Exactly. Hillary and her clueless followers will go to their graves with big "L's" planted on their foreheads.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Maher is a lib at heart but intellectually he's a republican. I love it when he just makes sense regardless of his politics.
After cohen was shown to be a lying slimeball jack ass I felt the def had the case well in hand. But instead of resting they bring up this guy Costello who was a go between for trump to cohen and he proceeds to be a lying slime ball jack ass and gets roasted on cross examination blowing up the def claim that cohen went “rogue”. One is lying. So it boils down to who will the jurors believe?
just an FYI, you're my only source for info about that ill-conceived dog and pony show.
At this point if I were a juror I would be torn. But you could make the case that being torn means there’s a “shadow of doubt” so I guess I would say not guilty.
It's reasonable doubt, slightly different than shadow.
Last edited:
In any sane setting with a sane jury, this would be a no brainer. Cohen’s testimony is simply incredible and there should be reasonable doubt in the minds of every juror. But this is NY and the jurors are predisposed to convict Trump. This judge has acted prejudicially against the defense from day one. BTAIM, I won’t be a bit surprised to see a conviction which is eventually overturned by appeal. But the damage will be done. I have zero faith in our justice system anymore.
No matter what the jury says it will be won on appeal. Merchan crossed too many lines during the trial.
But, was the ultimate result the actual goal or just a bonus if they initially get a conviction?
Orange has lost 5 to 6 weeks of hard campaigning through the swing states and associated fund raising. And, once the jury finds him guilty, Joe jumps out of the debates by saying that he simply isn't going to debate a "convicted felon" while his minions like Noir and Blaze repeat the phrase endlessly.
However you want to phrase it, when a juror is "torn", that settles the issue. The State of New York has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They haven't done that. Not guilty. Doesn't mean he didn't do it, that he didn't do something else, that he isn't a total asshole, or anything else. It only means that the State didn't meet its required burden because the presumption is that one is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Not guilty.
That being said, this thing has been stacked against Trump from the beginning, so I expect a verdict of guilty. For the sake of our country, I hope I'm wrong. I really can't take Kamala as president regardless of who is currently puppeting Joe.
Becker is Fedorchak's opponent and "tricked" Dylan into this video (one of those paid things where "celebs" will wish you a happy birthday, etc.)
Going to the DC Zoo to work with the RINO's was genius.
Going to the DC Zoo to work with the RINO's was genius.
If there ends up NOT being a debate on June 27, I will bet it's due to Trump backing out, not Joe Biden. And Trump off the campaign trail has actually benefitted him. I'm looking forward to him getting back out there and holding rallies with all the stupid gaffes that are sure to follow.
me too. Gaffemaster Biden will be spewing stupid gaffes left and right in trying to keep up with Trump.
I don't see Trump backing out unless something changes significantly. He's gonna be chomping at the bit to go head to head without Joe making 15 second soundbites subject to multiple edits and cuts.
I will agree with you that Trump has benefitted recently, whether that was him being off the trail or not I don't know. However, the trial has forced him to be efficient and focused with his time. But the irony of you saying that "all the stupid gaffes that are sure to follow" and not seeing the application to your man Joe is phenomenal.
He just gave a speech to the NAACP, READING FROM A TELEPROMPTER, that the WH had to issue 9 separate corrections in the transcript the following day. And you think it's Trump who is going to gaffe it up when he's live?
I have no idea what you're talking about, but strangely enough you may be right. I don't think I've ever seen him more efficient and focused than he is sitting in that cold courtroom.
I don’t ageee at all that this was “stacked against trump”.
You may not agree (and perhaps the extra e was just a jab at orangeman's tendency to hyperbole), but objectively, you'll have a hard time making the argument this was fair and, therefore, not stacked against him.
Consider:
- this type of charge has never been pursued in the State of NY before against anyone: surely, all kinds of political hacks have done shady accounting entries over the years - from all parties. Universally, the legal experts have crapped on this case from the beginning and only the most left leaning, progressive get trump types have argued it is legitimate and on the up and up.
- to even pursue this, they had to creatively charge him to state an alleged felony just to get past the statute of limitations that had run on all the asserted misdemeanors. Again, novel approach.
- in coming up with the charge, they couldn't even rely on NY criminal law, they had to claim an underlying charge of federal law (which they have no authority to pursue) and then charge a NY violation. Those are the same alleged federal law violations that the fed's themselves had declined to pursue because there was no there, there.
- they waited so long, letting the misdemeanors run knowingly, so they could have some interesting timing of the trial. Remember, this original event happened almost two decades ago, the accounting was done in '16, and it became known to everyone in '18. Why wait to pursue it unless the timing prior to Nov. '24 mattered?
- the actual DA, Alvin Bragg, has been uninvolved in the trial. One would think that the most high profile case in which he'll ever be involved would be his baby. Surely he has bigger ambitions than retiring in that job. What better way to elevate his status than being the man who secured a conviction against a former president of the US. But he's just sat in the audience?
- they bring in a notoriously anti-Trump guy from the DOJ to head this up. That's a big step down in status, position, title, pay, etc. Wanna place any bets on whether he's still in their office six months from now?
- the case was filed and pursued, never transferred as is commonly done when there is even the hint of potential for a fairness issue, in a jurisdiction that is profoundly anti orange. Remember, we have all agreed before that much of the vote in '20 was not actually pro-Joe, but was simply against Trump. These voters went almost 9 out of 10 to Biden. That's an incredible amount of hate for Trump when every poll or other metric will show almost an even split between the two sides nationwide. We do not know the individual leanings of those 12 decision makers, but I'd be hard pressed to believe it's 6 Biden voters and 6 Trump voters. That's not coincidence.
