Media Event!! Jan 6th Propaganda!! Tonight!! Official Thread!!

[Fnord 2,280]

24 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So the affidavits don’t exist? Are you going with that, or just sticking to the not widespread part of it? 

Affidavits OF WHAT? Eyewitness accounts OF WHAT? Sorry I don't speak gibberish and can't read what laughingly passes for "your mind." Let me know what you're talking about so I can school you with facts.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,466]

2 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Affidavits OF WHAT? Eyewitness accounts OF WHAT? Sorry I don't speak gibberish and can't read what laughingly passes for "your mind." Let me know what you're talking about so I can school you with facts.

So you don’t know what’s in the affidavits but can claim they aren’t evidence? Ok then. You’re really making a great case here. 

[craftsman 1,045]

4 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Affidavits OF WHAT? Eyewitness accounts OF WHAT? Sorry I don't speak gibberish and can't read what laughingly passes for "your mind." Let me know what you're talking about so I can school you with facts.

2020 liberal riots/insurrection.

[Fnord 2,280]

7 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

So you don’t know what’s in the affidavits but can claim they aren’t evidence? Ok then. You’re really making a great case here. 

So you're purposely avoiding the question so I don't school you? 

IF you're talking about people that signed affidavits suggesting they witnessed some sort of election fraud, that's beyond laughable. Sure it's evidence, just like blurry photos of Bigfoot and Nessy are evidence. No one's ever going to get charged for perjury for lying on an affidavit, and you know that. How many of these "witnesses" are willing to testify to it in front of a judge or jury?

You've got nothing.

[listen2me 23 1,873]

53 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Should be charged and will be charged are worlds apart. He might not be charged because of the political fallout and high likelihood of violence by delusional domestic terrorists, otherwise known as Trump supporters. 

But that's not a good enough reason to not indict him. The next guy that wants to try to overthrow the Republic will have a much harder time doing it if his predecessor is locked up for it.

You should be in favor of him being charged so the many good people that have exculpatory evidence are allowed to testify in front of a jury, right?

Unlike Liberals, I am for anyone who breaks the law to be charged and face consequences for their actions.  

So your stance is he will not be charged, correct?

[TimHauck 2,893]

 

3 hours ago, listen2me 23 said:

Thanks.  Wouldn't mind one of our bored centrist to take a stab at the question.   When does he get charged?

I say he doesn't.  If he was going to be he would've been already IMO. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,466]

34 minutes ago, Fnord said:

So you're purposely avoiding the question so I don't school you? 

IF you're talking about people that signed affidavits suggesting they witnessed some sort of election fraud, that's beyond laughable. Sure it's evidence, just like blurry photos of Bigfoot and Nessy are evidence. No one's ever going to get charged for perjury for lying on an affidavit, and you know that. How many of these "witnesses" are willing to testify to it in front of a judge or jury?

You've got nothing.

Why is it laughable? How can you possibly say that when you don’t know what’s in them? At least you acknowledge there is evidence though. I win. 

[Masshole 642]

1 hour ago, Fnord said:

Oh, you mean he hates Republicans because they continue to back insurrectionists and treasonous behavior that directly led to his injuries? I wonder why he'd do that...

That's definitely what's up with him.  It's definitely not that he was a going nowhere person with sh!tty tattoos who saw an opportunity to milk his 15 min of fame for all its worth.    Couldn't possibly have been that.   

 

[wiffleball 4,790]

Attempting to overturn election results in service of Donald Trump’s lie about voter fraud in his defeat by Joe Biden, the former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani told an Arizona official: “We’ve got lots of theories. We just don’t have the evidence.”

[wiffleball 4,790]

 

Schiff played footage from a Georgia state senate hearing in which Giuliani said Moss and her mother were “quite obviously surreptitiously passing around USB ports as if they were vials of heroin or cocaine”.

