Republicans = Trump

[aubiefifty 16,798]

On 8/1/2023 at 11:18 AM, KansasTiger said:

I like your sentiment, but disagree with your third party optimism. Thats what I want to happen, but that's not what's likely to happen from my own observations. People will stick to their party lines out of fear that not doing so creates the worst outcome of all in their mind...the other side winning.

i agree with this. anyone would be a fool not to look at all parties running.

[homersapien 11,379]

4 hours ago, Son of A Tiger said:

I hope that is the case but almost all the ones I know are.

Compared to Trump or DeSantis?  Sure.

[aubiefifty 16,798]

On 8/1/2023 at 11:46 AM, KansasTiger said:

I would say they played a sizeable role, yes.

people non maga know you cannot put lipstick on a pig. they knew what rump was. i like my typo. maybe i will refer to him now as the rump.................grins

[auburnatl1 4,935]

On 8/1/2023 at 12:16 PM, KansasTiger said:

The media and the left dug this hole themselves.

I agree with your first sentence. What liberals can’t seem to grasp is that legal and political are blurred at this level. If you can’t convict there’s optical consequences. You’d have to make it goal to be as incompetent as the democratic congressmen and the DA’s that have impeached, subpoenad, indicted, so many times no one can keep up with it anymore.  If you don’t have a 100% air tight case or impeachment  - don’t try. Optics. Trump had been reduced to irrelevance in the last midterm cycle - he’s was a loser - and then the litigation started again - and now he’s back. And because of the sheer number of frivolous persecution optics, every debate has regressed to tit for tat payback. My only hope is that one of these indictment  sticks, is seen as grave, and he’s convicted, otherwise liberals, media, and DAs might have done the impossible - gotten him elected.

[arein0 958]

On 8/1/2023 at 11:46 AM, KansasTiger said:

I would say they played a sizeable role, yes.

 

[KansasTiger 3,248]

15 minutes ago, arein0 said:

 

Wow. Reinforcing the 'left can't meme' stereotype aren't we? 😂

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

4 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The only reason that Weiss is being accused of protecting Hunter Biden is that his investigation didn't end with the charges many Republicans wanted

Incorrect, what he is being accused of is protecting Hunter with a plea deal that gave Hunter immunity forever.  The judge in the case saw right through that.

 

4 hours ago, AU9377 said:

They don't always get it right, but to assume that they always go to bat for whoever the President is would be a bad assumption.

I know this and, as I mentioned, I’m not the one that always adds *a Trump appointee* to his label.  That is the media.  It should stop.  It’s as if they want to play a Trump card so to speak.  

[TexasTiger 12,897]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Incorrect, what he is being accused of is protecting Hunter with a plea deal that gave Hunter immunity forever.  The judge in the case saw right through that.

 

I know this and, as I mentioned, I’m not the one that always adds *a Trump appointee* to his label.  That is the media.  It should stop.  It’s as if they want to play a Trump card so to speak.  

Actually, I believe when the judge asked that question the prosecutor said no. 

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

2 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Actually, I believe when the judge asked that question the prosecutor said no. 

Yes, that is the point.  When they arrived in court the prosecutor and defense had an agreement to get Hunter immunity for life.  When the Judge started to dig into the agreement and saw what the diversion agreement she asked if Hunter was still being investigated and Weiss, after the whistleblowers testified, had to say that he could be charged later on and the defense said *No deal*. 

I wonder what would have happened if she just signed the deal?

[AU9377 4,935]

2 hours ago, I_M4_AU said:

Yes, that is the point.  When they arrived in court the prosecutor and defense had an agreement to get Hunter immunity for life.  When the Judge started to dig into the agreement and saw what the diversion agreement she asked if Hunter was still being investigated and Weiss, after the whistleblowers testified, had to say that he could be charged later on and the defense said *No deal*. 

I wonder what would have happened if she just signed the deal?

I don't think you are reading that right.  The prosecutor and the defense team were not in agreement when they got to court.  That was the judge's initial concern and that is the concern anytime a plea is taken by a judge. 

