ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

bleeduncblue said:
i love it .. keep the hits coming! he's getting further and further from the nomination.
Click to expand...
The mar a Lago thing is apparently going to take a really long time to work thru the system, special handling of all the docs, all the appeals, etc. Goods odds nothing is resolved b4 Nov 24.

So it comes down to the "base voters" and the bagman in terms of whether gop wants to resolve this themselves. The base is looney though.
 
blazers said:
The mar a Lago thing is apparently going to take a really long time to work thru the system, special handling of all the docs, all the appeals, etc. Goods odds nothing is resolved b4 Nov 24.

So it comes down to the "base voters" and the bagman in terms of whether gop wants to resolve this themselves. The base is looney though.
Click to expand...
The GOP has had so many chances to permanently cut loose from Trump... he must be too good for business.
 
blazers said:
The mar a Lago thing is apparently going to take a really long time to work thru the system, special handling of all the docs, all the appeals, etc. Goods odds nothing is resolved b4 Nov 24.

So it comes down to the "base voters" and the bagman in terms of whether gop wants to resolve this themselves. The base is looney though.
Click to expand...
Most legal experts think it's going to be pretty quick. The district he's in is known as a "rocket docket." Most predictions say end of this year or beginning of next year.
 
Heels Noir said:
In this series of Where Are They Now?, we examine the current lives of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump:

CLINTON
After losing the 2016 presidential election, Clinton has since written an autobiography, cowritten another book with daughter Chelsea, co-founded her own production company, and taken part in a documentary film based on her life.

Presently, she serves as the 11th and first female chancellor at Queen’s University Belfast, hosts her own weekly podcast, and has recently sold the movie rights of her best-selling book of fiction.

In February she joined Columbia University with two appointments: Professor of Practice at the School of International and Public Affairs and Presidential Fellow at Columbia World Projects.

TRUMP
After losing the 2020 presidential election, Trump became the first former U.S. president to face criminal charges when a New York grand jury indicted him for allegedly falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment made to a porn star. The trial date is set for March 25, 2024.

In a civil case and following a short deliberation, a jury ruled on May 9 that Trump was liable for sexual assault and defamation and awarded E. Jean Carroll $5 million in damages.

In 2021, Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis began an inquiry into Trump’s attempts to overturn Joe Biden’s victory the year before. The probe centers around the infamous phone call Trump made to Georgia’s secretary of State Brad Raffensperger asking him to “find” additional votes during a recount in order for Trump to be declared the winner. A grand jury wrapped up its investigation last month and submitted to Willis its final report, which includes recommendations for indictments.

The U.S. Justice Department has an investigation underway into Trump's actions on Jan. 6, 2021, after he lost the 2020 election. Overseeing the investigation is Jack Smith, a war crimes prosecutor and political independent. Trump has accused the FBI, without evidence, of launching the probes as political retribution.

His second indictment, this time a federal indictment,
centers around his failure to comply with a federal subpoena asking him to turn over classified documents from his presidency, including some marked “Top Secret” or “Classified.” Trump not only improperly stored these documents but also obstructed the government’s investigation. He is to appear in court on June 13.

In September, New York attorney general Letitia James filed a lawsuit against Trump alleging that he had committed fraud by misrepresenting his net worth and the valuations of several of his properties as a means to deceive banks and lenders. The suit named three of his adult children -- Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric -- as well as the Trump Organization. James is seeking $250 million and to permanently bar the Trumps from operating a business in New York State. The case is expected to go to trial in October after a judge rejected an attempt by Trump’s legal team to delay the proceedings by six months.

And speaking of Trump's legal woes, he recently lost his two top lawyers Jim Trusty and John Rowley during the most perilous moment of his legal travails.
Click to expand...
thanks for proving my point
 
tarheel0910 said:
Sounds like the NCGOP is sore too. This is just childish on their part. I find it interesting that republicans hold Regan in such high regard, but continuously shit on his legacy. Democrats basically do the same to their heroes too, so I guess both sides still continue to prove that they are stupid and really no different from each other.
Click to expand...

