destruction of america

[a.d._510_n_ok]

On 12/18/2023 at 8:13 PM, john510 said:

Yes a believer. I believe we can have better than what we have now. No matter who makes it better, I don't care who it is. 

I believe the side telling us Trump is literally Hitler keeps forgetting Biden backs Ukraine neo nazis who LITERALLY wave swastikas!!!!

[bananahamuck]

[datzenmike]

He IS Hitler!!!!

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Mattndew76 said:

I spent some time reading the CO State Supreme Court ruling...

 

Its a massive pile of horse shit.

 

  They stayed their own ruling pending an overturn by the SCOTUS, and even went as far as to put a permanent stay rule on their own ruling if the SCOTUS doesn't take this up by Jan-4... An injunctive stay says that they know their ruling is without precedence or historic merit, but it gives the media headlines to blast far and wide for people to be happy or sad over. 

 

This is blatant election interference. What will people do if they think Trump is not on the ballot come the General Election? They wont vote..

 

Goal of this type of action:

 

-Disenfranchise voters in CO.

-Incite a violent reaction from the less intellectual more emotional among MAGA.

-Send a message to other state courts to take up this same strategy.

-give comfort to the TDS people that think this is all ethical. 

 

Reality:

 

Even with this ruling the GOP doesn't need to hold a public ballot primary to have Trump on the General Ballot. They just need to caucus for any state that pulls this illegal action. The ruling was only based on the Primary Public Ballot NOT the General. They even state that Trump will remain on the ballot should the GOP nominate him. 

 

I am so disappointed in people right now.  Nobody goes to the source for the information they have opinions about. Its totally outsourced to them and people have no issue with that...Disgusting...

 

Post note:

 

Paradime you're BIAS as fuck. I get your sentiment, but you're hardwired more to the left side of politics and try as you might cannot argue your way out of it. Own it and be proud of it, because it just looks dumb when you say you aren't. You're a rational west coast lefty though, kind of like a Jimmy Dore. 

 

 

 

Yeah... what ever happened to due process??????? Inciting an insurrection perhaps. Colorado...

 

[Mattndew76]

19 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

He IS Hitler!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah... what ever happened to due process??????? Inciting an insurrection perhaps. Colorado...

 

 

At this point there has been no Due Process. 

 

Trump has never been tried for an Insurrection. Not a single person from J6 has been charged or convicted of any Insurrection. 

 

So far its been a word or phrase repeated add nauseum a billion times over to rake up all the people who want it to be true. When factually its Bull Shit. 

 

If you believe Due process has been levied then explain how it was done. I would like to hear this. Default Judgment is not due process and never will be.

Its "I think you're guilty of said crimes, and now prove me wrong."... 

 

Another thing to note about the 14th amendment... It doesn't apply to the office of the executive.. It does however apply to the House and Senate, But we will get to see this once the SCOTUS reviews the CO bull shit ruling. The courts do NOT have power over Primary elections. The political parties do. General Elections are constitutionally bound to the State Legislatures not the fucken courts. This is partisan Lawfare.

 

 

[paradime]

5 hours ago, iceman510 said:

 

You can continue to try and shroud yourself in your "I am so unbiased and only use facts, so I can pronounce the correct and proper judgment on everything" approach, but not working for me.

 

Regarding the comment quoted above, how exactly does this particular court, not truly judging the legal merit of an actual outcome of a court case proving such, get to unilaterally pronounce  "yup, he led an insurrection, we said so".  Doesn't strike me as nor in their jurisdiction.  If in fact this becomes determined in a real (i.e. not a Garland DOJ kangaroo court case) that Trump in fact did so, then I could see they have the right to restrict him from their own state ballot.  Without that, no basis. 

 

Multiple other state courts have already declined these motions.  Why does this one get your approval and acceptance?  Do those judgments have any merit on your scale?

 

You could also more effectively demonstrate non-partisanship by not engaging in ad-hominem attacks.  

 

Why, because no one else here is engaging in ad-hominem attacks? I've been register independent my entire voting life because it's logical. I voted for Clinton the first time and didn't vote the second. I voted for Obama the first time, and McCain the second because it was logical. That said, I've never claimed to be bipartisan when it comes to Trump. He's done nothing but earn my bias, and that includes his faux conservative enablers. My values are consistent, I get attacked when expressing "liberal" views here, and cheered when expressing "conservative" views, so who's the hypocrite?  I call out BS when I see it, I speak my mind and on that, there is no compromise.

