squistion

Who, in his inner circle, will tell him that he is wrong and try to talk him out of it? Seriously?

https://x.com/C_Silva_Brock/status/1854621648445751619 BREAKING: 43 Rhesus monkeys "escape" from bio-research lab in Yemassee, South Carolina Kamala to Biden: "You were supposed to release those monkeys before the election!!!!”

Well, OK, did you notice they did not give any other statistical information outside of that? And no link provided outside of the tweet. What were the exact mortality numbers of those who are vaccinated and those that weren't? 5 died who were vaccinated and 1 died who wasn't? 50 died who were vaccinated and 10 died who weren't? 500 died who were vaccinated and 100 died who weren't? 5000 died who were vaccinated and 1000 died who weren't? Also was the cause of death the same for all those who were vaccinatted? Was the age and the health of those vaccinated versus those unvaccinated taken into account? Did all those who died die of the same thing? My point is the death ratio doesn't mean that much taken in isolation. We need to be given more information as to how these doctors came to their conclusions.

https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2024/11/08/massachusetts-governor-maura-healey-state-wont-cooperate-mass-deportations/?s_campaign=bcom%3Asocialflow%3Atwitter&utm_campaign=bdc_Twitter Healey says Mass. won’t cooperate with mass deportations Massachusetts Gov. Maura Healey said this week that her administration would not cooperate with federal authorities looking to conduct mass deportations of undocumented immigrants once President-elect Donald Trump takes office. Trump has vowed to oversee the “largest deportation effort in American history,” something that would involve rounding up as many as 13 million people nationwide and cost at least an estimated $315 billion, according to the American Immigration Council. When asked about the cost of a deportation operation on that scale recently, Trump said that “there is no price tag.” In an interview on MSNBC Wednesday, Healey was asked whether the Massachusetts State Police would cooperate with the Trump administration if it were to request the agency’s help in deportation efforts. “Absolutely not,” Healey said. The situation “in the courts” is very different in 2024 than it was in 2016, she added. While litigation against the Trump administration is still on the table, Healey said she would support other ways of resistance. This could include using the state’s regulatory authority, her executive powers, and state legislation. “There’s a lot of other ways that people are going to act, and need to act, for the sake of their states and their residents,” Healey said. “Every tool in the toolbox has got to be used to protect our citizens, to protect our residents, and protect our states, and certainly to hold the line on democracy and the rule of law.”

I am sure they will find something. And you can probably add Liz Cheney and Jack Smith to the list too.

No it isn't. That was the main reason he ran again so he can avoid prosecution for his crimes. He will have the justice department end all pending federal cases leaving only the New York and Georgia state cases. Winning the popular vote doesn't excuse and eleminate all criminal conduct before he takes office next year.

Wouldn't surprise me if it did. You already said you want all the ongoing Trump trials ended and the 34 felony convictions dismissed.

I doubt you will still be laughing when he doesn't leave office in January 2029 (or maybe you will be cheering instead).

So you don't want him to have the option to serve 2 more terms. Got it.

Well, you must be brainwashed too, according to the thread title (that is what you want and that is what you may get).

You know what I meant to say. He will find someway to remain in office after his term starting in 2025 expires.

I told you all in other threads that he will never leave office in 2028 and will find someway to remain as POTUS as long as he is alive (and SCOTUS will back his decision).

What did Harris say when the vaccine came out? Don't remember her words being"Don't take it folks!" And since you can't come up with any notable Democrats who announced they weren't taking the vaccine when it was available and since more Democrats took it than Republicans, her pre release concerns about the vaccine had a neglible effect.

No we haven't established that, Straw Man. And if you did keep a list it was very short one.

Which Democrats refused to take the vaccine? The concern was that the vaccine was fast tracked without the usual clinical trials required by the FDA to safeguard the public (which often takes several years). And as was noted, ultimately more Democrats took the vaccine than Republicans (this forum is proof of that). Also, it is false to say the vaccine was mandatory for everyone (although many businesses required it among their employees to protect their coworkers and the public).

https://x.com/AhmedBaba_/status/1854917018119516238 People project their worldviews onto others. Selfish people assume most people are selfish and empathetic people tend to project their decency onto others as well. This is why, even after 2016, it’s hard for good people to understand how anyone could overlook Trump’s depravity.

