishonesty of your positions you become more reckless in your blatant lying.
Nothing that emerges from the distortion filters of your sick mind has any relationship to reality.
Nothing.
People like Spook admit that they have renounced their own principles for the man.
Amazona already addressed this, so I’ll just add to what she said. Normally I’d give you the benefit of a doubt that your reading skills are just marginal, but I think we both know that’s not the case. Here’s what I said:
Not a word about Trump in there. I was referring to the fight for the soul of this country that is starting in earnest. I’m am abandoning my sense of fair play, gloves off, no holds barred.
“A recent survey found that 49 percent of white evangelical Protestants believe Trump was chosen by God.”
https://bigthink.com/the-present/was-trump-anointed-by-god/
Oh, and by the way, more Protestants believe Trump was anointed by God than believe all presidents are anointed by God.
“A recent survey found that 49 percent of white evangelical Protestants believe Trump was chosen by God.”
I’m not sure what your point is other than to denigrate people of faith. I can see why some people might believe that. Trump was a friend to people of faith. Have you checked with God to see if he can corroborate that belief?
re: your link to bigthink.com—when a group illustrates its total ignorance of a belief system its effort to portray it in any meaningful way is not very credible.
Your link starts with what is really a tacit admission to utter ignorance of the basic tenets of Christianity. That is, redemption, salvation and forgiveness. When you start with “Evangelical support of President Trump has baffled many who find his conduct at odds with core Christian values” you are actually admitting that you don’t know squat about “core Christian values”.
This is a pretty good hint that a poll by these people purporting to address faith or any concept of the role of God in our lives is simply irrelevant.
You know the whining and bleating when we play by their rules.
I think we are back to the same question that inevitably arises when the blog is invaded by blog vandals—have either of these people contributed even a single word that adds to the quality of discourse here? Or are they merely using the blog as a litter box for their mental and emotional excrement?
And how much longer should we tolerate it?
We don’t have to respond, but, truth be told, I think we all enjoy messing with them. What’s interesting (OK, maybe interesting is not the right word) is that we’ve had the exact same conversation with Forty in the past under names like Tryvasty, Simonee, RGRG2, Crewman, etc. — different set of topics, facts, and characters, but the same progression of responses to the point where I could have predicted almost exactly where it would go three days ago.
I am curious about one thing, actually several things, and perhaps Forty or Fielding could respond. You both dislike Trump as an individual. We get that. None of us are enthralled with the guy either. If all the good things he accomplished during his 4 years had been accomplished by someone else, say a moderate Republican like Romney or even a Democrat but someone of higher moral character, what would you have supported, and what would you have opposed? Also, what actions/policies of the current administration do you support or oppose? Do you feel as strongly about the moral flaws of Joe Biden (ie., groping little girls on camera) as you do about Trump’s moral flaws? Do you condemn the corruption (Trump was the first president to push back against China while Biden has essentially sold out to China) in the Biden family the same as you do the alleged corruption in the Trump family? I’m just trying to get a handle on whether you apply the same principles across the board.
As I have so often commented, these people can never tell us the origin of their passionate allegiance to—-well, here I stumble because so far not one of them, under any assumed name, has actually been able to say what they are loyal TO.
I’ve tried in as many ways as I can think of to get one of them to explain the political foundation for their passion. That leads me to the obvious conclusion that there is none. So what’s left? Nothing but emotion. And here’s where it gets creepy, because the nature of the emotional basis for their dedication to savaging conservatives is quite malignant.
Over the years it has become pretty obvious that these people just have vast reservoirs of free-floating negativity looking for something they think can justify it. And Leftist narratives, which have to depend on tapping into this kind of mother lode of hate and resentment looking for a landing spot, are a perfect match.
We saw the same kinds of blind hatred and vitriolic attacks on Mitt Romney when he ran. We saw it directed at McCain and Palin. We saw it directed at Bush. I wasn’t interested in politics back in the Reagan days, so I don’t have personal memories of how he was savaged, but looking at the history and pattern of Leftist opposition to Republican candidates I doubt it was any saner or more decent. It has become clear that it is not based on any one Republican, but is just a general knee-jerk response to any target named by the Left.
It’s certainly not based on ideology, because so far it seems that these attack dogs have none. It is not overtly in defense of any political model, though by attacking anything on the Right they are enabling and defending a political model. They just don’t know what it is. Or seem to care. Because that is not the point.
The point is to savage a person—in this case, Donald Trump—and those who defend him. And that is the sum total of their motivation. No wonder we have such contempt for them.
