OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Hacer que Estados Unidos vuelva a ser grande.
www.foxnews.com
Between candidates Biden and Trump, 46% of Hispanics who responded to the poll said they would vote for Trump, while 40% said they would support Biden. That's a big difference from Biden's 2020 general election support from Hispanics.
Biden won 59% of the Hispanic vote to Trump's 38% in 2020, according to Pew Research.
Biden launches 'Latinos con Biden-Harris' to court Hispanic voters wooed by Trump
President Biden's 2024 re-election campaign is launching a new program called "Latinos con Biden-Harris," meant to bring in Hispanic voters in key swing states.
Between candidates Biden and Trump, 46% of Hispanics who responded to the poll said they would vote for Trump, while 40% said they would support Biden. That's a big difference from Biden's 2020 general election support from Hispanics.
Biden won 59% of the Hispanic vote to Trump's 38% in 2020, according to Pew Research.
I expect them to say what is good for their business. Working with Trump was good for their business. What do you expect them to say?
No we're not. We're pointing out that what Trump is charged with happens literally every day. And the only reason they went after him is because they are scared to death that he's going to beat paw paw in November. They're pulling out all the stops.
Spoiler: it's not going work. Trump is going to win in November.
Who are you calling "they"? "They" are from different states, different courts, different crimes. How do you think they all came together and decided to nail Trump. I know it is useless to try to talk to you guys. I just keep hoping some of you guys will come to your senses. If half of the this crap had come about Trump in 2015 he would have nevver have beaten HC. What changed?
Last edited:
Do I need to spell it out for your dumb ass? Who is "they"? The Democratic machine and their merry band of soldiers, such as the media, the Soros backed AGs and judges, and the criminal establishment public servants. Or should I just call them your Masters?
And at what amount did the lender in this case value the collateral that they based the interest rate upon? It surely wasn't the amounts asserted by orange and it also wasn't the amount the judge found the collateral to be worth. Therein lies the problem with anyone arguing that this had actual victims. Without knowing the actual value the banks used and showing that it was an inflated value that resulted in reduced interest rates, your premise falls flat.
excellent example of libthink and libspeak. Thank you for exposing the insanity inherent.
Here's how it goes. Some guy steals a car and ditches it still running in the road in front of my house because the cops are after him. 'Awesome', I think, and I immediately take that vehicle and run over my neighbor who I disagree with occasionally. When the cops come to investigate THAT incident, I just tell them to blame it on the guy who stole the car and left it where I could get my hands on it. So now he gets charged with theft of a vehicle and manslaughter, and through the illusory miracle of libtard transference, a hate crime to boot since I used the car he stole to kill my neighbor who I hated. I get off with careless and reckless.
The crazy thing is, this mindless shit could actually play out that way.
I’m going to go back to your doublewide. That’s my pet name for your wife.
"If half of the this crap had come about Trump in 2015 he would have nevver have beaten HC. What changed?"
well, give them a break. They hadn't really had the time to come up with all this shit yet. All they could muster at the time was the fake 'Russian collusion' crap. What changed was that his presidency gave them the time to invent even more horse hockey to feed to the gullible.
So keep on with your tirades against Trump. If you're lucky, it will result in another four years of the worst president since obama and your victory will sink us even deeper into a hole that we might never extract ourselves from. I mean, that's what you want, isn't it?
I agreed with you that they SHOULD charge her for the shit that happened after, but i didn't say they WOULD. PS, they didn't, so you can go cry about other manufactured scenarios.
Jean does have quite the back side. You could post up in there for weeks without being noticed.
If he broke the law then he committed a crime. If people don't like the laws we should change them.
One reason his penalty was so severe is that he showed zero apology or remorse, he basically indicated he would keep repeating the same crime. He could've said, whoops, it was an accident, but instead said "There is no problem, mar-a-lago actually is worth a billion".
Nobody is above the law and politicians should be held to a higher standard, even when it comes to being honest in your financial statements during business transactions.
lol, you didn't agree with me that they should charge her blah blah because I was being sarcastic. And my manufactured scenario is ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than you agreeing with that sarcasm.
seriously?
Ever heard of Hillary Clinton? She preceded the latest law-breaking, prosecution-escaping politician hero of yours, Sleepy Joe Biden. I want to puke when someone plays the hypocritical 'but he broke the law' card. There are questionably punishable illegal acts that are prosecuted, and then there are illegal acts that unquestionably go unpunished because they aren't prosecuted as you insist they should be.
You're falling into the same embarrassing lack of info others on here have demonstrated, the case against orange was one of claimed civil fraud, not criminal. Just like the civil case that E. Jean brought. They are far different from committing a crime and they require a much lower standard of proof.
@tarheel0910Another L for @blazers. You honestly would have been better off saying that the 5th circuit is right wing. At least that way you could have at least made somewhat of an argument.