 

Giuliani claimed it was “obvious to anyone who’s a criminal investigator or prosecutor, they are engaged in surreptitious illegal activity”, and said the women’s places of work and homes “should have been searched for evidence” of voter fraud.

 

What Giuliani said was a “USB port”, Moss said, was in fact “a ginger mint”.

[Fnord 2,280]

1 hour ago, listen2me 23 said:

Unlike Liberals, I am for anyone who breaks the law to be charged and face consequences for their actions.  

So your stance is he will not be charged, correct?

I will be surprised if he's charged, unfortunately.  I will chalk it up to cowardice and political expediency, not justice.

If you're for charging those who break the law, you should want Trump, Giuliani,  Stone, Bannon, etc all charged, right?

[listen2me 23 1,873]

Just now, Fnord said:

I will be surprised if he's charged, unfortunately.  I will chalk it up to cowardice and political expediency, not justice.

If you're for charging those who break the law, you should want Trump, Giuliani,  Stone, Bannon, etc all charged, right?

If the court finds they broke the law then yes they should be charged.   Seems like common sense.  

[wiffleball 4,790]

 

Schiff played footage from a Georgia state senate hearing in which Giuliani said Moss and her mother were “quite obviously surreptitiously passing around USB ports as if they were vials of heroin or cocaine”.

 

Giuliani claimed it was “obvious to anyone who’s a criminal investigator or prosecutor, they are engaged in surreptitious illegal activity”, and said the women’s places of work and homes “should have been searched for evidence” of voter fraud.

 

What Giuliani said was a “USB port”, Moss said, was in fact “a ginger mint”.

[Fnord 2,280]

10 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

If the court finds they broke the law then yes they should be charged.   Seems like common sense.  

Well, it wouldn't be the court finding the law was broken, it would be up to the DOJ to decide whether to charge them, and then bring it to trial. 

Have you watched any of the hearings? Heard the evidence they've laid out?

[craftsman 1,045]

24 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Well, it wouldn't be the court finding the law was broken, it would be up to the DOJ to decide whether to charge them, and then bring it to trial. 

Have you watched any of the hearings? Heard the evidence they've laid out?

Hearings? Is that what liberals call them?

Sounds more like a little whine fest to me.

[Fnord 2,280]

46 minutes ago, craftsman said:

Hearings? Is that what liberals call them?

That's what PEOPLE call them. People that understand words, and that words have meanings. I wouldn't expect most Republicans to understand that concept anymore.

[jerryskids 6,811]

1 hour ago, Fnord said:

I will be surprised if he's charged, unfortunately.  I will chalk it up to cowardice and political expediency, not justice.

If you're for charging those who break the law, you should want Trump, Giuliani,  Stone, Bannon, etc all charged, right?

Correct, it's not about justice (or indictment), it's about winning.  The Left has nothing positive to message these days, they need to keep riling up the lemmings.  And Trump might present their only chance of winning in 2024, so they need to keep him around.

[wiffleball 4,790]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Correct, it's not about justice (or indictment), it's about winning.  The Left has nothing positive to message these days, they need to keep riling up the lemmings.  And Trump might present their only chance of winning in 2024, so they need to keep him around.

, You do understand that they can't force Trump to hold rallies and make stupid statements. He's doing that all by himself baby. 

[Fnord 2,280]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Correct, it's not about justice (or indictment), it's about winning.  The Left has nothing positive to message these days, they need to keep riling up the lemmings.  And Trump might present their only chance of winning in 2024, so they need to keep him around.

Considering the performance or lack thereof of the Biden administration, I believe that most liberals would rather get curb stomped by DeSantis in 24 than run the risk of Trump being elected again. To us it doesn't matter who is POTUS as long as it ain't him. All other choices are better.

[craftsman 1,045]

6 minutes ago, Fnord said:

That's what PEOPLE call them. People that understand words, and that words have meanings. I wouldn't expect most Republicans to understand that concept anymore.

wow.

