2024

[twocoach]

If Pence is all the way up to 4%, can we assume "Mother" voted multiple times?

Anyone else remember back when the DeSantis supporters/campaign kept saying, "wait 'till he announces"?

The GOP has truly lost it's way.

[defixione]

I have this funny feeling that Christie only entered the race so he could talk about Trump's incompetency and legal battles, and all the other issues that no republican wants to talk about or take a stance on.

[TDub]

can you be elected president from prison? Hell he might not even be able to cast his own ballot by then

[twocoach]

can you be elected president from prison? Hell he might not even be able to cast his own ballot by then

I believe that the answer to that is sadly "yes".

[Sparko]

can you be elected president from prison? Hell he might not even be able to cast his own ballot by then

I believe that the answer to that is sadly "yes".

No. He would be an incarcerated felon in Florida.

[twocoach]

can you be elected president from prison? Hell he might not even be able to cast his own ballot by then

I believe that the answer to that is sadly "yes".

No. He would be an incarcerated felon in Florida.

And? I don't think there is anything in the Constitution that would prevent an incarcerated felon from running for President.

[Shirley]

can you be elected president from prison? Hell he might not even be able to cast his own ballot by then

I believe that the answer to that is sadly "yes".

No. He would be an incarcerated felon in Florida.

Au, contraire!

...There are no legal obstacles to running for president as a convicted felon or even from behind bars. And if Trump finds himself in that predicament, he’ll be following in the footsteps of another rabble-rousing populist and frequent presidential candidate: the avowed socialist Eugene V. Debs, who received nearly a million votes while in prison a century ago.

...A Trump electoral victory from behind bars would open a constitutional can of worms, but the general view among legal scholars is that the need for a duly elected president to fulfill the duties of office would override a criminal conviction and require the sentence to at least be put on hold. And if Trump were convicted of a federal crime, he could even try to pardon himself immediately upon taking office — a maneuver that Debs himself promised to undertake if he won...

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

Dare I say I miss this guy?

Watch the video.....

[Sparko]

Wish we had missed his eight years.

[RainbowsandUnicorns]

If Pence is all the way up to 4%, can we assume "Mother" voted multiple times?

Anyone else remember back when the DeSantis supporters/campaign kept saying, "wait 'till he announces"?

The GOP has truly lost it's way.

If someone told me to guess the real numbers of all registered Republican voters I would guess TODAY....

Trump 48%
DeSantis 32%
Christie 7%
Haley 4%
Scott 4%
Pence 3%
Ramaswamy 2%
Hutchinson 0%
Burgum 0%
Butler 0%

I figure some/many will drop out but 6 months from now I would guess...

Trump 42%
DeSantis 31%
Christie 7%
Scott 7%
Ramaswamy 6%
Pence 4%
Haley 3%

[twocoach]

If Pence is all the way up to 4%, can we assume "Mother" voted multiple times?

Anyone else remember back when the DeSantis supporters/campaign kept saying, "wait 'till he announces"?

The GOP has truly lost it's way.

If someone told me to guess the real numbers of all registered Republican voters I would guess TODAY....

Trump 48%
DeSantis 32%
Christie 7%
Haley 4%
Scott 4%
Pence 3%
Ramaswamy 2%
Hutchinson 0%
Burgum 0%
Butler 0%

I figure some/many will drop out but 6 months from now I would guess...

Trump 42%
DeSantis 31%
Christie 7%
Scott 7%
Ramaswamy 6%
Pence 4%
Haley 3%

Maybe they can do a Zoom call from prison for Trump to accept the GOP nomination at next year's GOP Convention.

[Shirley]

[Shirley]

Some people say...

[Shirley]

[Shirley]

I had to look it up:

PAB One who acts like a pussy ass bitch at any occasion

[Shirley]

No Way!

[jfish26]

Christ almighty, the brainworms are fierce once they've taken hold.

Opinion | Merrick Garland needs to explain the timing of the Trump indictment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... ndictment/

From O.J. Simpson’s arrest on June 17, 1994, on charges of murder to his acquittal on Oct. 3, 1995, in what was billed as the “trial of the century,” nearly 16 months elapsed. How many months will pass, from Donald Trump’s arraignment on June 13, before a verdict in what might well be the trial of this century — the unprecedented federal criminal prosecution of a former president? Sixteen months would mean the nation learning Trump’s fate a matter of weeks before Election Day, with the accused very possibly on the 2024 presidential ballot.

The idea that the Justice Department is flirting with that possibility is astonishing. Prosecutors had other options — to charge Trump sooner or delay prosecution until later — but instead have chosen to take this route, two months before the Republican presidential debates begin.

Of course this is nonsense; the whole thing here is to more or less say there is no such thing as an ok time to criminally charge an aspirant for the presidency. Too soon? Not enough evidence. Too late? Too close to the election. These morons act like there is a 36-hour golden window, outside of which any action is impermissible (or "astonishing").

We continue, further.

[The] most basic question about the case is one I had, and I’m sure many shared, when the indictment of Trump for allegedly violating the Espionage Act was unveiled: That’s it? In this “espionage,” no documents were given to a third party? None were sold? It’s all about “unlawful retention”?

