leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 31 minutes ago, 4th&long said: I didn’t say he is sharp as a tack, I said the people I know are. I’m not a doctor, I never met the man. But to say he’s a bumbling idiot who lost it and can’t run the country? That’s quite the stretch. Every president has a cabinet they take advice from. Just like Biden, I hope trump listens to his. I’m not making excuses for Biden, if you don’t like his policies more power to ya. You don’t hear me saying anything about trump and his age related issues, and his are showing also. 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: If these morons would actually read the news instead of these second-hand Julie Kelly commentaries on the news, they'd see this: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/03/mar-a-lago-trump-classified-documents-00156124 The documents were not all in the same boxes in which they were found because classified documents were removed and replaced with a placeholder card before scanning by a contractor. In other words, unlike Trump, they protected the still-classified materials. There was a mistake, and it was in saying to the court that everything was as found. But they admitted that mistake, and explained exactly what it was. It is not "tampering." As far as the cover sheets and the photo on the carpet - I don't think anyone was saying that this was the crime scene as it was found. The documents, including classified cover sheets, were laid out on the carpet after they were discovered. Come on Frank, you're like Gumby here. The photo was staged, captured and released for maximum effect. It is completely on brand for a special counsel. You shouldn't have to 'think' about what that photo represented--that's what captions and explanations are for. The decision to not offer clarity is the decision made by those who took the photo. The 'mistake' may or may not be intentional, but as I understand it, the acknowledgment of the action was reactionary, not proactive. It's not on the casual observer or Trump legal team to accept the rather convenient explanation. The SC initially grabbed quite a bit of information outside the scope of the warrant. Seems mistakes are par for the course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Come on Frank, you're like Gumby here. The 'mistake' may or may not be intentional, but as I understand it, the acknowledgment of the action was reactionary, not proactive. It's not on the casual observer or Trump legal team to accept the rather convenient explanation. True, but what is the gravity of the said situation? It certainly doesn't seem to justify letting the defendant off the hook. If anything, sanction Jack Smith(if necessary) and move on. Instead, the judge just said, 'Everbody it's LIMBO TIME', right when the optics of it couldn't possibly be worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 5 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Come on Frank, you're like Gumby here. The photo was staged, captured and released for maximum effect. It is completely on brand for a special counsel. You shouldn't have to 'think' about what that photo represented--that's what captions and explanations are for. The decision to not offer clarity is the decision made by those who took the photo. The 'mistake' may or may not be intentional, but as I understand it, the acknowledgment of the action was reactionary, not proactive. It's not on the casual observer or Trump legal team to accept the rather convenient explanation. The SC initially grabbed quite a bit of information outside the scope of the warrant. Seems mistakes are par for the course. The bolded part: yeah, I think it was. But that is was for "maximum effect" on the public doesn't strike me as somehow exonerating Trump or showing that he is being railroaded in Court. It has no impact on his right to a fair trial. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but it's hardly the BLOCKBUSTER REVEAL that some here are making it out to be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted May 8 Author Share Posted May 8 That crazy unreliable Julie Kelly! Proceeds to link to.....Politico! Too funny Finding! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 4 minutes ago, daz28 said: This idiot Supreme Court ruled the Constitution is not self-executing, so that opens a can of worms that can NEVER be undone. Imagine a world where a president can commit any crime in the world, including treason or a coup, as long as his party holds the House, and refuses to impeach him. Basically, saying the House is above the Constitution. Very very sad times. I'm hung up imaging a world where classified/top secret documents are treated as discarded lottery tickets for some, and a life sentence for others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I'm hung up imaging a world where classified/top secret documents are treated as discarded lottery tickets for some, and a life sentence for others. I agree. I get that cooperation goes a long way in enforcement and prosecution, but the letter of the law is important, too. In reality, if any of trumps cases came sooner, he might actually be going to prison, but the questionable delay on all of them could be seen as giving him the same free pass the rest of them got/get, if he's elected. Neither the lack of justice, or perceived/real selective prosecution doesn't do none of us any good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted May 8 Author Share Posted May 8 So Finding Qanon linked to one of its "reliable" media sources. It's the same outlet that still to this day has this story proudly posted on its site. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 Thanks for proving your hackery Finding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 23 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Biden and Pence cooperated with investigators. Trump obstructed investigators. That's really all it is. If Trump didn't want to get prosecuted, he could have just cooperated. If Biden, or Pence had obstructed, they would have been in the same boat as Trump (though for Biden they'd have to wait until he was out of office). There are serious issues with how documents are handled and the laws we have were written for the millions of people who have clearances for their non-elected jobs. Unfortunately, electeds fall in a gray area. We can say we want to change the document controls to make them better, and change the laws to hold electeds more accountable, but today we have to deal with the controls and laws as they are. Righties big mad because they can't understand very basic things so they need to make up big conspiracies to avoid recognizing that even their people might do crimes. You keep saying that, and that's the interpretation offered as explanation as to why law(s) can be sidestepped, ignored, or disregarded. "Electeds" don't fall into gray areas--they fall into a category where individuals are making judgement calls to let obvious transgressions pass. When you introduce the ability for individuals to forgive obvious transgressions, it's quite easy to be supportive when your guy gets a pass, and the other guy looks at life in prison. Biden's actions over multiple decades were egregious, and it simply boils down to the fact that he ignored or disregarded the controls and laws as they were. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 23 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: The bolded part: yeah, I think it was. But that is was for "maximum effect" on the public doesn't strike me as somehow exonerating Trump or showing that he is being railroaded in Court. It has no impact on his right to a fair trial. It wasn't a smart thing to do, but it's hardly the BLOCKBUSTER REVEAL that some here are making it out to be. No, it doesn't exonerate Trump, but it's indicative of the strategy the SC has chosen to pursue this matter. Now that it is quite apparent it was a staged photo shoot, it's fair to wonder what other funny business or misleading statements have been made. When you add in seizing tax records, information protected by attny-client privilege etc, and now mistakes on process, it's fair to wonder about motive. I said this before--in my opinion, the government should be the shiny beacon on the hill in case like this. They hold virtually all the power, and if the case is rock solid, they should behave in a way that's beyond reproach. To the extent they don't, they deserve to be criticized and their motives questioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 9 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You keep saying that, and that's the interpretation offered as explanation as to why law(s) can be sidestepped, ignored, or disregarded. "Electeds" don't fall into gray areas--they fall into a category where individuals are making judgement calls to let obvious transgressions pass. When you introduce the ability for individuals to forgive obvious transgressions, it's quite easy to be supportive when your guy gets a pass, and the other guy looks at life in prison. Biden's actions over multiple decades were egregious, and it simply boils down to the fact that he ignored or disregarded the controls and laws as they were. Do you think all jaywalkers are or should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Should everyone going 36 in a 35 get a ticket? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 5 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: So Finding Qanon linked to one of its "reliable" media sources. It's the same outlet that still to this day has this story proudly posted on its site. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 Thanks for proving your hackery Finding. Where exactly is the 'bad reporting' in this article? Are you saying the reporters should have claimed that it wasn't Russian disinfo, when they weren't sure, and 50 guys signed a letter saying it has the marks of it? They even reported that Ratcliff said it WAS NOT Russian disinfo. Once again, you're trying to display some kind of 'gotcha moment' that doesn't actually exist. If you could get paid for this kind of nonsense you pull constantly, you would be off on Epstein Island sipping margaritas, and not here posting the same nonsense after nonsense tweets. 3 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: No, it doesn't exonerate Trump, but it's indicative of the strategy the SC has chosen to pursue this matter. Now that it is quite apparent it was a staged photo shoot, it's fair to wonder what other funny business or misleading statements have been made. When you add in seizing tax records, information protected by attny-client privilege etc, and now mistakes on process, it's fair to wonder about motive. I said this before--in my opinion, the government should be the shiny beacon on the hill in case like this. They hold virtually all the power, and if the case is rock solid, they should behave in a way that's beyond reproach. To the extent they don't, they deserve to be criticized and their motives questioned. If you believe that courtrooms, judges, prosecutors and defense lawyers are all squeaky clean, and only act in the strict standards of legal ethics, you're in for a rude awakening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 11 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Do you think all jaywalkers are or should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law? Should everyone going 36 in a 35 get a ticket? You see the actions of Clinton and Biden as akin to jaywalking or driving 36 in a 35? That’s your fallback? It’s moronic. 👏👏👏 🤣 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: You see the actions of Clinton and Biden as akin to jaywalking or driving 36 in a 35? That’s your fallback? It’s moronic. 