[jerryskids 6,811]

2 minutes ago, wiffleball said:

, You do understand that they can't force Trump to hold rallies and make stupid statements. He's doing that all by himself baby. 

This is not my point. Also I want DeSantis, not Trump.  Trump is the only shot the Left has, I wish he would just go away.

[Fnord 2,280]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Trump is the only shot the Left has, I wish he would just go away.

Look, we agree about something!

[jerryskids 6,811]

3 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Look, we agree about something!

 

[TimHauck 2,893]

59 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Correct, it's not about justice (or indictment), it's about winning.  The Left has nothing positive to message these days, they need to keep riling up the lemmings.  And Trump might present their only chance of winning in 2024, so they need to keep him around.

Are you referring to Trump running (if so I agree, but then it doesn’t make sense why they’d keep going with the 1/6 stuff)?  Or just them screaming about him to rile people up?

[TheNewGirl 1,496]

6 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Are you referring to Trump running (if so I agree, but then it doesn’t make sense why they’d keep going with the 1/6 stuff)?  Or just them screaming about him to rile people up?

It totally makes sense that the 1/6 stuff is still brought up. Insurrection! Coup! It was all planned by treasonous Trump! 

I mean, people will say (if they haven't started already), "What about 1/6? You can't tell me that he didn't plan all of that!!!!" 

[craftsman 1,045]

31 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Are you referring to Trump running (if so I agree, but then it doesn’t make sense why they’d keep going with the 1/6 stuff)?  Or just them screaming about him to rile people up?

It should all go to a real court now. Open everything up and allow the accused (Trump) to have legal representation.

At the same time, open up Hunter's laptop and prosecute him and 10% for the big guy.

And at the same time open up a case against Pelosi for insider trading with her husband.

Let's start there. Then we can move on to Harris funding the criminals in 2020 riots and the mayors telling cops to stand down and allow destruction, looting, killing, injuring people and cities around the US.

[wiffleball 4,790]

33 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

It totally makes sense that the 1/6 stuff is still brought up. Insurrection! Coup! It was all planned by treasonous Trump! 

I mean, people will say (if they haven't started already), "What about 1/6? You can't tell me that he didn't plan all of that!!!!" 

It's amazing to me from glancing through this thread how few of you actually watched any of the hearings. Not only did Trump personally direct the crowds to go to the capital. Not only did he direct secret service and park security to remove magnetometers after being informed  that there were weapons on the crowd. He vociferously  wanted to go to the Capitol and join the crowds. And then did nothing to disperse the crowds until damn everybody else had already begged them to disperse. Even his own daughter begged him to say something. And he did nothing for 187 minutes. Meanwhile, secret service agents were literally texting their families with their final goodbyes. These are all things that are revealed in the hearings. And documented. And testified under oath.

 

I mean, the only thing he didn't do in retrospect? Was provide free shuttle buses and buckets of rocks and baseball bats.

[Horseman 2,469]

3 hours ago, Fnord said:

I will be surprised if he's charged, unfortunately. 

Trump will not be charged.  That vindicates Trump.  THE END.

[TimHauck 2,893]

3 minutes ago, wiffleball said:

It's amazing to me from glancing through this thread how few of you actually watched any of the hearings. Not only did Trump personally direct the crowds to go to the capital. Not only did he direct secret service and park security to remove magnetometers after being informed  that there were weapons on the crowd. He vociferously  wanted to go to the Capitol and join the crowds. And then did nothing to disperse the crowds until damn everybody else had already begged them to disperse. Even his own daughter begged him to say something. And he did nothing for 187 minutes. Meanwhile, secret service agents were literally texting their families with their final goodbyes. These are all things that are revealed in the hearings. And documented. And testified under oath.

 

I mean, the only thing he didn't do in retrospect? Was provide free shuttle buses and buckets of rocks and baseball bats.

Then he should’ve been charged with something by now, no?  It’s been 18 months

[Horseman 2,469]

5 minutes ago, wiffleball said:

free shuttle buses and buckets of rocks and baseball bats.

