Trump 2024?

[mikbone]

So much spin.

Wonder what will happen to the stock market, and presidential polls…

Is it normal to have sentencing delayed a month and a half?

I’m giggling about the differences between the commentary on Fox News and MSNBC.

Guess where I heard these words..

Majestic, Travesty, Miracle, Justice, Injustice, Convict, Distinguished, Power, Omnipotent, Historic…

Edited May 30 by mikbone

[ZealoulyStriving]

It won't survive the Federal system.

Sonski 2024! 😁

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, ZealoulyStriving said:

Sonski 2024! 😁

I have a Catholic neighbor campaigning for this guy.  I can totally understand refusing the 2 choices we're given in order to do little more than raise awareness for issues.

[Just_A_Guy]

3 hours ago, mikbone said:

Is it normal to have sentencing delayed a month and a half?

Not licensed in New York and I don’t practice anything like the sort of law being applied here; but criminal sentencing can routinely take months.  In a run-of-the-mill criminal case in Utah the convict would be expected to meet with Adult Probation and Parole, which would do an evaluation and make recommendations to the court prior to the sentencing hearing.  The defendant could then theoretically bring in witnesses/experts to dispute the report and/or submit their own competing report.

Edited May 31 by Just_A_Guy

[mirkwood]

 

[mikbone]

They out there saying that Trump’s fundraising website went offline due to a crash from all the donations.

It feels like the Democrats have weaponized the law to take down Trump.  Probably will backfire on them.

Trump talked up throwing Hillary in jail but he didn’t pursue it…

I feel like we are in for a wild ride until the election and possibly beyond.

Edited May 31 by mikbone

[Phoenix_person]

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

They out there saying that Trump’s fundraising website went offline due to a crash from all the donations.

I'm sure Shaun King is taking notes.

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

It feels like the Democrats have weaponized the law to take down Trump.

Yes, it turns out that there are consequences when you break the law, even if you're a former president. Crazy, right?

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

Probably will backfire on them.

One can only hope.

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

Trump talked up throwing Hillary in jail but he didn’t pursue it…

And to be clear, Trump has been convicted of zero crimes charged by Biden's DoJ. That may happen later in the stolen documents case, but for now it's important to remember that the current convictions (all 34 of them) are from the state of New York exclusively.

[Vort]

13 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Yes, it turns out that there are consequences when you break the law, even if you're a former president. Crazy, right?

Funny. I don't see the legal consequences for Biden's open lying about his and his son's doings. Strange, that.

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

Funny. I don't see the legal consequences for Biden's open lying about his and his son's doings. Strange, that.

Well, lying isn't illegal (unless you lie under oath like Clinton).  And corruption is nigh impossible to prove, even when the political will exists to try.  So Biden & fam will never face any blowback from decades of peddling influence, the Burisma deal, or any of it.  

And impeach him they did.  "Weaponized the justice system for political gain, they did." - Yoda

 

As for the hush money stuff, it's just more of what we've come to expect from Democrats.  A Soros-funded New York DA campaigned big on talk of holding Trump accountable, gets elected.  Trump is prosecuted and convicted for interfering with the 2016 election.  And the thing is timed to help dems control news cycles during the campaign, and hamper Trump's campaigning.

 

 

The double-standard about the classified documents is especially egregious.  Trump, the guy who was totally able to declassify whatever he wanted to, had his home raided for stuff Trump took as president.  Biden, who never had the ability to declassify anything, had all sorts of stuff show up in his garage and whatnot.  But special counsel Robert Hur's report, admitting Biden committed several felonies jeopardizing national security, states he won't be charged, because he wouldn't likely be convinced, because he could portray himself as an "elderly man with a poor memory" who would be sympathetic to a jury.

Weaponized justice system, pointed at one but not the other. 

Lol - I remember when the left was voicing concerns about the way Trump walked down a ramp.   Elderly man with a poor memory.  Let that sink in.

 

Whelp, at the end of the day, no matter how the presidential election turns out, the house will probably flip from Dem to Republican.  Then we can have 2-6 years of payback.  I wonder if the media will cover any of it.

 

Edited May 31 by NeuroTypical

[Phoenix_person]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

Funny. I don't see the legal consequences for Biden's open lying about his and his son's doings. Strange, that.

6 hours ago, mikbone said:

It feels like the Democrats have weaponized the law to take down Trump.  Probably will backfire on them.

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

One can only hope.

I'm not exaggerating when I say that most leftists would be happy to see Trump and Biden sharing a prison cell at some point in the future. Maybe Hunter can have the cell next door. 