Thanks Strum. Wait, lemme guess,…you and Strum just share internet?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: toophly1124
According to sources close to the situation here are some of the legal strategies and preparations trump is working on

Grab the judge by the pu$$y and remind her he’s a star
“But Hillary”
“But hunter Biden’s laptop”
Claim FBI planted the docs
Claim he mentally willed the docs into being declassified
Make fun of jack smiths name
Claim he thought “classified” meant the docs were for really classy people like him
Refer to the investigation as “the Chink syndrome”
Appoint his own judge and jurors and have supporters take over the courtroom to install them
Make sure his legal team has their hair dyed with colors that won’t run
Claim the jury actually found him innocent but the verdict was stolen
Smirk and roll his eyes a lot
Start vetting old strip plazas for news conferences
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: blazers and Heels Noir
bluetoe said:
when did I ever say I wasn't siding with law and order? I'm sure people like you are wont to suggest that, for the sake of dishonest argument. But I challenge you to present any instance of me going against basic law and order. On the other hand, what does it say about your regard for law and order when you don't acknowledge the failure of justice in the case of Hillary Clinton. as a case in point.
Click to expand...
FyX1l3UWAAEFV4L
 
  • Love
Reactions: Heels Noir
bluetoe said:
That being said, I think anything that Trump did is far less egregious than what Clinton did, and as far as having classified info in his possession
Click to expand...

Key diff: Trump repeatedly tried to keep documents he could not legally have, while Clinton did not.

There wasn't evidence HRC intentionally violated laws governing the handling of classified info. Having them on personal email server for convenience wasn't against the law at the time. She requested "some" files be deleted PRIOR to subpoena, and was compliant with government requests.

In contrast, Trump is on recordings indicating he knew his were classified, then hid, obstructed and lied (and flaunted them to everyone). See the diff?

 
blazers said:
Did Biden show them to Kid Rock AND Limp Bizkit?
Click to expand...
I thought that was pretty funny. Apparently Kid Rock talked about it in an interview too. I think all of this is hilarious. I know democrats are freaking out about it, but it's just funny to me. He does deserve his day in court, but the evidence that has leaked out is basically Trump admitting he's guilty. And he's most likely going to get away with it anyway. So, republicans get to fake outrage before the case and democrats get to fake outrage after it. You can't help but laugh.
 
blazers said:
Key diff: Trump repeatedly tried to keep documents he could not legally have, while Clinton did not.

There wasn't evidence HRC intentionally violated laws governing the handling of classified info. Having them on personal email server for convenience wasn't against the law at the time. She requested "some" files be deleted PRIOR to subpoena, and was compliant with government requests.

In contrast, Trump is on recordings indicating he knew his were classified, then hid, obstructed and lied (and flaunted them to everyone). See the diff?

View embedded media
Click to expand...


Trump may have improperly held on to docs he shouldn't have had, but the docs were intact and ultimately accessible. CLINTON DESTROYED SUBPOENAED EVIDENCE.

See the diff? No? Didn't think you would.
 
blazers said:
Did Biden show them to Kid Rock AND Limp Bizkit?
Click to expand...
As far as I know, he showed them to the Chinese ambassador. They were in a box in his fvcking garage next to his fvcking 'vette. WHO KNOWS who might have seen them. Not just the box but the documents themselves. Trumps stash was inside his purportedly secure home.
 
bluetoe said:
Trump may have improperly held on to docs he shouldn't have had, but the docs were intact and ultimately accessible. CLINTON DESTROYED SUBPOENAED EVIDENCE.
Click to expand...
Wrong, Trump's own state department, under two different secretaries, couldn't nail Clinton over the email deletion.

Files revealed that Clinton's attorney Mills requested the deletion of emails PRIOR to the benghazi-based request.

Feb. 1, 2013: Clinton serves her last day as secretary of state.

July 23, 2014: The State Department reaches an agreement with the Benghazi committee about producing records for its investigation into the 2012 attack on a U.S. embassy in the Libyan city.

Oct. 28, 2014: The State Department sends an official letter to Clinton’s staff requesting "emails related to their government work." Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, and aide Cheryl Mills oversaw the review of Clinton’s email archives to produce work-related documents to the department.

Dec. 5, 2014: Clinton’s team provides 55,000 pages of emails, or about 30,000 individual emails, to the State Department. Mills tells an employee at Platte River Networks, which managed the server, that Clinton does not need to retain any emails older than 60 days. See page 18 here https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/Hillary R. Clinton Part 01/view

March 4, 2015: The Benghazi committee issues a subpoena requiring Clinton to turn over all emails from her private server related to the incident in Libya.

Between March 25-31, 2015: The Platte River Networks employee has what he calls an "oh s---" moment, realizing he did not delete Clinton’s email archive, per Mills’ December 2014 request. The employee deletes the email archive using a software called BleachBit.