What are the things the Dems did for Antifa/BLM riots in 2020, plus bail money?

[wiffleball 4,790]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

What are the things the Dems did for Antifa/BLM riots in 2020, plus bail money?

I don't know. Please elaborate.

[wiffleball 4,790]

5 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Then he should’ve been charged with something by now, no?  It’s been 18 months

well, not for nothing, but the Watergate trials took over 2 years...

[TimHauck 2,893]

1 minute ago, wiffleball said:

well, not for nothing, but the Watergate trials took over 2 years...

2 years from when it happened to any charges?

[lod001 1,344]

3 hours ago, Fnord said:

Well, it wouldn't be the court finding the law was broken, it would be up to the DOJ to decide whether to charge them, and then bring it to trial. 

Have you watched any of the hearings? Heard the evidence they've laid out?

If any of the BS 'evidence' had any merit, Trump would be charged. This is just a LizTard led d1ck dance with nothing of substance.

[wiffleball 4,790]

2 minutes ago, lod001 said:

If any of the BS 'evidence' had any merit, Trump would be charged. This is just a LizTard led d1ck dance with nothing of substance.

Have you ever followed Rico cases? This is essentially that. You start at the bottom. Secure convictions. Secure plea agreements. And you just keep working your way to the top. But you've done any analysis of the proceedings? That's exactly what's happening. Every single morons that's been convicted and sent to jail has bagged on trump. Even this most recent moron had his daughter come out and say that Trump should be in prison for life or some such nonsense.

 

It's like coming in a week after the Watergate break in and saying "well if he hasn't been impeached by now..."

[Horseman 2,469]

10 minutes ago, lod001 said:

If any of the BS 'evidence' had any merit, Trump would be charged. This is just a LizTard led d1ck dance with nothing of substance.

Lame duck trying to stay relevant.  Bye Bye Lizzy.

[wiffleball 4,790]

Like I said before, ultimately I think they're looking to tighten the screws on the GOP who will then in turn tighten the screws on trump. The GOP is already said "if you come out and announce your presidency before the midterms, we'll stop paying your legal bills."

 

Trump doesn't actually want  to be president. He's a grifter. The only reason he wants to be president? Is to make more money and to avoid any sort of prosecution or civil litigation. End of story. End of story. Period. 

 

Many of you are right in that there's a political message being sent here. The first message? Don't f****** threaten congress. People were legitimately scared. For legitimate reasons. If you want to see the video of Josh Hawley running like a b**** again?  Cops getting crushed and beaten?

 

That did irreparable damage to our country. The Visuals speak louder than anything else.  The vice president hiding in the bowels of Congress? Secret service legitimately fearing for his and their own safety? Ratifying to vote at like 1:00 a.m. under massive guard? What are we, a banana republic?

 

The second message is get the f*** out of town. And even, if not especially, the GOP is telegraphing that message as we speak.

 

I seriously doubt Trump will ever see jail time. But they're making sure they have a bazooka aimed at his forehead if he even tries it.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,466]

When does he get charged for assaulting the SS agent? 

[jerryskids 6,811]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Are you referring to Trump running (if so I agree, but then it doesn’t make sense why they’d keep going with the 1/6 stuff)?  Or just them screaming about him to rile people up?

There are two things possibly at play.  One, which is definitely happening, is continuing the bad pub on Trump independent if him running, and associating Trump == all repubs == evil incarnate.  They need him in the news cycle for this, so closure (i.e, an indictment) is bad.

The second, more speculative, is that the Left might want Trump to run because it is their only chance.  DeSantis would destroy them.  Trump elicits a lot of negative from the center, obviously stoked by the MSM, but there nonetheless.  Basically a poker analogy is going all in on a bluff when short stacked.  Sometimes you win despite the odds, vs dying a slow death.

[Horseman 2,469]

18 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

When does he get charged for assaulting the SS agent? 

Right after the murder charges for all the people that died that day.