Politics is serious business. It is the determination of the best blueprint for governing the country and the effort to find and elect the people most likely to use that blueprint. But to a segment of the population it’s really just a cage match, where they are pointed at a party or a person and told to kill it and then their entire focus is on racking up points in vicious attacks.
At least the true ideologues want to destroy Trump so they can gain power and put their own agenda into play. But people like forty and fielding don’t even have that kind of motivation—they’re just in it because checking in with talking heads who provide plenty of content and snouting around for nuggets of information (true or not) that they can use in their attacks and then putting together breathless arguments of spite and malice is their entire purpose. It’s fun.
I think we all know that if Donald Trump were to step aside tomorrow and Ron DeSantis were to become the obvious choice of Republicans for 2024 he would suddenly be the focus of the same level of malice and hysteria that Trump is now. This is obnoxious on its own, but the more significant thing about this kind of behavior is that it trivializes the very serious business of politics and turns it into a cage match.
Which is what the Left wants and needs, because Leftist ideology can never defeat the Constitutional model in a face-to-face matchup of ideas backed up by historical records of successes and failures The Left HAS to fight on a different battlefield, and that is emotional manipulation.
As I have so often commented, these people can never tell us the origin of their passionate allegiance to
Forty says (I’m quoting because I don’t want to be accused of putting words in his/her mouth) “My side is the United States of America. You know, the side that believes in the tradition of free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power going back to George Washington.”
That would make him/her not just a Republican, but a Trump Republican. Until Trump came along, Republicans, if they did anything at all, just paid lip service to eliminating election fraud, while Democrats have refined election fraud into an art form. Hillary Clinton is still insisting Trump was never a legitimate President after 5-1/2 years, and she and Congressional Democrats threw everything but the kitchen sink at him to first prevent him from winning and then to destroy and remove him from office after he won. They even supported violent Antifa/BLM/anarchists burning down large segments of American cities including federal buildings, police precincts, and killing American citizens and cops. They essentially engaged in a 4-year-long insurrection. You can’t get any more unpeaceful transfer of power than that.
Well how about Stacey Abrams? She has yet to concede the 2018 election.
But that’s different, just as it was different when Hillary and her minions declared that Trump had cheated and that he did not really win in 2016. Of course, back then that was not seditious, just as the #RESIST movement, which included members of Congress and implanted saboteurs within the government to undermine and interfere with the administration, were not efforts at insurrection.
Spook asks, “I am curious about one thing, actually several things, and perhaps Forty or Fielding could respond. You both dislike Trump as an individual. We get that. None of us are enthralled with the guy either. If all the good things he accomplished during his 4 years had been accomplished by someone else, say a moderate Republican like Romney or even a Democrat but someone of higher moral character, what would you have supported, and what would you have opposed?”
I think you are mistaken in believing that the reason I think Trump was a terrible president, and would be again, is because I merely dislike him and think he is of low moral character.
Of course, he is of exceptionally low moral character, and that does cause me to dislike him because I dislike people of such low moral character. But that misses the point. We’ve had other presidents of arguably low moral character. The problem with Trump is the rampant corruption on a scale the likes of which we haven’t seen in your or my lifetime, culminating in his attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election. There are so many aspects of his corrupt that it is impossible to ignore. You can start with the list of people closely associated with him who are now convicted felons, and go from there. I certainly hope that I would have the moral rectitude to reject such a figure if another one should come along in the future, regardless of which party they aligned themselves with.
Look, sometimes the Republicans are in control and advance their agenda. Sometimes the Democrats are in control and advance theirs. That’s fine. That’s part of the normal governance of the United States of America. That doesn’t mean either one is un-American.
The problem with Trump is the rampant corruption on a scale the likes of which we haven’t seen in your or my lifetime, culminating in his attempt to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
Take a breath and calm down, and give examples of this “rampant corruption on a scale the likes of which we haven’t seen in your or my lifetime”. Don’t bother going back into accusations about his prior business dealings—they have been investigated by serious law enforcement, by TDSers, by the Agenda Media (sorry for the redundancy) and those with actual legal issues have been adjudicated.
What we are interested in is corruption while in office. Got any examples?
You see, calmer heads understand that people often look back on lives that were less than perfect and say to themselves “I don’t want to be that person any more”. Our nation has a history of formerly corrupt robber barons going through this evolution and becoming philanthropists and contributing to the betterment of the nation. Many of us know people who have gone through this process in their own lives, though usually on a much smaller scale. The obsessive need to collect, archive and revisit old sins is a character flaw of the collector, not of the subject of the obsession.