Paper-trail shows REQUEST for deletion PRIOR to subpoena == Clinton complying with all gov requests rather than obstructing.
 
blazers said:
Paper-trail shows REQUEST for deletion PRIOR to subpoena == Clinton complying with all gov requests rather than obstructing.
Click to expand...

let's get the timing right.

from the article;

"The FBI found no evidence that either Hillary Clinton or her aides ordered an IT technician to delete an email archive that was under congressional subpoena, Director James Comey testified Wednesday."

you can of course choose to believe that Hillary had nothing to do with the deletion or that a story wasn't concocted to cover it. Most reasonable people don't. You can also ignore the fact that she wasn't supposed to be using her personal communication devices to send ANY official communications, let alone those with classified information. Most reasonable people haven't tried to sweep that under the rug. You have chosen to do so. What a surprise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Archer2
tarheel0910 said:
Sounds like you're sore as well.
Click to expand...

How exactly does me poking fun at you parroting Strum's talking points indicate any soreness on my part?

Am I sore because I called back Strum's second account here (Chick Bleeds Blue) and his feeble, yet hilarious explanation of "sharing internet" when Heelbent busted him with the same IP address? Is that soreness? Or just hilarity?
 
heelmanwilm said:
Appoint his own judge and jurors and have supporters take over the courtroom to install them
Click to expand...

Don't get me excited. That would be f*ckin awesome. I'd want him to be guilty if I could be assured of that happening.

But as you know, I care nothing about his guilt doing the same things others are doing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: heelmanwilm
bluetoe said:
let's get the timing right.

from the article;

"The FBI found no evidence that either Hillary Clinton or her aides ordered an IT technician to delete an email archive that was under congressional subpoena, Director James Comey testified Wednesday."

you can of course choose to believe that Hillary had nothing to do with the deletion or that a story wasn't concocted to cover it. Most reasonable people don't. You can also ignore the fact that she wasn't supposed to be using her personal communication devices to send ANY official communications, let alone those with classified information. Most reasonable people haven't tried to sweep that under the rug. You have chosen to do so. What a surprise.
Click to expand...
What's the next quote in your article?

”We did not have evidence to disbelieve [the technician’s account] and establish someone told him to do that. No email, no phone call, nothing,”

So there is no evidence Clinton deleted emails AFTER subpoena. Meanwhile there is a shit-ton of evidence that Trump obstructed, lied, hid AFTER subpoena. And again that's they key - the evidence of his willful "fvck around" after the gov requested the docs:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Heels Noir
I give Hillary a ton of credit. She's been a corrupt lawbreaker so long she has it down pat and knows exactly how to cover her tracks and the right people to have in her arsenal. She's one evil genius.

But only a goddam fool would believe what @blazers is poasting above.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Heels Noir and bluetoe
blazers said:
What's the next quote in your article?

”We did not have evidence to disbelieve [the technician’s account] and establish someone told him to do that. No email, no phone call, nothing,”

So there is no evidence Clinton deleted emails AFTER subpoena. Meanwhile there is a shit-ton of evidence that Trump obstructed, lied, hid AFTER subpoena. And again that's they key - the evidence of his willful "fvck around" after the gov requested the docs:

View embedded media
Click to expand...
I hope DJT's legal team has a better defense for the court than just "Well, what about Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton?" Granted, the judge is in Trump's pocket, but I don't know if that will be enough.
 
gunslingerdick said:
How exactly does me poking fun at you parroting Strum's talking points indicate any soreness on my part?

Am I sore because I called back Strum's second account here (Chick Bleeds Blue) and his feeble, yet hilarious explanation of "sharing internet" when Heelbent busted him with the same IP address? Is that soreness? Or just hilarity?
Click to expand...
You're sore because I beat you to the "yeah, but Biden/Hillary/democrats" response. It's funny that you get upset when someone says both sides are corrupt, but then your standard response to the posters on the left is "yeah, but Biden/Hillary/democrats."
 
heelmanwilm said:
Grab the judge by the pu$$y and remind her he’s a star
Click to expand...
if I ever get in big trouble I might try that, except I'd say 'I voted for Donald Trump. He was a star.'

To quote Delroy Lindo's character from 'Get Shorty'..."I wonder would that work?"
 
blazers said:
What's the next quote in your article?

