Would appreciate your answer to those questions above. I am sure there are some others that would be curious to know. Just remembering how you would hound and attempt to put ZZ down if he didn't answer one of your questions.
I have no interest in asking you any questions. I’m simply here to enjoy everyone taking the piss out of you and to advocate for your removal, which, if this thread continues like this, can only get closer.
My opinion is that there is no point in engaging with you on anything substantive as you are too far down a rabbit hole of conspiracy and culture war but it is weirdly fascinating as an example of how people can radicalise themselves online. It was at the point when you were excitedly posting dozens of comments about Dominion voting machines, servers in Germany and Sidney Powell having some dynamite revelations that I realised you're too far gone. Good luck to you and your band of fellow travellers. Never surrender to the World Economic Forum (or the Lizard People)!
Having re-read that preceding post, I have no idea what you’re talking about; it seems likely to be another instance of how you draw completely differing meanings from what has actually been expressed. I am creating no ‘straw man’ about you ‘defending Trump’; I am commenting upon the unsatisfactory nature of your linkage of his indictments with those you feel should be filed against Biden. As far as I can tell, the main case against Trump lies in his attempts to use his position to bully officials into ‘finding’ him enough extra votes to clinch the extra college votes he needed to retain the presidency. That appears to be an extreme abuse of power self-evidently contrary to the US constitution. And if you’re really claiming all his talk about elections being stolen and the need to ‘fight’ had no intention of stirring up trouble, especially in the context of the make up of the crowds he was addressing, then I think you may be sticking your head in the sand. Trump ‘handed over power without a hitch’ because his attempts at finding a way to hold on had failed. Every president ‘hands over power without a hitch’; no preceding one has treated the handover process the way he did. If you’re so good at detecting BS you must be breathing fetid miasma in your house.
You should know by now that trying to fix an election = fine. Attempting to punish + charge those trying to fix an election = fascism.
Your memories are not too good. My comments regarding her claims were that they were ridiculous, but that the situation regarding the establishment's refusal to disprove the them in court, at that time, gave her claim lasting credibility, whether deserved or not. No comment the other topic I see.
I don't stand a chance against you, in terms of you engaging with what is said, rather than what is in your head. So I am going to ignore you again for a bit, and allow anyone who has read the thread to make up their own mind.
No. I wouldn't want to answer those questions either. But nice that you reveal your strategy to be "take the piss out of a poster until the mods ban him". I don't think any reasonable person would have any trouble recognising what manner of behaviour that is reminiscent of. People take note. He's on your side.
Absolutely hilarious! HH puts me on ignore as he accuses me of not ‘engaging’ with what is said, but with ‘what is in my head’. Proving his mirror is still intact.
So you do think the indictments for the Georgia case (for Trump and his merry band of followers) are justified and worthy of investigation?
As I have said many many times and, on occassion I believe, directly to you, I think that if they believe they have a case, they should bring it. I haven't once claimed that Trump should not be indicted or tried. Please correct me if I am wrong. Prosecute him and good luck. Do I believe the charges are strong? Hell no. In fact I think they are a pile of trumped up old cack, but the application of justice is not down to me, so try him. Are you receiving the message yet?
Not putting you on ignore, just ignoring your confused responses to me. I'll read what you say, to see if there is any improvement, and reply if I like. If you write some sense, I'll even consider replying in kind.
I asked for your views - not theirs. Based on the evidence available to us - do you think he should be indicted/tried? I was correct with my post above then - that you don't think attempting to punish trying to fix an election is a valid course of action and is instead being done to stifle the political influence of the Republican party (aka fascism)
You wouldn’t recognise ‘sense’ if it hit you in the face, but I am pleased that you’ve not hit the ‘ignore’ button. I must admit, I didn’t think that was your way at all, so I withdraw that element of my post.
Cool, guess we'll see whether your views change once the verdicts are announced! I haven't contradicted myself at all. Please feel free to correct me as to which of these points is wrong - You think the charges (Georgia case) are trumped up and are politically motivated. - You think the indictments around the Georgia case are showing fascistic behaviour on behalf of the Democrats - You think there was no behaviour (the Trump recordings, filing of false documents, perjury, influencing and harassment of witnesses) that is worthy of punishment. Thanks - it's obvious that nobody has ever called you special, hope you find another bunny to fall down that rabbithole with xx [/QUOTE]
That doesn't make any sense. None what so ever. It does not relate to the quote you preceded it with. Why would my views on your comment change because of a verdict. You really don't get the concept of live and let live do you? Well, given that you asked me your question a second time in your first paragraph, indicating I had not answered what you asked, I would say it is fair of me to point out the fact that you responded to my answer in your second paragraph, as evidence of you contradicting yourself. Do you really not see that? As for your bullet points, above, you have me spot on. The false document charges are challenging Trump's use of a precedent set my JFK in 1960, that led to the election in Haiwaii being overturned. The harassment and perjury and influencing relate to the recording you talk of, which is an hour long discussion between Trump and the Governor of Georgia discussing Trump's beliefs about the election, with lawyers from both sides present. I don't believe the evidence is as conclusive as you have been told it is. But let them try him. I have no problem with that, and if he did bad things, let him fry. And when Democrats are guilty of the same or other crimes, let them be dealt with in the same manner. I don't mind indulging your straw man. But it makes no difference to what I percieve to be the behaviour of Biden and other Democrats. Sorry if that concept of equal justice offends you. And you would not believe the praise and compliments I get for treating cancer patients on a daily basis. I get called special five or six times a day mate. So don't worry about that. Just answer me one question. Why are you defending Joe Biden?