And no, we cannot start with the list of people closely associated with him who are now convicted felons. To go into this fairly would require a whole different blog thread. Suffice it to say that from his first days of candidacy everyone connected with Trump became a target of the Left. When we look at the elaborate schemes and hoaxes of the Left in this frantic effort to get rid of Trump, it’s hard to put much credence in the accusations made against people who were in, or accused of being in, his close circle of friends and associates.
Carter Page is an excellent example. An honest and ethical businessman, he had some business dealings in Russia. When he was approached by the CIA and asked to work with them regarding Russia, he agreed, and from that point on his dealings in Russia and with the Russian government itself were in coordination with the CIA. Yet when the Left decided to target Trump they started by going after people associated with him, and as one result top FBI officials committed perjury in their application for a FISA warrant to spy on Page, an American citizen, in the pretense that he was involved in something nefarious, in connection with the other invention of the FBI, the claim that Trump was somehow asking Russia to help him win the election.
The FBI lied about Page and withheld the information that while he was, in fact, engaging in business that sometimes did involve the government of Russia, he did so as an asset of the CIA. As a result, Page was accused of all sorts of crimes.
So, while I reject the “Guilt By Association” tactic, I’d still like you to research these felonies and get back to us with a report on what they were and they were related to the relationship, such as it was, with Donald Trump.
Hint: Guilt By Association, if accepted, is a far more dangerous concept to the Democrats than it is to Republicans.
I certainly hope that I would have the moral rectitude to reject such a figure if another one should come along in the future, You might start with working on developing the moral rectitude to reject toxic partisan manipulation of emotions to justify vicious and nonstop attacks intended to do nothing but remove a speed bump from the Left’s pursuit of power.
Platitude alert: That doesn’t mean either one is un-American
Well, I guess that depends on what you decide IS “American”. My personal opinion includes a person or a party governed by the belief that we, as a nation, are governed by our Constitution. The Democrat Party is inarguably not committed to that.
You’re so transparent. That’s exactly the way I thought you’d non-answer my questions. BTW, have you seen that video of Trump using a billion dollar loan guarantee to extort a foreign country into firing a prosecutor who was investigating his son? Oh wait, that was Biden — never mind. The corruption of the Biden crime family makes everything you’ve accused Trump of look like shoplifting.
Don’t forget that as “point man” for Obama regarding distribution of tax dollars to different countries then-VP Biden was in charge of funneling billions of dollars to countries, some of which then entered into “business dealings” with his son, whose own words on his own computer admitted that 10% of his take had to go to the “Big Guy”
There is a long and documented history of Biden political influence enriching his whole family.
“Take a breath and calm down.” I’m perfectly calm. You, on the other hand, seem agitated.
“So, while I reject the ‘Guilt By Association’ tactic, I’d still like you to research these felonies and get back to us with a report on what they were and they were related to the relationship.”
Now I’m laughing. You’d like for me to research these felonies and get back to you… Get real. Maybe I’ve overestimated you. Are you asking me because you don’t know how to do it yourself? If only you had an ounce of intellectual curiosity.
Oh, I KNOW how. I just wondered if you were willing to back up your claims serious wrongdoing with facts. Clearly you are not.
Laugh away, though I think it is probably more of a nervous titter at being backed into yet another corner. You’re the one who says these felonies are somehow damning to Trump, so put up or shut up.
I think my intellectual curiosity has been proved here many times, as my record for rebutting the nonsense posted by you people is pretty good, and that is because I do my research and come back with facts. You followed the script, tried the tired old tactic of “you should condemn Trump for what other people did” and it didn’t work.
Take the L and buzz off. And just a warning: If you want to play Guilt By Association, the cards in my hand include Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, just to name a few. I’ll see your process crimes and raise you an effort to set fire to a police station at shift change to kill as many cops as possible. I’ll see your symbolic guilty plea to head off bankruptcy caused by political persecution and raise you “guilty as hell and free as a bird”.
You’ve got nothing but malignant spite and malice and a tool box full of Agenda Media crap and you want to stink up this blog with it.
It’s like arguing with a first grader. I’m perfectly calm. You, on the other hand, seem agitated is a marginally more mature version of “I know what you are but what am I?”
It’s like you graduated from Bicker U and are going for your Master’s.