It is unusual for a plea not to be broad and cover all charges relating to the same series of events.  You do realize that, after 30 days, a new hearing date will be scheduled and the judge will most likely accept the plea at that time?

[I_M4_AU 7,848]

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

The prosecutor and the defense team were not in agreement when they got to court. 

Then why go to court if the defense is not going to agree unless Hunter is immune?  It was said for weeks that there was a plea deal, which means to me both side agree.

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

That was the judge's initial concern and that is the concern anytime a plea is taken by a judge. 

If the judge just rubber stamped the deal it would have been agreed to, correct?  It seems the judge stopped it because of concerns about the creativity of the diversion agreement.

9 hours ago, AU9377 said:

You do realize that, after 30 days, a new hearing date will be scheduled and the judge will most likely accept the plea at that time?

I realize that there is a 30 day delay, but I doubt the judge will accept a plea deal that lets Hunter off the hook if he is still being investigated because the defense will not accept the deal.  Hunter is being investigated for a FARA violation as I understand it and it is a big deal.  Have I misinterpreted the situation?

[GoAU 1,600]

On 8/2/2023 at 7:40 AM, TexasTiger said:

You don’t display an understanding of any of these situations. Trump isn’t charged with unlawful possession of documents. Read the indictment. Read something other than right wing talking points on the Ukrainian prosecutor. Your facts are all wrong. If he did anything criminal Trump would have prosecuted him when he had the chance. Republican House would have found something. They didn’t because that’s not what happened. “Influence peddling” — what did he get in exchange for doing something illegal in regard to Hunter? Name it.

When you said “if he did anything wrong Trump would have prosecuted him” - first, I assume the “him” is Hunter, or are you talking about Joe Biden?  Secondly, Trump doesn’t prosecute anyone as President - and you claim my facts are wrong….  If you’re referring to Hunter and the laptop, the slow playing of the investigation by the IRS and FBI is very clearly a reason.  If you’re referring to Joe Biden, obviously the documents weren’t known by the public.  Prosecution of prior administrations wasn’t a practice before, but I can almost guarantee it will be a thing going forward.  Honestly, I’m not sure that’s necessary a bad thing though - accountability is a good thing. 
 

Regarding the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden (in his own words) “got fired” - please tell me you don’t really believe that was just a conspiracy, right?   I really had you pegged as being smarter than that.  

On 8/2/2023 at 5:08 PM, homersapien said:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/06/gop-republican-party-fbi-authoritarian-acceleration.html

The GOP’s Authoritarian Acceleration

Internal resistance to its anti-democratic turn has all but vanished.

This made me LOL.  To call the right “authoritarian” is laughable.  Compare the number of things “banned” by Biden and then by Trump.  The only possible thing I can imagine would be abortion - and that’s just a matter of perspective.  By that I mean it really all comes down to whether or not you believe the baby is alive or a person.  

[homersapien 11,379]

14 minutes ago, GoAU said:

When you said “if he did anything wrong Trump would have prosecuted him” - first, I assume the “him” is Hunter, or are you talking about Joe Biden?  Secondly, Trump doesn’t prosecute anyone as President - and you claim my facts are wrong….  If you’re referring to Hunter and the laptop, the slow playing of the investigation by the IRS and FBI is very clearly a reason.  If you’re referring to Joe Biden, obviously the documents weren’t known by the public.  Prosecution of prior administrations wasn’t a practice before, but I can almost guarantee it will be a thing going forward.  Honestly, I’m not sure that’s necessary a bad thing though - accountability is a good thing. 
 

Regarding the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden (in his own words) “got fired” - please tell me you don’t really believe that was just a conspiracy, right?   I really had you pegged as being smarter than that.  

This made me LOL.  To call the right “authoritarian” is laughable.  Compare the number of things “banned” by Biden and then by Trump.  The only possible thing I can imagine would be abortion - and that’s just a matter of perspective.  By that I mean it really all comes down to whether or not you believe the baby is alive or a person.  