I'll let everyone else join those dots to see whether my first post was correct or not. Not your views on my comment - your comment "if they think he should be indicted, I think he should be indicted". Can't really imagine you going "well fair enough" if there's guilty verdicts handed down. Where have I done that? I don't like Biden at all, he's absolutely lost his marbles and has a regrettable history on comments about race and I wish he wasn't running for 2024. Trump also has a history of making regrettable comments around race but poses a much much greater threat to democracy.
Thank you, thank you Reids. Now, at last, I can do this... But why are you defending Joe Biden? Because that is what you have been doing to me with Trump.
So to summarise. Trump is a fascist because if his 20 men armed with sharp sticks had managed to take the White House and prevent the transfer of power, he would still be President right now? Have I got that right? Is that what you guys believe? You belived that Trump was relying on those guys to keep him in power? You think he only co-operated peacefully with the transition on 22 January because his coup had failed? Ha. Talk about fantasists. But Biden isn't a fascist, because arresting 1200 people and holding them, some without trail, in order to convict 20 (not sure if it is even that many yet) conspirators, and arresting Trump and his lawyers and many more people who represent political enemies of Biden, in no way indicates an authoritarian regeim. You can suggest I am the one who is deluded, but I think history may remember it differently. Honestly. Trump is a bigger threat to democracy than Biden? How many arrests would it take to persuade you otherwise? Baaa.
Good to see one of the MAGA cheerleaders out and about and meeting her electorate and generating the greatest political headline everrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Lauren Boebert wasn't telling the truth about 'Beetlejuice' ejection
I am sure we are all shocked that she was lying all along. Quite why any modern public figures think they can lie about their behavior in an age where everyone has a video camera in their pocket is beyond me.
Has this dangerous insurrectionists terrorist been locked up yet? Incoming indictment for seditionist vaping under the influence of an unidentified substance. Must be.
I think that was his last attempt after trying to fix it in other ways. 20 were convicted of seditious conspiracy. Over 600 others have pleaded guilty to the charges they are accused of, with over 350 spending time in jail as a result, with a median sentence of 60 days. Over 370 people have been charged with assaulting officers/employees. 104 for entering a restricted area with a dangerous or deadly weapon. 50 for theft of government property. 60 for destruction of government property. That "if they have a case then let them bring it" lasted long eh? But sure, the Dems are the fascists for punishing quite serious crimes. I don't think it will. Can't do the time, don't do the crime. There's ample evidence (and ob of the other charges for the Republican politicians) on those there that day and plenty of guilty pleas to go with it.
It represents no one being above the law. You know, your line of argument here might have some force if Biden had publicly ordered this over the resistance of DOJ appointees and staff (oh no, silly me, that's what Trump tried to do multiple times) or had acted as if he were king to make these prosecutions happen. Instead he's barely said a thing about them. The laws being used haven't be hashed together by Democrats in Congress in some unseemly plot to retrospectively criminalise what happened on January 6th. These are all long standing criminal statutes being applied. The cases are going before federal judges in DC - including Trump appointees like Trevor McFadden - and are resulting in convictions. If there was a legal flaw somewhere it would have been found by now. They (and you) are essentially moaning about optics. You'd rather people were not held to account for their voluntary actions because... reasons? I think the US criminal justice system, as a broad brush overview, is pretty harsh. They do things there we don't here in the motherland. I doubt we'd hold hundreds on remands for disrupting proceedings in Parliament, though I think prosecuting them would be more likely than not, even after balancing the right to protest. Particularly if, say, something like the King's speech or the swearing in after a general election was disrupted in the same way.
"But you never actually saw Biden tell his DOJ to go after the MAGA, did you? I know what I saw mate. And I know who he has arrested. Tjis is absurd. Biden hhardly said a thing? Maybe he just said "Who will rid me of this turbulent MAGA". You can kid yourself, of you like.
Nope. Bit hypocritical considering you've called people out for insulting you previously. But hey, that's Hooter! Hypocritical to the max whilst deflecting constantly. It's an easy read and everyones fully aware you do it. Doesn't really matter if they weren't fired when people had trucks with multiple (unlicensed) weapons and molotov cocktails. And knives/tasers and other weapons still pose a big danger, so trying to reduce it down to just firearms doesn't really matter. Trespass itself doesn't usually attract a custodial sentence. Trespass in a federal/restricted building does. Of course I do, and 17 people were (rightly) arrested and charged in Minneapolis alone for arson. But then again, I'm not a hypocrite when I say I believe in the law system
Jacob Chansley, the Q Anon Shaman. I have no affinity. I am not defending his actions. Sentenced to something like 48 months for tresspass after accepting a plea deal. He has now been released, after footage that he was told, by the DOJ, did not exist whilst the plea was being negotiated. The footage showed him being led around by police officers, including one scene where about ten of them step aside to let him through. The first think he did on entering the main chamber was say a prayer of thanks to those officers. The DOJ knew about the exculpatory evidence that it denied existed, because it was logged for their own use in prosecutions. Are their others in that situation? I don't know, but given that Chansley's high profile case involved such devious behaviour, it can be fairly speculated that evidence was held from others. Is that fascistic behaviour? Or do you think it is all justified because the press keeps saying how bad these guys are and, guilty or not, they don't deserve the law?
I'm sorry. I was pointing out that you were making yourself look an idiot. I also said it was regrettable. You have identified the people that deserve to be convicted. Utter Rubbish. Their have been several high profile invasions of the Capitol since J6 including a sit in in the speakers office last week. There was a camera team from one of the late night shows wondering round doing skits without permission last year. Heaven knows what they could have been getting up to in the offices they entered. That is the same type of trespass. I am not aware of any charges, let alone two and a half years being held without trial for any of them. Sorry, but you are being extremely naiive. 17 people? Do you know how many were there? BLM and fa were trying to burn down buildings with people in. I guess its OK if they got those 17 though. That's not J6 by the way.