 

Speaking of ad-hominem attacks, Colorado didn't unilaterally pronounce anything for the country. They forced the Supreme Court to decide wether these judgments have any merit, because that's proper procedure. I'm in no position to judge their case, and neither are you. Showing an interest has nothing to do with approval, acceptance, or prejudgment. When the highest court in the land will be answering the question wether this 4th amendment provision applies to the POTUS, I want to know WTF is going on, and so should you. 

[paradime]

26 minutes ago, Mattndew76 said:

 

At this point there has been no Due Process. 

 

Trump has never been tried for an Insurrection. Not a single person from J6 has been charged or convicted of any Insurrection. 

 

So far its been a word or phrase repeated add nauseum a billion times over to rake up all the people who want it to be true. When factually its Bull Shit. 

 

If you believe Due process has been levied then explain how it was done. I would like to hear this. Default Judgment is not due process and never will be.

Its "I think you're guilty of said crimes, and now prove me wrong."... 

 

Another thing to note about the 14th amendment... It doesn't apply to the office of the executive.. It does however apply to the House and Senate, But we will get to see this once the SCOTUS reviews the CO bull shit ruling. The courts do NOT have power over Primary elections. The political parties do. General Elections are constitutionally bound to the State Legislatures not the fucken courts. This is partisan Lawfare.

 

 

Should we say Trump attempted "the I word"? Would it help If I own that I'm proud to be called a liberal by "Conservatives" like you?  

[flyerdan]

For everyone losing their shit over the Colorado thing, first, it's not gonna stand up, and if it did, every election I can remember has a write in provision for each position below the printed ones, so that would put him back on the ballot, just requires a bit of writing.

Everyone knows that this is just the first salvo in the big cheat; democrats cheat at elections -- always have and always will.  With all the exposure from the last go round, and with their abysmal track record on things that matter they are going to have to cheat in new and innovative ways in order to get the Biden replacement the four billion or so votes needed for the majority.  I would expect things like masking the vote counting machines to not recognize the write in space, in which case one would need to draw a line through all of the choices so it kicked out for hand count.  Of course, they won't like this and will claim that only thirty or so people did that, so everyone that does the write in will have to put some unique doodle or makers mark in a margin somewhere so they can swear under oath that they did write in Trump, and can prove it if necessary.

Of course all of that would only work if the republicans were serious about winning, and we all know they aren't, otherwise they wouldn't make sure there was billions for yachts and houses and shopping and border security for Ukraine, and sweet fuck-all for us.

[yenpit]

2 hours ago, Mattndew76 said:

I spent some time reading the CO State Supreme Court ruling...

 

Its a massive pile of horse shit.

 

  They stayed their own ruling pending an overturn by the SCOTUS, and even went as far as to put a permanent stay rule on their own ruling if the SCOTUS doesn't take this up by Jan-4... An injunctive stay says that they know their ruling is without precedence or historic merit, but it gives the media headlines to blast far and wide for people to be happy or sad over. 

 

This is blatant election interference. What will people do if they think Trump is not on the ballot come the General Election? They wont vote..

 

Goal of this type of action:

 

-Disenfranchise voters in CO.

-Incite a violent reaction from the less intellectual more emotional among MAGA.

-Send a message to other state courts to take up this same strategy.

-give comfort to the TDS people that think this is all ethical. 

 

Reality:

 

Even with this ruling the GOP doesn't need to hold a public ballot primary to have Trump on the General Ballot. They just need to caucus for any state that pulls this illegal action. The ruling was only based on the Primary Public Ballot NOT the General. They even state that Trump will remain on the ballot should the GOP nominate him. 

 

I am so disappointed in people right now.  Nobody goes to the source for the information they have opinions about. Its totally outsourced to them and people have no issue with that...Disgusting...

 

Post note:

 

Paradime you're BIAS as fuck. I get your sentiment, but you're hardwired more to the left side of politics and try as you might cannot argue your way out of it. Own it and be proud of it, because it just looks dumb when you say you aren't. You're a rational west coast lefty though, kind of like a Jimmy Dore. 

 

 

THANK YOU for this!!

[paradime]

 

[Ooph!]

[Ooph!]

20 hours ago, paradime said:

Should we say Trump attempted "the I word"?

 

It is a widely held opinion that the 1868 14th amendment was directly aimed at elected officials that had joined or voted to join the Confederacy due to its wording, an actual insurrection. It also provides an escape clause in that a 2/3's vote can override this,

later in 1872 an Amnesty was given to Confederates with the exception of leadership ending the blanket prohibition.