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/05/donald-trump-2024-plans

https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-term

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/17/trump-second-term-democracy/

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/08/politics/trump-campaign-promises/index.html

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/07/donald-trump-second-term-purge-plans

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/07/13/the-meticulous-ruthless-preparations-for-a-second-trump-term

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-a-second-trump-term-would-mean-for-the-world/

https://www.newsweek.com/2022/11/04/sweet-revenge-what-trump-would-do-second-term-1754654.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/08/23/trump-list-of-50-core-priorities-for-second-term-includes-return-to-normal-in-2021/

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-28/trump-reveals-agenda-second-term

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-adviser-stephen-miller-reveals-aggressive-second-term-immigration-agenda-n1245407

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-presidential-plans-second-term-power-election-2024-rcna94628

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/donald-trumps-plan-to-make-the-presidency-more-like-a-kingship

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/08/project-2025-gut-worker-protections-labor-department-heritage-foundation-trump-2024/

https://newrepublic.com/article/174535/people-arent-facing-horrors-new-trump-term-bring

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-allies-forge-plans-increase-114639311.html

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/02/donald-trump-second-term-predictions.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/07/trump-second-term-isolationist-fascism/674791/

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/miles-taylor-trump-2nd-term-would-focus-solely-on-revenge/

 

 

[GoAU 1,600]

9 minutes ago, homersapien said:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/05/donald-trump-2024-plans

https://www.axios.com/2022/07/22/trump-2025-radical-plan-second-term

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/17/trump-second-term-democracy/

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/08/politics/trump-campaign-promises/index.html

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/07/donald-trump-second-term-purge-plans

https://www.economist.com/briefing/2023/07/13/the-meticulous-ruthless-preparations-for-a-second-trump-term

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-a-second-trump-term-would-mean-for-the-world/

https://www.newsweek.com/2022/11/04/sweet-revenge-what-trump-would-do-second-term-1754654.html

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2020/08/23/trump-list-of-50-core-priorities-for-second-term-includes-return-to-normal-in-2021/

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-08-28/trump-reveals-agenda-second-term

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/trump-adviser-stephen-miller-reveals-aggressive-second-term-immigration-agenda-n1245407

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-presidential-plans-second-term-power-election-2024-rcna94628

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/donald-trumps-plan-to-make-the-presidency-more-like-a-kingship

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/08/project-2025-gut-worker-protections-labor-department-heritage-foundation-trump-2024/

https://newrepublic.com/article/174535/people-arent-facing-horrors-new-trump-term-bring

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-allies-forge-plans-increase-114639311.html

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/02/donald-trump-second-term-predictions.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/07/trump-second-term-isolationist-fascism/674791/

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/miles-taylor-trump-2nd-term-would-focus-solely-on-revenge/

 

 

Quite a worthless post - just spam a bunch of random links and then pat yourself on the back?   I read the first few articles and I see hysteric fear mongering and generalization of what Trump “wants to do” if elected again.  Essentially just trying to scare people.  
 

if you have a specific article that makes a real point, let me know and I’ll read it, but I read enough of them to get the gist
 

Since we have 4 years of track record to deal with, how about you give me a real, not hypothetical, example of Trump being authoritarian?

Edited August 3, 2023 by GoAU

[TexasTiger 12,897]

1 hour ago, GoAU said:

When you said “if he did anything wrong Trump would have prosecuted him” - first, I assume the “him” is Hunter, or are you talking about Joe Biden?  Secondly, Trump doesn’t prosecute anyone as President - and you claim my facts are wrong….  If you’re referring to Hunter and the laptop, the slow playing of the investigation by the IRS and FBI is very clearly a reason.  If you’re referring to Joe Biden, obviously the documents weren’t known by the public.  Prosecution of prior administrations wasn’t a practice before, but I can almost guarantee it will be a thing going forward.  Honestly, I’m not sure that’s necessary a bad thing though - accountability is a good thing. 
 

Regarding the Ukrainian prosecutor that Biden (in his own words) “got fired” - please tell me you don’t really believe that was just a conspiracy, right?   I really had you pegged as being smarter than that.  