Trump's recent convictions are an outlier in a system that typically favors people like Donald Trump. If it weren't for people in power putting knives in each others backs, we might not have a single convicted white collar criminal in this country. Trump made a lot of enemies during his time in office. The fact that his enemies turned the law against him is an indictment of the toxicity of American politics, not an indictment of the legal system itself. If Trump didn't want his enemies using his crimes against him, then perhaps he shouldn't have committed so many crimes. And yes, I will gladly say the same about Biden if a day ever comes when he faces credible criminal charges. I truly hope that holding politicians accountable for criminal behavior becomes a new norm, even if the reasons for doing so may be politically-motivated. Perhaps it will result in a new class of politicians that actually respect the law. I doubt it, though.

[NeuroTypical]

10 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

The fact that his enemies turned the law against him is an indictment of the toxicity of American politics, not an indictment of the legal system itself.

I largely agree.  Although I'd state that one side is more toxic than the other.  For example, Trump talked big about putting Hilary in prison, but never did anything about it.  

Edited May 31 by NeuroTypical

[Phoenix_person]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Trump talked big about putting Hilary in prison, but never did anything about it.  

She was investigated by the FBI. James Comey even re-opened the investigation two weeks before the election. There was never a recommendation to indict her. That's probably why Trump fired Comey. The previous investigating didn't leave DOJ much room to act.

[Phoenix_person]

Speaking of Trump, felonies, and shady financial dealings, Dinesh D'Souza's film "2000 Mules" just got pulled off the market. You remember Dinesh, right? He was convicted (and later pardoned by Trump) for making illegal political contributions by *checks notes* using mules.

Edited June 2 by Phoenix_person

[NeuroTypical]

20 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

You remember Dinesh, right?

Heh.  Yeah, Dinesh is not exactly what I'd consider a stellar shining example of principled conservatism.  He might start from such a foundation, and express plenty of principles in which I agree, but he also seems happy to stoke fires with emotionally-tinged outrage click-baitey hate pr0n.  I'm never a fan of that style of agenda-forwarding, and I'm always sad to see it on my side.  

If you'd like an example of a decent ultrapartisan right-wing attack book that I'd be willing to stand behind, I'd suggest Hugh Hewitt's 2006 book "If It's Not Close, They Can't Cheat: Crushing the Democrats in Every Election and Why Your Life Depends on It".   Click-baitey title, I'll admit, but back in 2006 I found it a well-sourced examination of the left wing's history of election fraud.  It's been a while since I read it, but I remember it carried a warning about how unhealthily polarized our politics could become unless we started changing course on what Hugh saw as increasing nasty tactics in politics.

[old]

On 5/31/2024 at 3:41 PM, Phoenix_person said:

I'm not exaggerating when I say that most leftists would be happy to see Trump and Biden sharing a prison cell at some point in the future.

Considering that Biden has garnered 80%+ of the primary vote, I think your viewpoint is just a tad off; unless you want to claim that most people who are democrats are not leftist.

[mordorbund]

On 5/31/2024 at 6:31 PM, Phoenix_person said:

She was investigated by the FBI. James Comey even re-opened the investigation two weeks before the election. There was never a recommendation to indict her. That's probably why Trump fired Comey. The previous investigating didn't leave DOJ much room to act.

For anyone who needs to dust off their memory cobwebs, this was Comey's conclusion:

Quote

Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.

 

[NeuroTypical]

11 hours ago, old said:

unless you want to claim that most people who are democrats are not leftist.

Oh, I can help here:

Hey @old: Most people who are democrats are not leftist.  I picked up on this 9 years ago, listening to the left side of the political aisle talking about the Trump vs. Hillary election.  Folks who called themselves democrats and liberals were all in for Hillary.  Folks who called themselves leftists were just oozing with negativity and bad things to say about Hillary and the democrat party.  As in, they considered T and H two sides of the same coin.  Angry at how they had no choice in politics.  

A leftist came up with this image, when asking folks which one they were going to vote for:

 

After Biden won the election, all the democrats and liberals were excited about how we'd now have peace and people could stop burning down their own cities.  Leftists responded:

 

 

Yeah.  No reason to think that leftists and democrats, or leftists and liberals, have all that much in common.

 

Edited June 3 by NeuroTypical

[LDSGator]

@NeuroTypical-your new avatar is awesome. Just saying. 

[old]

16 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Oh, I can help here:

Hey @old: Most people who are democrats are not leftist.  I picked up on this 9 years ago, listening to the left side of the political aisle talking about the Trump vs. Hillary election.  Folks who called themselves democrats and liberals were all in for Hillary.  Folks who called themselves leftists were just oozing with negativity and bad things to say about Hillary and the democrat party.  As in, they considered T and H two sides of the same coin.  Angry at how they had no choice in politics.  