👏👏👏 🤣 Way to miss the point entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 (edited) 22 minutes ago, daz28 said: Where exactly is the 'bad reporting' in this article? Are you saying the reporters should have claimed that it wasn't Russian disinfo, when they weren't sure, and 50 guys signed a letter saying it has the marks of it? They even reported that Ratcliff said it WAS NOT Russian disinfo. Once again, you're trying to display some kind of 'gotcha moment' that doesn't actually exist. If you could get paid for this kind of nonsense you pull constantly, you would be off on Epstein Island sipping margaritas, and not here posting the same nonsense after nonsense tweets. Amen. What you point out here is that the "mainstream media" (I guess they consider Politico as such, even though it is a relative newcomer to that status) does at least try to investigate and to approach people who may be on the other side with an opportunity to comment. Do you ever see Julie Kelly or Jack Posobiec or any of the other faves of the alt right even mentioning an opposing viewpoint, much less seeking out the subject of one of their postings for comment? The Politico article is news. It reports that 50 former members of the intelligence community signed off on a letter saying the Hunter Biden laptop documents have the hallmarks of Russian disinformation. It then quotes Trump's DNI Ratcliffe saying no it isn't, and Rudy Giuliani saying "if it was hacked, I didn't do it, and it was information on his laptop." That is a news story. Not opinion. Not everything in the mainstream media is opinion. Everything in the right-wing twittersphere IS opinion. Edited May 8 by The Frankish Reich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 14 minutes ago, daz28 said: If you believe that courtrooms, judges, prosecutors and defense lawyers are all squeaky clean, and only act in the strict standards of legal ethics, you're in for a rude awakening. No, I don’t believe that, but it’s the ideal. I think much of what goes on at the upper levels of DOJ and politics in general is political and often shady. I believe there are lots of good, hardworking and decent people in the DOJ, FBI etc, but on matters this large, politics skews everything. It is interesting to me though that when people bring up concerns about behavior they see as outside the scope of justice, it’s often labeled a conspiracy theory. 2 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Way to miss the point entirely. Your point was moronic. There’s not much more to say than that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 6 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Amen. What you point out here is that the "mainstream media" (I guess they consider Politico as such, even though it is a relative newcomer to that status) does at least try to investigate and to approach people who may be on the other side with an opportunity to comment. Do you ever see Julie Kelly or Jack Posobiec or any of the other faves of the alt right even mentioning an opposing viewpoint, much less seeking out the subject of one of their postings for comment? They want to be fed a heavy dose of people who have no facts whatsoever, but say, "this suggests", "raises questions", or "has the appearance of". Somehow this hack trash becomes their Bible. If all they did was accept that something may be awry, then I'd be right there with them digging into the meat and potatoes of it. If any member of the lyin' GQP suggests something, then they get right in line with it. The House has been nothing but unproven conspiracy crap for 2 years, and they STILL eat it up. Congress is for legislating, not for campaigning on lies and supposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, daz28 said: They want to be fed a heavy dose of people who have no facts whatsoever, but say, "this suggests", "raises questions", or "has the appearance of". Somehow this hack trash becomes their Bible. If all they did was accept that something may be awry, then I'd be right there with them digging into the meat and potatoes of it. If any member of the lyin' GQP suggests something, then they get right in line with it. The House has been nothing but unproven conspiracy crap for 2 years, and they STILL eat it up. Congress is for legislating, not for campaigning on lies and supposition. Hey, Hunter Biden's laptop fooled me too. I'll admit it. Who would just drop off a laptop full of photos of drug use and confidential business documents at a hole-in-the-wall repair shop, and then forget to pick it up? And then somehow the contents wind up in the hands of ... Rudy Giuliani?? You gotta be sh!ttin me. Nobody is that stupid, and nothing is that convenient for Biden's opponents. What I forgot is that drug addicts are that stupid, that out of control. I mean, Hunter had just returned a rental car to a tiny location in Prescott AZ with a crack pipe in the center console. So the wildly implausible turned out to be real. I don't think it was foolish or ridiculously partisan for anyone to doubt that story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 6 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I don't think it was foolish or ridiculously partisan for anyone to doubt that story. Doubt is the wrong word. Question is the right word. Questioning is what were SUPPOSED to do. Running lawfare in Congress without any proof, as if it's their personal inquisition, IS NOT what were supposed to do. If the Democrats ever grow a spine, they will thoroughly regret doing what they did with the last 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 RIP documents case… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted May 8 Share Posted May 8 1 minute ago, Doc said: RIP documents case… Not if Trump loses in November ... remember, his real defense is "get elected, by hook or by crook." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts