What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

joe40

stefanovich wrote: »

She spent 4 years saying Trump colluded with the Russians. He didn’t. She lied.

Election meddling by a foreign country is not the same as actual election fraud perpetrated within a country.
They're poles apart.

As for the Russian meddling it was taken seriously by the FBI, they're not beholden to Clinton.
What Trump was claiming was the American democratic system was corrupt. That would make it a basket case of a western democracy.

Then he claims to be a patriot.

stefanovich

joe40 wrote: »

Election meddling by a foreign country is not the same as actual election fraud perpetrated within a country.
They're poles apart.

As for the Russian meddling it was taken seriously by the FBI, they're not beholden to Clinton.
What Trump was claiming was the American democratic system was corrupt. That would make it a basket case of a western democracy.

Then he claims to be a patriot.

She claimed Trump colluded with the Russians

joe40

stefanovich wrote: »

She claimed Trump colluded with the Russians

That is a crime but it is not claiming widespread electoral fraud by the electorate or the election officials.

That is what Trump claimed they're in no way comparable. How can you not see that?

I had a feeling I would wake up to Trumpists both repeating the same nonsense they did before they last disappeared, as well as not a single one of them replying to any of my messages from last night. They are consistent at least I will give them that.

everlast75

joe40 wrote: »

That is a crime but it is not claiming widespread electoral fraud by the electorate or the election officials.

That is what Trump claimed they're in no way comparable. How can you not see that?

People who don't are being delusional/can't see it (the Mueller report does not day what they think it says) or disingenuous (they repeat "no collusion/no obstruction" despite knowing that collusion isn't a crime and therefore can't be proven, Mueller says that there is evidence that he obstructed justice and preserved that evidence so that he could be charged, as Mueller believed no shooting president can be indicted).

Now, with the impeachment, the facts really were not in dispute.

Instead, the Republicans voted on the basis that the hearing was unconstitutional.

I could list the reasons why that's a damning indictment of what Trump did and the Reps for letting him away with it below, but there's no point.

His supporters at this stage can't see those reasons or won't.

They are the political equivalent of a "flat earther".

Tell me how

stefanovich wrote: »

She spent 4 years saying Trump colluded with the Russians. He didn’t. She lied.

This is BS. We heard about Hillary 100 times more from Trump fanatics talking about her than we did from her saying anything significant in relation to Trump.

You are way off the mark on virtually every topic which you are commenting across various threads over the last number of hours. Where do you get your information?

Leroy42

12gauge dave wrote: »

The hypocrisy is crazy isn't it.

Hopefully people will start seeing through it soon.

What is hypocrisy? Apparently Trump did nothing wrong so, based on that, neither did anyone else.

All members of the House & senate, anybody actually it would seem, is now completely free to say anything they want, organise any rally, and make up anything such that people will riot.

Not sure why so many were so upset with BLM.

stefanovich

Tell me how wrote: »

This is BS. We heard about Hillary 100 times more from Trump fanatics talking about her than we did from her saying anything significant in relation to Trump.

You are way off the mark on virtually every topic which you are commenting across various threads over the last number of hours. Where do you get your information?

You’ll have to prove that with examples. Sorry if rigourous debate is hard.

Field east

Tell me how wrote: »

There were lots of differences outside from the fact that Trump instigated the insurrection.

The access to weapons.
The presence of military clothing amongst participants.
The ease at which the participants were allowed to move around.
The aid given by the police to several of the insurrectionists.
The lack of preparedness from police forces ahead of the protest.
The ease at which participants were allowed to leave once it was over.
The fact that one group wanted to kneel at the use of the flags symbolism, the other wanted to mount that flag to a pole and beat policemen with it.
And that's aside from one group protesting civil disparity, the other tryin to override a fair election.

Lots of differences.

There is one key difference to the two situations that has been totally overlooked and is as follows:-
The BLM rioting ,etc , was as a result of how that black man died as a result on he being held down by the knee of a white police officer. This was NOT an isolated incident, It was one of many such incidents over many years. So the outbreak of looting, etc, was as a result of a deep frustration held amongst the black community in general.
Whether we believe it or not the black community feel that they are being ‘ badly treated’ by the government and especially the police and rioting, etc, can breakout when things boil over.