A leftist came up with this image, when asking folks which one they were going to vote for:

 

After Biden won the election, all the democrats and liberals were excited about how we'd now have peace and people could stop burning down their own cities.  Leftists responded:

 

 

Yeah.  No reason to think that leftists and democrats, or leftists and liberals, have all that much in common.

 

So if leftist compose of a very little of the political spectrum, why do Democrats pander to them so much (see the St. George Floyd kneeling)?

[NeuroTypical]

28 minutes ago, old said:

So if leftist compose of a very little of the political spectrum, why do Democrats pander to them so much (see the St. George Floyd kneeling)?

Because of the 2nd Great Commandment of politics.  The 1st rule is "thou shalt get elected", the 2nd is "thou shalt remain elected".   To remain elected, they need to pander to the younger voters.  And younger voters, having been educated by our public schools and our colleges, live, eat, and breathe wokeness.

Everyone knows what happened when Perot lost the election for the republicans.  They're quite aware that Kennedy might lose it for the democrats.  So they need to at least give lip service to the woke leftie don't-call-it-marxist wing of their party, because that's what the schools have been churning out.

Nancy Pelosi won't be around forever.  AOC and the squad will.  So says the folks who poll our younger generations.

 

Edited June 3 by NeuroTypical

[old]

15 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Because of the 2nd Great Commandment of politics.  The 1st rule is "thou shalt get elected", the 2nd is "thou shalt remain elected".   To remain elected, they need to pander to the younger voters.  And younger voters, having been educated by our public schools and our colleges, live, eat, and breathe wokeness.

Everyone knows what happened when Perot lost the election for the republicans.  They're quite aware that Kennedy might lose it for the democrats.  So they need to at least give lip service to the woke leftie don't-call-it-marxist wing of their party, because that's what the schools have been churning out.

Nancy Pelosi won't be around forever.  AOC and the squad will.  So says the folks who poll our younger generations.

 

I mean you are playing both sides here.  Either a significant portion of the democrats are leftist (and if they don't pander to them they won't get elected) or they aren't and there is no need to pander.

A significant portion of Republicans are MAGA-that's a fact; i.e. a significant percentage of the country are MAGA. 

So either a signification portion of Democrats are leftist (and thus the need to pander) or they are not. If they are not; then the Democrats could easily tell them to shut-up and grab the portion of Republicans who are not MAGA to vote for them.

Why deny reality?

[zil2]

7 minutes ago, old said:

they aren't and there is no need to pander

They aren't, but they need to pander in order to ensure enough votes.  What's hard to understand about that?

Ah, I see.  You're not separating politicians from populace.  There's the issue.

Edited June 3 by zil2

[Vort]

Went to lunch with my cousin over the weekend. He's one of the smartest people I know, and one of the most insightful. He had nothing good to say about Trump. He considers Trump to be an existential threat to the democracy. He would literally vote for Biden over Trump (though I'm quite sure he would never actually vote for Biden, whom he despises). I have to admit, he makes a compelling case. I have not seen things in that way, and I still do not. But I understand better now why some people would simply refuse to consider voting for Trump under any circumstance.

[LDSGator]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

understand better now why some people would simply refuse to consider voting for Trump under any circumstance.

Even when I agree with the left I don’t want to be associated with them. Same with Trump. Even if I agree with him I don’t want him to be a spokesman for my values.  

[NeuroTypical]

24 minutes ago, old said:

I mean you are playing both sides here.  Either a significant portion of the democrats are leftist (and if they don't pander to them they won't get elected) or they aren't and there is no need to pander.

If they aren't, and don't pander, then the leftists won't vote democrat, which means Trump wins.  Does that make sense?

 

Quote

So either a signification portion of Democrats are leftist (and thus the need to pander) or they are not. If they are not; then the Democrats could easily tell them to shut-up and grab the portion of Republicans who are not MAGA to vote for them.

So, if you were in charge of democrat election strategy, you'd have them thumbing their noses at emerging new generations of left-of-center voters, and focus their efforts on right-of-center never-Trumpers?  I mean, feel free to go be a democrat strategist and run it up the flagpole and see who salutes.  I don't think you'll get much traction.   

Politicians, business, religion, the military, all of them are trying to keep the children of their voters/customers/parishioners/recruits interested in them.  And the children think and believe differently than the parents.  They're gonna at least give lip service.  Aren't they?

I mean, not everyone is going to be an eternal-principle-based organization like us, right? 

Edited June 3 by NeuroTypical