So, talk to me like I'm five years old. You're saying there isn't anything to do with someone who illegally kept national defense secrets, unless and until you can prove that the secrets were in fact given to an adversary?

While you're thinking that through, please show your work on the BUT HER EMAILZZZZ bullshit.

Onward.

Smith has loaded up lots of criminal counts — 37 of them — and released seemingly damning photos of cardboard boxes stacked at Mar-a-Lago, with the implication that they are full of classified material. But the indictment hinges on just 31 documents — presumably small enough to fit in a single box — and among the containers in the infamous chandeliered-bathroom photo is one with “Bedroom” scribbled on it with a marker, just as millions of Americans would do when moving.

Again, the bad-faith moving goalposts. Are you saying that the charges here should fail because Smith...didn't go farther with them than he did? How does that make any sense?

And stop with comparing boxes in a social club bathroom - a social club that has seen tens of thousands of people, including Chinese spies, come and go this calendar year alone - to the moving and storage habits of "millions of Americans."

Continuing.

Has the Justice Department really thought this through? After the GOP presidential debates begin on Aug. 23, they will occur regularly for months to come. Trump might or might not participate, but he will certainly be campaigning hard. Do prosecutors envision sandwiching court hearings between debates and campaign appearances? Do they foresee hearings while Iowa is caucusing or New Hampshire is holding the first Republican primary? Will the government demand his presence on Super Tuesday?

Again: what's the Justice Department supposed to do? Where's the just-right porridge here, timing-wise?

Or are we just inventing a "I'm a declared candidate for president, I'm above the law" get-out-of-jail-free card?

This possible invasion of the nation’s quadrennial election cycle — of the democratic process — by a group of never-elected lawyers, never even queried by the people’s elected representatives, demands explanation by Attorney General Merrick Garland. Where is he? Garland should be out front, answering questions about the decision to proceed now, and why.

What the FUCK are you talking about? Garland isn't "out front, answering questions," because he appointed an independent special counsel so as to protect Trump's rights.

On we go.

At a minimum, Americans have a right to know how the attorney general will ensure that the same standard of prosecutorial discretion used to charge Trump will be applied by the special counsel investigating President Biden’s trail of improperly kept classified documents.

Trump, knowing Biden would be his 2020 opponent, had years of control of all three branches of government. You think he wouldn't have had Biden charged, if there were even barely-coherent facts supporting a charge?

Biden is not, and should not be, above the law. But stop with this false equivalency; it makes no sense that Biden must be charged for document something-something because Trump is being charged for document something-something. If there are FACTS showing that the conduct was similar, SHOW THOSE FACTS.

Still more.

[Complex pretrial decisions could be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court before the actual trial begins. This case seems certain to drip into every day of this election cycle.

It does! But aren't you more or less admitting here that, given the complexities of our laws (and the defense's right to, you know, mount a defense), there simply IS NOT a window to bring a complex case against a candidate for office that will not overlap with the candidate's race?

Let's put a bow on this.

That’s why the country needs to hear from Garland. Why the Justice Department dawdled so long in bringing its expansive charges just as the 2024 election season gets underway is deeply puzzling. I’ve always dismissed conspiracy theorists and pushed back on “deep state” paranoia, while defending the great majority of professionals working at the FBI and elsewhere in the Justice Department. But this sequence of events has painted both the FBI and DOJ a deep blue in the eyes of red America. That’s going to be very difficult to undo.

Again, no, we should not hear from Garland. That's a goddamn trap.

Dawdled? Meadows flipped like two weeks ago! Would you morons want charges that are NOT supported by evidence?

Ugh.

[KUTradition]

red ‘murica was already skeptical of the FBI and DOJ…trump has made sure if that since 2016

hugh is a dipshit (most guys named hugh seem to be)

[jfish26]

red ‘murica was already skeptical of the FBI and DOJ…trump has made sure if that since 2016

hugh is a dipshit (most guys named hugh seem to be)

Exactly. And that chapter of the playbook is easy reading.

Step One: Seed the conversation with "grave doubts" and "questions" and demands that negatives be proven.

Step Two: Point to "the people's" grave doubts and questions, and the requirement that negatives be proven.

Anyone who's ever met a teenager knows this silly dance. Declare that something can be done only when conditions are just so, and then make the conditions impossible to meet. That way, inaction is only logical!

[KUTradition]

red ‘murica was already skeptical of the FBI and DOJ…trump has made sure if that since 2016

hugh is a dipshit (most guys named hugh seem to be)

Exactly. And that chapter of the playbook is easy reading.

Step One: Seed the conversation with "grave doubts" and "questions" and demands that negatives be proven.

Step Two: Point to "the people's" grave doubts and questions, and the requirement that negatives be proven.

Anyone who's ever met a teenager knows this silly dance. Declare that something can be done only when conditions are just so, and then make the conditions impossible to meet. That way, inaction is only logical!

personally, i actually have MORE faith in the DOJ/FBI right now

if the pubs choose to pardon, that’s a huge hit to my faith in the entire system and would exemplify what so many pubs have been stomping their feet about..a two-tiered system

you break the law, particularly knowingly and willfully-so, you suffer the consequences…whether you’re a former president or joe the plumber