Take the L… lol. The fact that you want me to be your errand boy and do research for you into things that are easily found shows how insincere you are. If you truly wanted to know the answer, you would look it up yourself. (You probably already have in order to prep for your responses.) But you just want to play semantic games.
flap flap flap
I don’t want you to be my “errand boy”. and it’s not research for ME, doofus—it’s research to prove that you’re not just making stuff up. I don’t care one way or the other. You can post whatever you want, and you can choose whether or not you want to back it up. If you don’t, (which I understand given how many times you’ve had your nose rubbed in what you thought was compelling information) then I’m fine with that.
I was paying attention while the feds used the might and power of the State to harass, intimidate and yes, even arrest people for what amounted to political crimes. While I can’t, off the top of my head, recite the details of each abuse of power, I do know that the goal was to intimidate and bully people close to Trump, which I assumed was to scare others who might consider aligning themselves with him. So when a Leftist puppet starts howling about all these big bad felonies and how awful they were and how much this reflects on Trump, my reaction is “put up or shut up”.
You chose Door #3, which was to whine about being challenged to do this.
I am pretty well grounded in the historical abuses of power by Leftist governments and the same sleazy bully-boy tactics have been in play in the Obama-Biden administration and now under Biden—the weaponization of federal agencies, the spying on citizens, the tactic of using the might of the State to intimidate and control. The goal has always been to make any ally of Trump fear that midnight or dawn knock on the door, to fear being dragged out of bed and forced into a shackled perp walk past Agenda Media cameras or family and crowds at an airport. It’s the same heavy-handed thuggery of every Leftist in power.
And part of it is to force honest citizens to drain their savings till they are nearly bankrupt and willing to plead to bogus charges just to stop the hemorrhaging of assets. It’s the State’s version of “nice little retirement fund you’ve got there—-be a shame if you lost it all”.
Both of these administrations have been shameless in their adoption of the Stalinist model explained by secret police chief Lavrentiy Beria’s comment “Bring me the man and I’ll find you the crime”.
So if you are going to play the game of listing Trump allies who have been found guilty of crimes, you’d better be able to name and describe those crimes. Or STFU
What you dismiss as “semantic games” are really just accurately using words according to their real definitions. This is also offensive to the Left, which depends on semantic infiltration of false definitions. Not my problem.
“I don’t want you to be my ‘errand boy’. and it’s not research for ME, doofus—it’s research to prove that you’re not just making stuff up.”
I already know about the many Trump associates who are convicted felons and what their crimes are. Do you? Can YOU prove that you do?
I kind of doubt it because you also said, “Don’t bother going back into accusations about his prior business dealings—they have been investigated by serious law enforcement, by TDSers, by the Agenda Media (sorry for the redundancy) and those with actual legal issues have been adjudicated.” Sadly for you, Trump and his businesses are right now embroiled in several “legal issues.” I guess you are unaware that just last week Trump took the Fifth 440 times in connection to a New York state investigation into his business practices in order to avoid answering questions truthfully and incriminating himself. And I guess you unaware that his CFO pleaded guilty this week to tax fraud schemes on behalf of the Trump Organization, and will testify against the Trump Organization later this year. Seems like not all of his legal issues have been adjudicated, sweetie
News flash, Bickerboy—I don’t have to prove anything to you.
It is no surprise that Trump, et al, are still being hounded by the jackals of New York and our national DOJ. It’s an unending effort to interfere in the electoral process by eliminating a candidate who poses a threat to Leftist hegemony.
If you don’t like the 5th Amendment then start a movement to change it. But it is in place to allow people to refuse to incriminate themselves without prejudice. I guess you missed that “without prejudice” part—but then one of your idols is trying to criminalize the right to freedom of opinion and speech, so there seems to be a lot concern on the Left over those pesky Constitutionally protected rights
I am ” unaware that his CFO pleaded guilty this week to tax fraud schemes on behalf of the Trump Organization”—-as this is your claim, please back it up. My understanding is that the CFO of the Trump Organization, not “HIS” CFO, pled guilty to personal tax evasion, and it was just a failure to report taxable benefits, not some grand “fraud scheme” or “on behalf of the Trump Organization” Correct me if I am wrong, with actual quotes from the ruling.
I never said all of his legal issues have been adjudicated—they never will be as long as the Left has the power to use the might of the State against an enemy. The cases that have been adjudicated have cleared him, except for a couple, such as the Trump University case which rested so heavily on the use of the word “University” and on the actions of employees of the business.