”We did not have evidence to disbelieve [the technician’s account] and establish someone told him to do that. No email, no phone call, nothing,”

So there is no evidence Clinton deleted emails AFTER subpoena. Meanwhile there is a shit-ton of evidence that Trump obstructed, lied, hid AFTER subpoena. And again that's they key - the evidence of his willful "fvck around" after the gov requested the docs:

View embedded media
Click to expand...
'we have no evidence', because it was covered up. Duh. The concocted story was accepted because without evidence to the contrary it had to be. Not sure how hard they looked though, given what we now know about the FBI's affinity for all things dem. Any evidence would likely have been a verbal communication, which of course there would be no record of.

BTW, the e-mails were deleted after the subpoena. It was the supposed request for deletion that came before. Did you read your own linkage?

edit..let me expand on this a little. The IT technician not only deleted the messages after the subpoena, he used a power scrubber to remove any chance of recovering them. Sure, that seems innocent. It would be the easiest maneuver imaginable to tell the IT guy to get permanently rid of the e-mails, and here's a little something for you to live on for the next twenty years if you'll go along with our story.

I might be less willing to call bullshit if it hadn't been for the scrubbing. Also, that IT guy was operating independently of the IT outfit that was supposed to be handling all of Hillary's e-mail stuff. Hmmm.

Ultimately, Hillary's lawyer took responsibility for the deletion. You know he got paid.
 
Last edited:
tarheel0910 said:
You're sore because I beat you to the "yeah, but Biden/Hillary/democrats" response. It's funny that you get upset when someone says both sides are corrupt, but then your standard response to the posters on the left is "yeah, but Biden/Hillary/democrats."
Click to expand...

Are you sure you had this discussion with me? I have no idea what you're talking about. My memory might be bad but you're also known to have trouble articulating your message. Let's try to get this worked out.

I didn't know we were competing so for you to have beaten me in anything is strange. But for argument's sake, let's say we were. Remind me of the competition. And then remind me of my side of the argument. Lastly, remind me where I got upset. TIA.
 
bluetoe said:
'we have no evidence', because it was covered up. Duh. The concocted story was accepted because without evidence to the contrary it had to be.
Click to expand...
How do you know it was covered up? Innocent til proven guilty, right law & order champion?
 
blazers said:
How do you know it was covered up? Innocent til proven guilty, right law & order champion?
Click to expand...
because I'm not a complete or even a partial idiot. The evidence is circumstantial but too amazingly convenient to disbelieve.

ETA; innocent until proven guilty and if Loretta Lynch chooses not to press I guess you mean. That airport meeting with Bill doesn't look suspicious does it? Comey himself said that influenced his recommendation, that Lynch latched onto as an excuse to drop the matter.

How's your sense of smell. I smell a rat.
 
Last edited:
bluetoe said:
because I'm not a complete or even a partial idiot. The evidence is circumstantial but too amazingly convenient to disbelieve.
Click to expand...
You cannot convict someone on circumstantial notions.
End of story, you can quit comparing Trump's indictment to HRC's lack of indictment.
 
blazers said:
You cannot convict someone on circumstantial notions.
End of story, you can quit comparing Trump's indictment to HRC's lack of indictment.
Click to expand...
wow you really know your law, lawman. Nobody can be convicted on circumstantial evidence. Remind me not to retain you even for a parking ticket.

The comparison is still wide open, BTW.
 
Who wants to tell McCarthy that garages can have locks too. Oh man, the spin and hara kiri from the right is entertaining. #whataboutfail
 
It’s hilarious when some poasters poast something thinking they’re making a point in their favor and in reality they’re doing the exact opposite. Lulz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluetoe
gunslingerdick said:
Are you sure you had this discussion with me? I have no idea what you're talking about. My memory might be bad but you're also known to have trouble articulating your message. Let's try to get this worked out.

I didn't know we were competing so for you to have beaten me in anything is strange. But for argument's sake, let's say we were. Remind me of the competition. And then remind me of my side of the argument. Lastly, remind me where I got upset. TIA.
Click to expand...

I’ll take it that @tarheel0910 was just mixed up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RobJones__

Transfer Portal Thread (not UNC specific)

Replies
266
Views
11K
Four Corners
dadika13
dadika13
TarHeelMark

2024 ACC Tournament thread

Replies
126
Views
2K
Four Corners
uncfanatic
uncfanatic
andrew jones
  • Sticky

Upcoming visitors (Update 4-30: Criswell intel added)

Replies
62
Views
4K
Blue Heaven
andrew jones
andrew jones
I

Remember the “Sports Writer” Gregg Doyel?

Replies
3
Views
1K
Tar Heel Radar
WoadBlue
W
KevinHeel

Recruits at today’s game

Replies
8
Views
484
Four Corners
Ned Cota
Ned Cota
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back