You would think with pointing the finger of suspicision at Jimmy Kimmel alleging an Epstein connection when there is no proof, they might have a teeny tiny problem with Trump's documented association with him - but like with everything else with Trump his supporters give him a pass.

They will mean something on his sentencing date.

Your so called circumstantial evidence has all been debunked by fact checkers.

Wrong on that one too. https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/tom-hanks-sexy-baby-pedophile-epstein/ An Instagram post takes a Tom Hanks clip out of context to falsely claim he condones pedophilia An Instagram post claims to show proof that the actor Tom Hanks supports pedophilia. The Jan. 3 post showed a snippet of Hanks clapping his hands and shouting “sexy baby” at a child walking down from a stage. The video’s caption said, “Tom Hanks Not Even Trying To Hide It,” and includes several hashtags, such as #epstein and #ghislanemaxwell, referring to Jeffrey Epstein, a financier who died in jail in 2019 before being tried on sexual abuse and sex trafficking charges, and Ghislaine Maxwell, a friend of Epstein who in June was sentenced to 20 years in prison for conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse minors. PolitiFact has rated Pants on Fire similar, unfounded statements about Hanks and pedophilia. The Instagram post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.) The post takes Hanks’ clip out of context. It’s from a sketch the actor did in 2011 for the late-night talk show “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” satirizing the reality television series “Toddlers & Tiaras.” “Toddlers & Tiaras,” which aired from 2009 to 2016 on TLC, was criticized throughout its run for sexualizing young children competing in beauty pageants, wearing costumes and performing routines that were considered overly adult in tone. The sketch mocked the reality show; it did not endorse pedophilia. It featured Hanks as an overbearing father obsessed with a fictional daughter named Sophie winning a nonexistent child beauty pageant called “Miss Ultimate Sexy Baby Nevada.” QAnon conspiracy theorists have long claimed, without evidence, that some prominent politicians and celebrities are involved in a satanic child sex trafficking ring. We rate this claim about Hanks as Pants on Fire!

So they are presumed guilty unless they can prove they are innocent? If you never molested a child how can you prove it? You can't. You can't prove a negative that something didn't or never happened.

Maybe, but I doubt that Jimmy Kimmel is one of them.

No, but the entire claim he is a pedophile was based on the false Epstein story that Aaron Rodgers ran with (and there has been nothing else).

The Epstein story about a connection with Kimmel was false and has been completely debunked by fact checkers https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-evidence-epstein-document-mentions-jimmy-kimmel-2024-01-05/ Fact Check: No evidence Epstein document mentions Jimmy Kimmel A set of legal documents from a civil lawsuit related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, which were released on Jan. 3, contains no mention of comedian Jimmy Kimmel, contrary to online posts sharing an image of a purported excerpt referencing Kimmel. Kimmel has also stated publicly that he had no contact with Epstein, who was arrested on July 6, 2019, and died in a New York jail while being held without bail on sex-trafficking charges. The circulating image visible in a Facebook post, opens new tab shows text resembling a transcript of questions and answers between two unnamed parties about meeting and having sexual relations with Kimmel. The page number 1,375 is visible in a corner of the image. However, neither Kimmel’s name nor the exchange shown in the image appears in the 943-page document set, opens new tab that was unsealed by the Southern District of New York on Jan. 3, 2024. The Guardian newspaper made the full set available online, opens new tab. A search of the documents reveals no mention of Kimmel and the document has no page 1,375. The format of transcripts in the documents also differs from the format seen in the fabricated image, which has been shared by meme, opens new tab pages. In a Jan 2. post, opens new tab on messaging platform X, Kimmel responded to the suggestion made by New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers that Kimmel would be named in the forthcoming documents, saying in part, “for the record, I’ve not met, flown with, visited, or had any contact whatsoever with Epstein, nor will you find my name on any ‘list’.”

He will also be talking to Seafoam...oh, wait...