SB4: Supreme Court again blocks Texas law allowing police to arrest migrants
The court places the law in limbo while emergency appeals from the Biden administration play out.www.bbc.com
Did you read the reasoning? If so, what happens next is you use your expert legal mind to answer these three questions
1. Should they have ignored legal precedent?
2. If so, why?
3. Why can't the Biden justice department ask for an emergency TRO?
Believe
Literally
Anything
Zero
Evidence
Required
Sheep
Literally
Anything
Zero
Evidence
Required
Sheep
@blazers, That far right, hardcore maga SC finally gets a chance to put the state in their place and make sure this transgender nonsense doesn't spread. So naturally they take up the case and rule in favor of family rights and against the transgender devils. Well... not so fast.
Supreme Court rejects appeal from parents who lost custody of trans teen
Mary and Jeremy Cox warned cases like theirs will reoccur "due to developing conflicts between parents and their children concerning gender identity."
www.usatoday.com
Fraud is a crime though. The distinction tween civil and criminal labeling largely depends on who brings the charge.
He and other Pols show be held accountable for crimes like fraud, especially when they're repetitive and egregious, to ensure victims (the public or others) aren't hurt by the fraud.
What I posted was accurate. It wasn't too soon. But I see you ignored my simple questions. Not surprising since you would have to ignore logic to do so. Let's be honest here. It's been fun for me to point out your continued misunderstanding of the court, but your problem with them isn't how they rule on cases. It's that the person who appointed them was Trump. If Trump appointed the second coming of RBG you would complain. No matter how many times you're proven wrong, I'll doubt that you will admit it's just about Trump, though
Fraud can be a crime, but he wasn't charged with that. Read that again. Just like he's never been charged with insurrection. The haters, such as yourself, like to make all kinds of statements and claims that aren't actually true. The CRIME of fraud requires different elements from this specific civil fraud charge that Ms. James pursued (like there being actual, provable victims). It also requires a far higher burden of proof, and Trump would have been entitled to a jury trial, not just getting set (coincidentally???) before a very liberal, democratic judge that served as the trier of fact and decided every single issue in this CIVIL case.
"He and other Pols show [should] be held accountable for crimes like fraud, especially when they're repetitive and egregious, to ensure victims (the public or others) aren't hurt by the fraud." You might be correct, if only he had actually been charged with the crime of fraud and found guilty by a jury of his peers, you might not have to makeup things and lie about what actually happened.
Except for the actual pursuit of the civil fraud action against him in a novel application of the statute for the State of NY and the terror that is experienced by tds'ers or opportunitists at the possibility of him being president again, none of this had anything to do with Trump being a politician. His actions, those of his sons, and the Trump organization(s) were done as real estate developers. If you think that's not done by every other real estate developer and, frankly, home owners applying for a home equity loan, you are blinded by the orange haze. The funny part is NY politicians are celebrating and they have no clue about how they've harmed their city and state. What developer in their right mind would ever do business there again unless they are totally left leaning and safe from attack?
Your gotcha headline you at'd from BBC:
Supreme Court again blocks Texas law allowing police to arrest migrants
A day later the same headline from BBC after a ruling:Supreme Court says Texas can arrest and jail migrants
Whatever. FYI, Trump didn't appoint the two most "interesting" justices though - Alito and Thomas.
I can't wait to hear what you define as "interesting". I thought your only interest in Thomas was being hurt over the assumption that his wife is making rulings for him because she dared to publicly make her politics known. You can't assail his actual opinions and reasoning for two reasons: first, you'd have to actually read them rather than some blurb from some lib leaning source, and; second, his arguments are always well reasoned and thought out without any of judicial creativeness required to be an activist, legislating judge that you prefer (so long as they are doing so in a leftward direction).
And what about that headline was wrong?
Are you mad that I called you out or mad that you can't answer the questions I asked you?
I'm just dense I guess but what exactly are you getting at here? What do you mean by 'interesting'? Those are not the same question.
Well, joking or not, technically you might be on to something since one is African American and the other is first generation son of an Italian immigrant. But, what he really means by "interesting" is "I hate them the most." Thomas is an actual conservative and never waivers from it. Alito wrote the majority opinion in Dobbs. They are likely 1A and 1B on the hit list.
The headline for the day after would be your L, that's all.
Fuming on both.
four hours ago...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68613083
Freeze remains on strict new immigration law in Texas
fun fact
In 2009 during tense times with Iran (imagine that) the us navy sent uss Eisenhower, Vicksburgh, and one other battleship I don’t remember sailing in formation into Persian gulf. All had hull numbers “69”. An obvious jab at islams prudish guidelines for sex. Iran was not amused.
In 2009 during tense times with Iran (imagine that) the us navy sent uss Eisenhower, Vicksburgh, and one other battleship I don’t remember sailing in formation into Persian gulf. All had hull numbers “69”. An obvious jab at islams prudish guidelines for sex. Iran was not amused.