Why do you care? He is a private citizen. Why aren’t you getting your panties in a wad over Hunter Biden, whose various illegal and disgusting antics have made him a serious national security risk and implicated his father—who is NOT just a private citizen but the President of the United States—-in a series of illegal and corrupt schemes, some of which touch on national security? Did you get all worked up into a frenzy about a member of the House Intelligence Committee sleeping with a Chinese spy? Or a senior Democrat Senator employing a different Chinese spy for many years? Or Pay to Play schemes in our State Department, resulting in, among other things, selling 20% of American uranium to Russia? Or the heads of the FBI committing perjury to allow spying on American citizens? Do any of the things that are actually important to the nation matter to you? Or is there room in your head only for your obsessive loathing of Donald Trump?
And I repeat: WHY ARE YOU HERE?
I have come to realize that your pseudo-political onanism is really just a form of exhibitionism, and it is increasingly creepy to have you keep coming here to stroke your fantasies. Sorry if your pathology needs the involvement of others to be satisfying, but I am not interested in being part of it any more.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see
Sorry if your pathology needs the involvement of others to be satisfying, but I am not interested in being part of it any more.
Admit it, though. It’s fun beating up on people like Forty and Fielding, although it does get to the point after 4 days and a 130-comment-long thread that it feels like making fun of the kids getting off the short bus. Still, a good way to hone your research and debating skills.
Fun to a point, till I realize that it’s gone from beating up on someone to being sucked into a truly sick and creepy pathology that almost feels like egging on an exhibitionist instead of ignoring him. Being part of that, even at a distance, even with a different motive for me, is just too distasteful. His intensity really was starting to feel like he was emotionally masturbating, at least getting a nearly sexual thrill out of the battle, and that’s not something I feel like encouraging. Beating up—- OK Beating off—no thanks.
So he’s all yours.
So he’s all yours.
Nope! I’ve had enough as well. And your assessment about “emotionally masterbating” is hilariously spot on.
This is an amazing statement given that so many Republicans actually think Trump was sent by God to be our president.
Forty has the emotional maturity of an AOC non binary staffer. There is no penetrating that shield of propagandized ignorance. What she knows, is what she knows and no amount of reality will convince her otherwise. I too use to like to debate progressives but they are incapable of any kind of intelligent debate. They are so convinced of their own moral superiority that anyone who doesn’t think exactly the way they do, is a flawed human being in their opinion and they will ignore and aggressively deflect away any bit of contradictory information. There are plenty of real life examples of the blatant corruption and spectacular failures of the Democrat agenda, but that is a distant second to the evil and dangers of the “others” in Forty’s fevered mind. Progressives like Forty need a villain, and everyday her propaganda media gives her the people who to blame and the narrative to use. Rinse and repeat.
You know, I can’t even think of forty as a “progressive” because so far I haven’t seen even a hint of political belief or motivation. All I have seen is glee in expressing hate for all that is associated with the Invented Other defined for her by the Left.
In the animal world, most animals only kill to eat, but every now and then an animal will go on a killing spree just for fun. When my mother-in-law had a llama killed by a mountain lion, it was not eaten. Instead, the lion killed several other llamas —just for fun. Any farmer who has had a chicken yard invaded by a fox will tell you the same thing—chickens slaughtered not for food but because it was entertainment for the fox.
This is what I see in people like forty and fielding. They are not here to argue the merits of a researched and chosen political model. All they want to do is attack. The fact that they are a de facto support arm of a toxic and dangerous political structure doesn’t mean a thing to them if they even understand it (which I doubt).
They’re just here, and on sites like this, because they provide a superficially acceptable outlet for the kinds of hate, rage and fury that can’t really be expressed anywhere else because in other settings society wouldn’t stand for it. But under the assumed cloak of “political discourse” they can act out their unpleasant personality characteristics.
And Left, knowing this and taking advantage of it, assures them that by attacking the Invented Other they are sicced on they are occupying the Higher Moral Ground.
a superficially acceptable outlet for the kinds of hate, rage and fury that can’t really be expressed anywhere else
You see this a lot on Twitter too. What’s funny is that the conservatives can handle the attacks, abuse, and name calling but the progressives?? NO. lol. They are much too sensitive to have their world view challenged. It’s comical. There’s a new word out there that I can’t for the life of me remember, but it defines verbal sarcasm as actual threats – that’s how sensitive the left is now. Even words harm them lol.
I think part of this is the underlying difference in the foundations of the conflicting positions. On the Right, the foundation is one of ideas, but on the Left it is emotions. So we can have our ideas challenged, even disproved, because they are separate from our sense of who we are. But the Leftist mouthpieces are defined by their emotional needs, so when we challenge what they say they take it as personal attacks on their very identities, and that’s why their react so violently.
That’s the foot soldiers. Their masters, the architects of the Left, are not dominated by emotion but just by their lust for power. They understand the pathologies of their public voices, and how easily they can be manipulated, and they are the ones behind the strategies of declaring that words are violence, for example. They have to keep coming up with emotion-drenched imagery to keep the fury and hate boiling in their puppets out on the internet.
“You know, I can’t even think of forty as a ‘progressive’ because so far I haven’t seen even a hint of political belief or motivation.”
I already told you that for starters I believe in the tradition of free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power going back to George Washington. I believe that an armed mob assaulting the capitol is un-American. I believe that a president is duty-bound to do something when the United States capitol is attacked.
You laughed it off like it is some kind of joke. Spook called it “hilarious” to believe in such things. This says a lot more about you than it does me.
Spook called it “hilarious” to believe in such things.
No, I think it’s hilarious that you “claim” to believe in such things.
But back to what really matters, rather than being distracted by the pathologies of our blog vandals.
Earlier we touched upon a reason for the FBI raid on Trump’s home, and we mentioned the fact that the FBI, which had been protected to some extent by the classified nature of the documents relating to their abuse of power, negotiating with the Democrats to influence the election and their lies to the FISA Court. And we talked about the potential threat to the agency after Trump declassified those documents, even mentioning them by name in his memo to the AG and intelligence agency heads and his public announcements. This led to discussing the fact that the Mar-A -Lago raid put that ticking time bomb of documents back in the hands of the agency most threatened by them.
Sorry about the recap but we did veer off into left field (pun intended).
We were speculating about the motive for the raid, and now insiders are confirming our suspicions:
The FBI was reportedly seeking documents President Donald Trump believed would exonerate him from Russian collusion claims and other election-related charges when agents raided his Mar-a-Lago residence, anonymous intelligence officials told Newsweek.
The FBI collected all of the documents that were government property and used concerns about classified documents to justify the raid, but agents were looking for Trump’s personal stash containing documents related to Russian collusion accusations against him, fearing that he would “weaponize” them, Newsweek reported. One former Trump official said he may have planned to use the documents to help in a presidential run in the coming term.
Earlier in the week we learned that an agent who was part of the original collusion hoax and lies to the court to get the warrants to spy on Trump and his associates, though still under investigation for those offenses, is still with the Bureau and even more significantly played a major role in this raid. Which secured evidence against him in the event for which he is being investigated. a key member of the Crossfire team—Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten—has continued to be involved in politically sensitive investigations, including the ongoing federal probe of potentially incriminating content found on the abandoned laptop of President Biden’s son Hunter Biden.
The FBI analyst is hardly a household name, but whistleblowers who contacted the office of GOP senator Chuck Grassley say he was behind an August 2020 report that FBI officials used as part of a “scheme…to undermine derogatory information connected to Hunter Biden by falsely suggesting it was disinformation.”
Auten’s report also caused the FBI “to cease” investigative activity into the younger Biden, according to a letter Grassley sent the Justice Department and FBI.
The whistleblower allegations are the latest evidence of politicization at the FBI. Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the allegations, if accurate, show the FBI and Justice Department are “institutionally corrupted to their very core.”
Auten was a key figure in Crossfire Hurricane, the counterintelligence investigation into Donald Trump’s potential ties to Russia. The Justice Department inspector general said in a December 2019 report that an FBI intelligence analyst who has since been identified as Auten “failed to advise” others at the FBI about inconsistencies in the Steele dossier, the controversial report the bureau used to investigate Trump.
Auten’s involvement in the Hunter Biden saga, which was not previously known, is likely to come under scrutiny because of his involvement in the Trump-Russia probe. Auten took part in the Hunter Biden matter even though he was seemingly referred to the FBI’s disciplinary office for investigation because of the inspector general’s findings. FBI Director Christopher Wray testified in February 2020 that every FBI employee mentioned in the inspector general’s report, which accused the FBI of “significant” abuses of the foreign surveillance process, was referred to the Office of Professional Responsibility for investigation. It is unclear whether Auten faced any discipline.
Auten, an expert on Russia, pushed aggressively for surveillance warrants against Trump adviser Carter Page, according to the inspector general. He urged colleagues at the FBI in a Sept. 19, 2016, email to obtain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against Page based on information in the dossier. The Justice Department watchdog criticized the FBI for failing to verify Steele’s allegations before citing them in the spy warrant. The Justice Department has invalidated two surveillance warrants granted against Page because of FBI malfeasance.