My question to you is this - were weapons used at the Jan 6 Capitol insurrection?

and a follow up

If no weapons were involved how can it be considered an insurrection?

When I looked up the definition it includes the wording "armed resistance"

And another thought, if we apply the definition of insurrection without armed resistance as it is currently being used wouldn't ANY protest be an insurrection? and if this is the path we follow where goes liberty?

[john510]

3 hours ago, Ooph! said:

 

It is a widely held opinion that the 1868 14th amendment was directly aimed at elected officials that had joined or voted to join the Confederacy due to its wording, an actual insurrection. It also provides an escape clause in that a 2/3's vote can override this,

later in 1872 an Amnesty was given to Confederates with the exception of leadership ending the blanket prohibition.

My question to you is this - were weapons used at the Jan 6 Capitol insurrection?

and a follow up

If no weapons were involved how can it be considered an insurrection?

When I looked up the definition it includes the wording "armed resistance"

And another thought, if we apply the definition of insurrection without armed resistance as it is currently being used wouldn't ANY protest be an insurrection? and if this is the path we follow where goes liberty?

Come on it had to be an insurrection. All the Democrats say it was along with the media. Except for one Democrat, Chucky Schumer. He claimed Trump cited an erection. Why they didn't go after Trump for that also baffles me. 

[paradime]

I hear you Oops, but widely held opinions is not how constitutional law works. This case is not solid by any means, and it's up to the SCOTUS to decide if CO's decision has merit.

 

Weapon or not, if I forcibly break into someone's home and choke them to death, it's still defined as murder. Wether weapons are used or not; "an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government" is still the definition of "Insurrection".

 

If we're at liberty to forcibly break into our nation's capital when ever the POTUS doesn't accept an election result, where goes democracy? Jan 6 was the result of Trump's accusation of wide spread election fraud. It stands to reason that if Trump had solid evidence, he would have shown it by now, and Biden would be rotting in jail. 

[john510]

15 minutes ago, paradime said:

I hear you Oops, but widely held opinions is not how constitutional law works. This case is not solid by any means, and it's up to the SCOTUS to decide if CO's decision has merit.

 

Weapon or not, if I forcibly break into someone's home and choke them to death, it's still defined as murder. Wether weapons are used or not; "an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government" is still the definition of "Insurrection".

 

If we're at liberty to forcibly break into our nation's capital when ever the POTUS doesn't accept an election result, where goes democracy? Jan 6 was the result of Trump's accusation of wide spread election fraud. It stands to reason that if Trump had solid evidence, he would have shown it by now, and Biden would be rotting in jail. 

I suggest you watch some of the video the Democrats didn't want us to see. Are you sure everybody forced their way in ? People went to jail just for being there even though they never participated in the violence. Is that fair ? 

[angliagt]

   Wouldn't it be nice if they were just as impassioned about stopping illegals

from crossing our borders?

[datzenmike]

We covered this. A weapon does not mean just a firearm. Anything that you could carry that could be used to inflict harm makes you armed or weaponized. 

[john510]

Isn't it great that Colorado is saving Democracy by removing a Presidential candidate from the ballot ? 

[Rustbin]

2 hours ago, datzenmike said:

We covered this. A weapon does not mean just a firearm. Anything that you could carry that could be used to inflict harm makes you armed or weaponized. 

 

I need to be careful where I fart.

[datzenmike]

 ... and use a suppressor.

[bananahamuck]

[ratpatrol66]

5 hours ago, Rustbin said:

 

I need to be careful where I fart.

Less where and more when after eating Taco Bell

[bananahamuck]

6 hours ago, ratpatrol66 said:

Less where and more when after eating Taco Bell

  
I think Carls Jr should be sued for saying they sell food. 
 

   

[difrangia]

9 hours ago, bananahamuck said:

 

& look how the last one ended; & we didn't even have 'three letter agencies' back then.

[a.d._510_n_ok]

14 hours ago, john510 said:

Isn't it great that Colorado is saving Democracy by removing a Presidential candidate from the ballot ? 

[john510]

22 hours ago, datzenmike said:

We covered this. A weapon does not mean just a firearm. Anything that you could carry that could be used to inflict harm makes you armed or weaponized. 

So every human being is weaponized ? Hands to make a fist ,a foot to kick with, elbows, knees etc. can all be very effective at inflicting harm. I always carry those with me so......