- the case was "assigned" to a judge who has been involved in cases against trump in the past. His bias in rulings is clear. His family bias is clear. It has come out that he should have recused himself from the beginning. Oh, and by the way, he's the one who refused to transfer the case to another jurisdiction to be handled by any other judge.
- one last thing about this judge is his schedule. They've been done for days now with both sides having rested their cases. Closings aren't set until Tuesday, after the holiday. Upon resting, the judge should have met with the lawyers, provided the Court's proposed jury instructions (or charge as they call them). They could have noted corrections and any modifications. Closings the next morning and into the hands of the jury it goes. We should have had a verdict by now. We don't and more time is wasted and Trump is further delayed while tied up in a courtroom. What's the real point of that type of approach?
So, you can say all that doesn't add up to being stacked against Trump, but that doesn't mean you're right, it just means you're really bad at basic math.
TL;DR
Your orange boy is getting a fair trial. Just as he ran in a fair election and is running in another. Win or lose is on him. Not a bunch of idiotic conspiracies. FFS how many does this make now? Is anyone on the planet not wearing a maga hat not involved in a secret conspiracy to get trump? Maybe some tribes on the Amazon perhaps?
Last edited:
Have any of yall been following this crazy fuggin mayor in a small town in Illinois. Her name is Tiffany Henyard and she is out of her fuggin mind. She is a liar and a thief.
Check this shit out.
Check this shit out.
She uses local police for personal security and having the city pay for it. One guy claimed 303 hours on detail for 2 weeks. There's only 336 hours in 2 weeks. His paycheck for that period was over 13k dollars. This shit is deep. FBI is involved.
the next election hasn't even taken place and you're already declaring it fair? Your new username is Claire Voyant.
Maybe hold up a bit and see who wins, and then consider this exchange before deciding what's fair....
I know this doesn't exactly apply to you, but it sure as hell helps expose this hypocritical 'fair election' bullshit. There were more accusations of an illegitimate presidency leveled at Trump than were leveled at Biden, excepting by Trump himself and those who chose to parrot him.
I'm not dwelling on impropriety, and never have in spite of what I believe about the last election...but I will keep screaming at the top of whatever I'm on top of that we need to make elections beyond question, regardless of that sacred right to not be slightly inconvenienced..
Every registered dem voter should be qualified at the polling place something like this....
LOL at comparing Trump's denial to 2001.
A few house reps questioned the cert of the election due to the absolute craziness and procedural F-up that happened in in those Florida counties AFTER Gore conceded.
And it was VP Gore himself who used his gavel to shutdown Jessie Jackson and the 12 other House reps who griped for that half hr.
The florida counties were undergoing recount, but took too long (see Brooks brothers riot) . The FL supreme court ruled (4-3) for a statewide recount. SCOTUS Bush v Gore overuled (5-4), FL supreme ct and thus Bush won the electoral college by ONE
Now compare to that Trump, the House, and many Senators in 2020 (including organizing a shutdown of the cert process, fake electors, all the Kraken) thru TODAY.
That proves Cruz really has nothing. Oh, but he also has ONE comment from Hillary AFTER she CONCEDED.
I doubt even changing the voting rules would quell your angst. 2020 wasn't about procedure as much as it was about the outcome. And you're still grumbling about it today!
Lol “see who wins”. So the fairness depends on who wins? Interesting take. It will be fair. Just as the last one. Just as the couple dozen before that. Regardless of who wins.
C. Voyant
They have William Jennings Bryan with a massive inferiority complex... and a criminal record.
Do you believe the world’s power brokers (politicians/media/big time funders like Black Rock, etc.) always tell us regular citizens the truth? Do you believe they hide things from the general public? Do you believe there’s no corruption? That’s a complete 180 from statements you’ve made in the past.
Reminds me of a bit this comedian has. I can’t remember his name but he’s a middle aged black guy. It’s funny. I’ll see if I can find it.
Anyway, why do you find it so hard to believe that the power brokers have tried to screw Trump? I know you’ll try to make the argument that Trump is in that group of people and simply part of the ongoing corruption. But he’s not. He’s an outsider to the uber elite. He was once liked by all those people until he threatened their power. Now they hate him.
Conspiracy Theories - Ron Funches | Wake up, sheeple. Ron Funches has your Morning Routine. | By Comedy Central Stand-UpFacebook
Wake up, sheeple. Ron Funches has your Morning Routine.
www.facebook.com
Yea i saw that. The arrogance and sense of entitlement is off the chart. I hope they bust her ass.
I haven't kept up with the case closely, but I wouldn't go to a Trump supporter for objectively. I haven't seen any legal experts talk about how this has been stacked against Trump. That tells me that it's been about as fair as it can be. You could make an argument that he shouldn't have been charged, but that's a separate subject.
My default position on the judicial system is that while being flawed and subject to human error it is ftmp fair and unbiased. You have to prove otherwise on a case by case basis to change my mind. That’s just how I am. I assume the best in people, until they prove otherwise and then that bridge is burned. Maybe that’s naive. In this case yes for sure it’s possible the power brokers are manipulating things. It’s also possible that lawyers and such are doing lawyer shyt to improve their chances. All I know is as a casual observer who’s listened to a lot of commentary from people smarter than me including numerous people who are adamant no crime has been committed, that there is no proof or evidence of anything nefarious. If this weren’t conspiracy theory #375 that’s yet to be proven I would def be more open to the possibility though. But MAGA has a serious, SERIOUS, prob in the credibility department on these claims.
ETA I have said that when it comes to this case, that I don’t care if he did this. (I do find the whole spectacle interesting) I don’t care if he lied on loan applications either. I enjoy watching him pop a neck blood vessel each day after court I admit. But I just don’t think he should have been prosecuted. So I will give you that in the “stacked against him” argument.
Last edited:
Similar threads