BUT BUT BUT BUT———-
But in the CAPITOL rioting case - it was caused be the notion that the election was stolen ONLY . This whole saga started off by DT , at the very outset and at the start of the canvassing and the beginning of the caucuses /Primaries floating the idea that the only way he could lose the election was if it was stolen. The intensity around this idea got louder and louder - especially when the polls showed a big gap between Biden and himself even close to the election date- right up to his Jan 6th rally . This was followed during it/after it by the assault on the Capitol.

In summary, the BLM ‘movement’ had a deep felt reason to march with a fringe of them ‘ breaking ranks’. Whereas the ‘storming of the Capitol group’ carried out their actions on a single issue that was totally disproven - 60+ court cases- just weeks before Jan 6th. BUT DT KEPT ON SAYING THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN.

ps . What did DT expect the marchers to the Capitol to achieve if the outcome to the ‘ ratifying the votes proceedure’ went ahead as per the laws of the constitution/Congress and Biden was confirmed elected as a formality - a bit of finger wagging ??????

Leroy42

PalLimerick wrote: »

Trump also condemned the Capitol rioters many times it's on video. He also said any protest has to be peaceful, that's also on record.

But we'll ignore all that because it doesn't suit certain agendas.

Either his words carry weight or they don't. If you want to claim these words provide evidence then you also have to take his other words.

stefanovich

Field east wrote: »

There is one key difference to the two situations that has been totally overlooked and is as follows:-
The BLM rioting ,etc , was as a result of how that black man died as a result on he being held down by the knee of a white police officer. This was NOT an isolated incident, It was one of many such incidents over many years. So the outbreak of looting, etc, was as a result of a deep frustration held amongst the black community in general.
Whether we believe it or not the black community feel that they are being ‘ badly treated’ by the government and especially the police and rioting, etc, can breakout when things boil over.

BUT BUT BUT BUT———-
But in the CAPITOL rioting case - it was caused be the notion that the election was stolen ONLY . This whole saga started off by DT , at the very outset and at the start of the canvassing and the beginning of the caucuses /Primaries floating the idea that the only way he could lose the election was if it was stolen. The intensity around this idea got louder and louder - especially when the polls showed a big gap between Biden and himself even close to the election date- right up to his Jan 6th rally . This was followed during it/after it by the assault on the Capitol.

In summary, the BLM ‘movement’ had a deep felt reason to march with a fringe of them ‘ breaking ranks’. Whereas the ‘storming of the Capitol group’ carried out their actions on a single issue that was totally disproven - 60+ court cases- just weeks before Jan 6th. BUT DT KEPT ON SAYING THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN.

ps . What did DT expect the marchers to the Capitol to achieve if the outcome to the ‘ ratifying the votes proceedure’ went ahead as per the laws of the constitution/Congress and Biden was confirmed elected as a formality - a bit of finger wagging ??????

BLM are Marxist extremists who agitated the black community for ulterior motives.

Tell me how

stefanovich wrote: »

BLM are Marxist extremists who agitated the black community for ulterior motives.

Evidence please.

everlast75

Field east wrote: »

There is one key difference to the two situations that has been totally overlooked and is as follows:-
The BLM rioting ,etc , was as a result of how that black man died as a result on he being held down by the knee of a white police officer. This was NOT an isolated incident, It was one of many such incidents over many years. So the outbreak of looting, etc, was as a result of a deep frustration held amongst the black community in general.
Whether we believe it or not the black community feel that they are being ‘ badly treated’ by the government and especially the police and rioting, etc, can breakout when things boil over.

BUT BUT BUT BUT———-
But in the CAPITOL rioting case - it was caused be the notion that the election was stolen ONLY . This whole saga started off by DT , at the very outset and at the start of the canvassing and the beginning of the caucuses /Primaries floating the idea that the only way he could lose the election was if it was stolen. The intensity around this idea got louder and louder - especially when the polls showed a big gap between Biden and himself even close to the election date- right up to his Jan 6th rally . This was followed during it/after it by the assault on the Capitol.