Auten also took part in several interviews in which the FBI withheld information that undercut the theory that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia.
A second Trump term was always a major threat to the Left in general, as he was in the process of dismantling the illegitimate Bureaucratic State that is the foundation of Leftist power in our government, and now the Trump Threat Level has gone all the way up as it includes a second Trump term posing threats to the upper echelons of the FBI as well. The kinds of threats that include prison time.
The stakes keep rising, and the Left is aware of this. And we see their heightened awareness and nervousness in the increased activity of their social media foot soldiers and attacks on Trump — and his supporters.
Good article about Auten and other conspirators in the Russia Hoax. From the article:
An Obama donor, ( former top counterintelligence official at Justice David) Laufman helped oversee the Russiagate probe, as well as the Clinton email case, which also involved classified information.
A Senate investigator told RCI that ( whom he replaced as the top counterintelligence official at Justice.) Laufman was the “mastermind” behind the strategy to dust off and “weaponize” the rarely enforced statutory relic – the Foreign Agents Registration Act – against Trump campaign officials, a novel legal move that the investigator noted is similar to the department’s current attempts to enforce the Presidential Records Act against Trump – which is a civil, not a criminal, statute – by invoking the Espionage Act of 1917.
Laufman signed off on the wiretapping of Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, which the Department of Justice inspector general determined was conducted under false pretenses involving doctored email, suppression of exculpatory evidence, and other malfeasance.
Suddenly resurfacing as a media surrogate for the Justice Department defending the Mar-a-Lago raid, Laufman has been a key source for stories by the Washington Post, CNN, and other outlets.
On CNN, for instance, he claimed the documents seized from Trump’s storage were “particularly stunning and particularly egregious,” and their discovery “completely validates the government’s investigation” into the former president – though he quickly added, “Whether this investigation transforms into an outright criminal prosecution remains to be seen.”
As he is the one trying to shift this civil complaint into a criminal action, that’s pretty slimy.
In an objective courtroom the FBI will have a hard time convincing anyone this is not a political ploy and they are not acting as political henchmen for the Dems.
a motion to dismiss in the Oath Keepers prosecution was light on specific details about the embedded FBI and BATF agents but recited that attorneys reviewed mountains of discovery. Alert readers had noted that a tiny footnote on page 6 of the Motion said “at least 20 FBI and ATF agents were embedded around the Capitol on J6.” We assume that the conclusion was formed after reviewing all that discovery.
The footnote doesn’t prove anything, but it is extremely unlikely the defense lawyers would falsify a statement like that in a federal filing. And famously, the FBI was unwilling to say how many agents were embedded around the Capitol when asked by Senator Ted Cruz at a committee hearing.
Of course, he is of exceptionally low moral character, and that does cause me to dislike him because I dislike people of such low moral character.
Wow, Forty must be someone of exceptional moral character LMAO. The hubris of these people is off the charts
Well. cluster, you have to remember that the Left does lure the weak minded in with the promise that they are the short cut to the Higher Moral Ground, and then they assure their new acolytes that lying isn’t a moral failing if they do it for “the right reasons”—which of course means enabling and supporting a brutal and vicious political model which has always led to economic misery, loss of liberty and very often the deaths of millions.
Of course they don’t care about the system they enable and defend by attacking its opposition—they are only in it for the visceral pleasure of hurting people. Or at least trying to hurt people. They are the worst kind of bullies, as they don’t even risk the chance that someone will physically kick their butts. No, they hide behind avatars while they hurl their insults and lies, and they don’t even base those insults and lies on observation and analysis, merely parroting what they are fed at the troughs of Leftist propaganda.
You guys may have noticed one of the questions ignored by the trolls, especially forty, as fielding seems to have dropped off for a while.
The question I posed to both of them was: Why are you here?
Forty is the more smug and arrogant of the two, so it is possible that he is so convinced of his superior grasp of important issues that he wants to come here and……..and what? Convert us to his political point of view? He doesn’t have one. Convince us that Donald Trump is a flawed man? Don’t need forty to do that. Convince us that we are defective for not turning on him like the jackals of the Left? Not likely, given our contempt for the jackals of the Left.
So why? What is the point?
They won’t answer. There is certainly the evident allure of petty bickering that forty seems particularly fond of, but I think it’s deeper than that. My personal guess is that they are motivated by such a deep well of hostility and hatred that they get a visceral satisfaction in expressing it, what Kurt Schlichter calls “political onanism”, coupled with a level of smug arrogance that has them convinced they are just better and smarter than we are, and they want to show us how much so. As that gets knocked down and spat on every time they try it doesn’t make sense, but then they are defending lies and positions that defy sanity and reason so that’s actually consistent.