This made me LOL.  To call the right “authoritarian” is laughable.  Compare the number of things “banned” by Biden and then by Trump.  The only possible thing I can imagine would be abortion - and that’s just a matter of perspective.  By that I mean it really all comes down to whether or not you believe the baby is alive or a person.  

Simple question— what crime do you think Biden committed and what proof do yo have that supports it?

[Son of A Tiger 561]

On 8/2/2023 at 4:23 PM, homersapien said:

Compared to Trump or DeSantis?  Sure.

[GoAU 1,600]

17 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Simple question— what crime do you think Biden committed and what proof do yo have that supports it?

Which Biden?   They’re both winners….

[TexasTiger 12,897]

9 minutes ago, GoAU said:

Which Biden?   They’re both winners….

Joe. Hunter is guilty of multiple things.

[GoAU 1,600]

3 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Joe. Hunter is guilty of multiple things.

It is perfectly obvious he is guilty of improper storage and retention of classified materials, right?   
 

I think there is more than enough indicators that he (via Hunter and Joe’s family) likely peddled influence and took bribes, but all I ask on that is a legitimate investigation worthy of the allegations.   

[TexasTiger 12,897]

18 minutes ago, GoAU said:

It is perfectly obvious he is guilty of improper storage and retention of classified materials, right?   
 

I think there is more than enough indicators that he (via Hunter and Joe’s family) likely peddled influence and took bribes, but all I ask on that is a legitimate investigation worthy of the allegations.   

I’d have to look at the relevant statute, but he was in possession of classified documents.

[GoAU 1,600]

19 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I’d have to look at the relevant statute, but he was in possession of classified documents.

He also failed to maintain control / maintain security of the documents.  In the military people go to jail for less.  
 

And before you ask - yes I also believe this needs to be consistently applied to Trump, Pence, and Hillary.  There is no reason politicians should be held to a lower standard than the men and women in our military. 

[TexasTiger 12,897]

2 minutes ago, GoAU said:

He also failed to maintain control / maintain security of the documents.  In the military people go to jail for less.  
 

And before you ask - yes I also believe this needs to be consistently applied to Trump, Pence, and Hillary.  There is no reason politicians should be held to a lower standard than the men and women in our military. 

One question I have about the relevant law is intent or at least knowledge. Most people in possession of classified documents took them themselves or orchestrated it. As VP’s, Biden & Pence had staff handle those things. Was it even at their direction? I don’t think it’s about a different standard, but it is definitely a different fact pattern in regard to their actions and awareness, unless there’s evidence to the contrary.

[GoAU 1,600]

5 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

One question I have about the relevant law is intent or at least knowledge. Most people in possession of classified documents took them themselves or orchestrated it. As VP’s, Biden & Pence had staff handle those things. Was it even at their direction? I don’t think it’s about a different standard, but it is definitely a different fact pattern in regard to their actions and awareness, unless there’s evidence to the contrary.

Actually the law states nothing about intent.  You can (and people do) go to jail for accidents involving classified documents.   That was one of the most shocking things to most people familiar with classified document rules when the DOJ chose not to prosecute Hillary (although installing your own server also clearly displays intent).   
 

As for allowing politicians to use a “fall guy” to hide behind - are you saying Trump can use that excuse too?   I mean the documents were in Biden’s garage and office for around 6-8 YEARS.   I don’t have anything in my garage that could sit for years without knowing what it is.  

[TexasTiger 12,897]

17 minutes ago, GoAU said:

Actually the law states nothing about intent.  You can (and people do) go to jail for accidents involving classified documents.   That was one of the most shocking things to most people familiar with classified document rules when the DOJ chose not to prosecute Hillary (although installing your own server also clearly displays intent).   
 

As for allowing politicians to use a “fall guy” to hide behind - are you saying Trump can use that excuse too?   I mean the documents were in Biden’s garage and office for around 6-8 YEARS.   I don’t have anything in my garage that could sit for years without knowing what it is.  

Please cite the law you think applies that doesn’t require knowingly taking or retaining the documents?

[GoAU 1,600]

18 USC 793 (f)

 

(f)

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

 

 

And that’s assuming we honestly believe he had classified documents scattered all over the place without intentionally doing it…..