In summary, the BLM ‘movement’ had a deep felt reason to march with a fringe of them ‘ breaking ranks’. Whereas the ‘storming of the Capitol group’ carried out their actions on a single issue that was totally disproven - 60+ court cases- just weeks before Jan 6th. BUT DT KEPT ON SAYING THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN.

ps . What did DT expect the marchers to the Capitol to achieve if the outcome to the ‘ ratifying the votes proceedure’ went ahead as per the laws of the constitution/Congress and Biden was confirmed elected as a formality - a bit of finger wagging ??????

People who have a problem with BLM don't understand that there is and always has been systematic discrimination against black people resulting in black people being murdered.

If they don't accept that premise, then there can be no way that they can grasp what it is about.

stefanovich

Tell me how wrote: »

Evidence please.

Insufferable.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/jul/21/black-lives-matter-marxist-movement/

stefanovich

everlast75 wrote: »

People who have a problem with BLM don't understand that there is and always has been systematic discrimination against black people resulting in black people being murdered.

If they don't accept that premise, then there can be no way that they can grasp what it is about.

BLM cynically exploit legitimate grievances.

joe40

stefanovich wrote: »

Insufferable.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/jul/21/black-lives-matter-marxist-movement/

Did you actually read the article, it certainly doesn't support your assertion that the BLM is fundamentally marxist.
Whatever that even means in a modern context.

Leroy42

stefanovich wrote: »

BLM are Marxist extremists who agitated the black community for ulterior motives.

How did they do that? Words can’t have been it, sure everybody says fight so you can’t hold them responsible.

And herein lies the real problem with Trump being let away with what he did.

Now no one is responsible for anything unless they specifically detail it out. Suggestions, concerted campaign. None of it can be used.

stefanovich

stefanovich wrote: »

You’ll have to prove that with examples. Sorry if rigourous debate is hard.

No problem, I'll step in if you don't mind.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Obama is the "king of the drone strikes".
Actual fact: Trump is the "king of the drone strikes", with 2,243 drone strikes in the first two years compared with 1,878 drone strikes in Obama's eight years.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Fact is he did a lot less harm than Obama or Bush or Bush Senior or pretty much any US president in decades.
Actual fact: As the total number of drone strikes done under Trump is not known, this is not a fact. See above.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Zero proof he orchestrated anything, get your facts straight.
Actual fact: We don't even know if 67% of the Senate believes that. All we know is that 57% believe it that he is guilty of inciting violence and that it is constitutional to charge him for it. Along with those 57 senators, we at least also know that Mitch and both Idaho senators voted against conviction because Trump was no longer in office, not because he did or did not incite violence. As the majority of senators have not since released a public statement, we currently have no way of knowing if 67% of the senate believe he incited violence or not.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: He [Mitch] clearly said he was not guilty based on the charge. That’s why he voted against.
Actual fact: He in fact states that Trump did incite violence but could not be charged as a private citizen. See above.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: You understand that the dems are trying to implement 1984 right?
Actual fact: You have a large tendency to state your opinion as a fact without evidence but then get bothered when others do the same. No need to debunk this as it's, you know, obviously just an opinion and not a fact.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: They actually suggested at one point the onus was on him to prove innocence. You couldn’t make this up.
Actual fact: They actually said that, as in any civil trial, there is an inference that an accuser can say things and it can be claimed to be true if the defendant is not there to deny it. So yes, you can make this up.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Impeachment removes one from office, he was already gone.
Actual fact: Impeachment does not remove one from office, conviction does. Trump has been impeached twice.

And that was what I found in only ten minutes. So yes, people should take what you say with a grain of salt.

Akrasia

stefanovich wrote: »

He’s not perfect at all. I do not fawn over him. I just think the Democratic Party are evil.

But the GOP aren’t??!