I don’t know. All I know is that every time we are subjected to a version of the troll brigade I think of it as another chapter of WANNA SEE HOW DUMB I AM? starring the same strident losers squealing the same toxic nonsense.
That was a rhetorical question moron
Uh-oh.
In a shocking report, the U.S. Census Bureau recently admitted that it overcounted the populations of eight states and undercounted the populations of six states in the 2020 census.
All but one of the states overcounted is a blue state, and all but one of the undercounted states is red.
Those costly errors will distort congressional representation and the Electoral College. It means that when the Census Bureau reapportioned the House of Representatives, Florida was cheated out of two additional seats it should have gotten; Texas missed out on another seat; Minnesota and Rhode Island each kept a representative they shouldn’t have; and Colorado was awarded a new member of the House it didn’t deserve.
………………………..
The original census reported that Florida needed only 171,500 more residents to gain another congressional seat. Yet the survey shows that Florida was undercounted by over three-quarters of a million people. The bureau also said that Texas needed only 189,000 more people to gain another congressional seat. The survey shows that Texas was undercounted by 560,319 residents.
Minnesota, according to the original census report, would have lost a congressional seat during reapportionment if it had 26 fewer residents; the survey shows the state was overcounted by 216,971 individuals. Similarly, Rhode Island would have lost a seat if the Census Bureau had counted 19,000 fewer residents. It turns out that the state was overcounted by more than 55,000 individuals.
An innocent mistake, I am sure. //sarc off
This is a powerful and informative article. An excerpt:
It is likely that the FBI’s raid on Trump was driven by intelligence community fears over information that was contained within those documents relating to the RussiaGate hoax.
The DOJ’s coordinated FBI raid of Trump was likely related to the potential unsealing and public presentation of this information—particularly in relation to Trump’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) suit against Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and former FBI officials like former Director James Comey, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former agent Peter Strzok, and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page—and his amended RICO suit, which added more defendants.
As new information has come to light, we’ve gained increased confidence and now feel even more strongly regarding this theory. The vast breadth and scope of the search warrant alone have bolstered this theory. But that’s far from being the only reason behind our belief.
An Aug. 17 article from Newsweek included some remarkable statements from two sources within the Intelligence Community.
One of these sources noted that “agents went into Trump’s residence on the pretext that they were seeking all government documents…but the true target was this private stash” of documents amassed by Trump, “which Justice Department officials feared Trump might weaponize.” The second Intelligence Community source claimed that although the FBI supposedly “collected everything that rightfully belonged to the U.S. government,” the true target of the DOJ-led FBI raid was “these documents that Trump had been collecting since early in his administration.”
Both sources note that the “sought-after documents deal with a variety of intelligence matters of interest” to Trump—“including material that Trump apparently thought would exonerate him of any claims of Russian collusion in 2016 or any other election-related charges.” In other words, documents that Trump had collected and held within his possession that proved the RussiaGate hoax was exactly that—a hoax. One that was led by officials from within our nation’s highest institutions—including, but not limited to, the FBI and the DOJ.
I believe this 100%. Trump has more dirt on them than they do him.
I agree.
At the risk of luring our trolls back, I’d like to comment on Forty’s assertion: “A recent survey found that 49 percent of white evangelical Protestants believe Trump was chosen by God.”
I’m surprised that the percentage isn’t higher. God works in mysterious ways, and the bible is filled with examples of flawed human beings that God used to further his message, no better example than Saul of Tarsus who became the Apostle Paul, author of nearly half the books in the New Testament. And no, I’m not trying to equate Trump to Paul, but if God didn’t send Trump, who did? It certainly wasn’t the GOP.
I am a believer in redemption, salvation and forgiveness, and if I remember correctly many of the original Apostles were flawed men who went through radical changes.
I also distrust characterizations of poll questions. The way this one was presented implies that 49% of Protestants believe God reached down and spoke to Trump in a ray of blinding light, directing him to run for the presidency.
Those of us who have studied the formation of this country and the biographies of its Founders know that the hand of God was present for all of them. The Hugh Hewitt show once had a July 4th show in which all three hours were given over to a man who went through, in great detail, the various events that allowed this group of states to become a nation, each event indicating divine intervention. I would still buy multiple copies of that show if it were ever put on CDs. It was truly inspiring.