Is this something to do with paedophiles and Pizza parlors?

everlast75

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No problem, I'll step in if you don't mind.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Obama is the "king of the drone strikes".
Actual fact: Trump is "the king of the drone strikes, with 2,243 drone strikes in the first two years compared with 1,878 drone strikes in Obama's eight years.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Fact is he did a lot less harm than Obama or Bush or Bush Senior or pretty much any US president in decades.
Actual fact: As the total number of drone strikes done under Trump is not known, this is not a fact. See above.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Zero proof he orchestrated anything, get your facts straight.
Actual fact: We don't even know if 67% of the Senate believes that. All we know is that 57% believe it that he is guilty of inciting violence and that it is constitutional to charge him for it. Along with those 57 senators, we at least also know that Mitch and both Idaho senators voted against conviction because Trump was no longer in office, not because he did or did not incite violence. As the majority of senators have not since released a public statement, we currently have no way of knowing if 67% of the senate believe he incited violence or not.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: He [Mitch] clearly said he was not guilty based on the charge. That’s why he voted against.
Actual fact: He in fact states that Trump did incite violence but could not be charged as a private citizen. See above.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: You understand that the dems are trying to implement 1984 right?
Actual fact: You have a large tendency to state your opinion as a fact without evidence but then get bothered when others do the same. No need to debunk this as it's, you know, obviously just an opinion and not a fact.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: They actually suggested at one point the onus was on him to prove innocence. You couldn’t make this up.
Actual fact: They actually said that, as in any civil trial, there is an inference that an accuser can say things and it can be claimed to be true if the defendant is not there to deny it. So yes, you can make this up.

Your claim, which you state as a fact: Impeachment removes one from office, he was already gone.
Actual fact: Impeachment does not remove one from office, conviction does. Trump has been impeached twice.

And that was what I found in only ten minutes. So yes, people should take what you say with a grain of salt.

How dare you bring facts to a Trump discussion!

duploelabs

everlast75 wrote: »

How dare you bring facts to a Trump discussion!

And citation!

Only rhetoric and feelings are of value when it comes to defending trump

12gauge dave

A bad week for democrats.

Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) Tweeted:
Great week.

Trump beats impeachment. Dems in disarray. The Lincoln Project burnt to the ground. The RINOS in the GOP establishment exposed & collapsing. Cuomo & Dem Govs in free fall. The media depressed and lashing out at Dems for their impeachment fail.

#MAGA ascending again! https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1360742476139610118?s=20

stefanovich

stefanovich wrote: »

Insufferable.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/jul/21/black-lives-matter-marxist-movement/

You've previously complained about people not being able to inform themselves.... But you can't read the contents of a fact checking site that you're linking to? You really do not like facts...

Professor Moriarty

12gauge dave wrote: »

A bad week for democrats.

Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) Tweeted:
Great week.

Trump beats impeachment. Dems in disarray. The Lincoln Project burnt to the ground. The RINOS in the GOP establishment exposed & collapsing. Cuomo & Dem Govs in free fall. The media depressed and lashing out at Dems for their impeachment fail.

#MAGA ascending again! https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1360742476139610118?s=20

Almost as if that was written by someone on coke.

stefanovich

Akrasia wrote: »

But the GOP aren’t??!

Is this something to do with paedophiles and Pizza parlors?

No it’s about their need for power at the expense of their country.

12gauge dave

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Almost as if that was written by someone on coke.

His father just made a fool of the Democratic Party we won't begrudge him a few nose beers.

stefanovich

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You've previously complained about people not being able to inform themselves.... But you can't read the contents of a fact checking site that you're linking to? You really do not like facts...

Bias is an incredible truth filter

Professor Moriarty

12gauge dave wrote: »

His father just made a fool of the Democratic Party we won't begrudge him a few nose beers.

I think the Republican party made a fool of itself. As to Junior, he's just a poor little rich boy off his face. As long as he he keeps stoking up division in the GOP, I'm happy for him to retain his Twitter account unlike Daddy.

everlast75

stefanovich wrote: »

No it’s about their need for power at the expense of their country.

The cognitive dissonance.

The GOP literally stood by while one of their own tried to stop the transition of power as set out in the constitution.

12gauge dave

12gauge dave wrote: »

His father just made a fool of the Democratic Party we won't begrudge him a few nose beers.

Imagine the House and at least 57% of the Senate finding you guilty of inciting violence while being a president and someone's response being "yeah Trump sure showed the democrats!".

The only thing you should be feeling is relief, not pride. Relief that the senators of the party your support have no backbone.