ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
That's what I'm saying! I wanted to highlight not just after they'd gotten in like you posted, but I wanted to show how peaceful they were on the way in. Just look at how peacefully they are climbing through that window that they broken on the way in over on the right side of the video.
Together we can show everyone the whole story!
Why don't you show them the video of police officers holding the doors and gates open and waving the protestors in?
https://rumble.com/vhcxnh-capitol-police...
https://rumble.com/vnxa07-yet-another-su...
https://rumble.com/vjnzml-more-jan.-6-fo...
The protest was to ask Pence to order a 10 day pause before certifying the election to investigate the tens of thousands of voter fraud claims, including many people showing up to vote who were told they already voted, during a first ever type of election in a pandemic that we've never done before. We never had "drop boxes" on corners for people to discreetly drop off a paper ballot (the video evidence of mules dropping off hundreds of ballots at a time is in the documentary "2000 Mules"),
This was NOT an insurrection. You should look up the definition of what that actually means. This was a protest to examine evidence of election fraud, it wasn't about overturning the election or taking over the county (with flag poles).
Anyone, even a civilian citizen, who blocks the effort to investigate a possible stolen election by a foreign entity is also committing treason by definition.
...these are the best days.
Speaking of possible conflicts of interest, the judge of the classified document case, Aileen Cannon, has been nominated by Trump (????) to that seat, it's truly incredible to think that American rules allow her to judge Trump himself.
Which would give more credibility to a condemnation.
(It should but in reality she will fall in the rino camp and get herself and the judgement discredited afterwards …. Like everyone disagreeing with trump ).
Why don't you show them the video of police officers holding the doors and gates open and waving the protestors in?
https://rumble.com/vhcxnh-capitol-police...
Because videos of violent protestors being herded away from vulnerable congresspeople didn't negate the other videos.
The protest was to ask Pence to order a 10 day pause before certifying the election to investigate the tens of thousands of voter fraud claims, including many people showing up to vote who were told they already voted, during a first ever type of election in a pandemic that we've never done before. We never had "drop boxes" on corners for people to discreetly drop off a paper ballot (the video evidence of mules dropping off hundreds of ball
You don't think we've ever had drop boxes before? And you think 2000 Mules shows evidence of fraud.
lol?
This was NOT an insurrection. You should look up the definition of what that actually means.
The courts disagree with you, my friend.
Why don't you show them the video of police officers holding the doors and gates open and waving the protestors in?
https://rumble.com/vhcxnh-capitol-police...
Yes it would have been better to shoot their own Americans citizen instead and transform them into martyrs…?
Until they found another reason afterwards to postpone , etc.
Btw the claim was only in the minds of maga , not in reality.
Learn how to read …
What court? Show me the ruling.
SCOTUS never took on a case as of yet but there are hundreds of state convictions for election fraud
"After permitting President Trump and the Colorado Republican State Central Committee (“CRSCC”; collectively, “Intervenors”) to intervene in the action below, the district court conducted a five-day trial. Thecourt found by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection as those terms are used in Section Three. Anderson v. Griswold, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶241, 298(Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denver, Nov. 17, 2023). "
https://law.justia.com/cases/colorad...3...
This finding was affirmed by a state supreme court:
•The district court did not err in concluding that the events at the U.S.Capitol on January 6, 2021,constituted an “insurrection.
•The district court did not err in concluding that President Trump “engaged in” that insurrection through his personal actions.
...and has not been reversed or even challenged since.
Lol
Luciom. You are coming at it from the wrong angle. Look at it as a setup. A trap. Then it all makes sense.
I agree !
The trap was made by trump believing his lies and they paid for it by acting without thinking -> natural selection .
Bad decisions maker by pure stupidity gets eliminated .
And the worst is ?
Still trump pushing even today that lie but maga ain’t acting on it anymore so they are safe .
Sadly the law of evolution as stopped for now .
What court? Show me the ruling.
SCOTUS never took on a case as of yet but there are hundreds of state convictions for election fraud
Lol cases in that list go back 42 years.
Would they have hung Mike Pence if they got their hands on him?
"After permitting President Trump and the Colorado Republican State Central Committee (“CRSCC”; collectively, “Intervenors”) to intervene in the action below, the district court conducted a five-day trial. Thecourt found by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection as those terms are used in Section Three. Anderson v. Griswold, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶241, 298(Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denver, Nov. 17, 2023). "
Yes, and the 4 CO justices who voted to remove Trump from the ballot committed treason by doing so (where are they now? Especially Ms. Hart?) Not a very good example but I was referring to the national election, now what a corrupt state voted to do.
Yes, and the 4 CO justices who voted to remove Trump from the ballot committed treason by doing so (where are they now? Especially Ms. Hart?) Not a very good example but I was referring to the national election, now what a corrupt state voted to do.
As I already told you, multiple courts disagree with you. I didn't expect you to agree. It is merely your opinion that the courts were corrupt or this decision was in error. Merely asserting it is not effective.
So, again. It was an insurrection. Inarguably. It's been ruled on in multiple courts. Your disagreement is both noted and irrelevant.
Why is that?
WHY is that? Why is that??
"After permitting President Trump and the Colorado Republican State Central Committee (“CRSCC”; collectively, “Intervenors”😉 to intervene in the action below, the district court conducted a five-day trial. Thecourt found by clear and convincing evidence that President Trump engaged in insurrection as those terms are used in Section Three. Anderson v. Griswold, No. 23CV32577, ¶¶241, 298(Dist. Ct., City & Cnty. of Denv
The link above got mangled by the copy/paste on my phone, so here it is corrected:
https://law.justia.com/cases/colorado/su...
And for reference, the part that explains the definition of insurrection and the evidence considered when determining if it was an insurrection is in section G, subsection 2, beginning on page 97.
I will quote some of it below:
...
But we part company with him when he goes one step further. No authority supports the position taken by President Trump’s counsel at oral argument that insurrectionary conduct must involve a particular length of time or geographic location.¶184 Although we acknowledge that these definitions vary and some are arguably broader than others, for purposes of deciding this case, we need not adopt a single, all-encompassing definition of the word “insurrection.” Rather, it suffices for us to conclude that any definition of “insurrection” for purposes of Section Three would encompass a concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish a peaceful transfer of power in this country.
The required force or threat of force need not involve bloodshed, nor must the dimensions of the effort be so substantial as to ensure probable success. In re Charge to Grand Jury, 62F. 828, 830 (N.D. Ill. 1894). Moreover, although those involved must act in a concerted way, they need not be highly organized at the insurrection’s inception. See Home Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Davila, 212F.2d731, 736 (1st Cir. 1954) (“[A]t its inception an insurrection may be a pretty loosely organized affair.... It may start as a sudden surprise attack upon the civil authorities of a community with incidental destruction of property by fire or pillage, even before the military forces of the constituted government have been alerted and mobilized into action to suppress the insurrection.”😉. ¶185
The question thus becomes whether the evidence before the district court sufficiently established that the events of January6 constituted a concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish the peaceful transfer of power in this country. We have little difficulty concluding that substantial evidence in the record supported each of these elements and that, as the district court found, the events of January6 constituted an insurrection.
Immediately following this quoted part the evidence referenced above is listed. The section closes with:
...
In short, the record amply established that the events of January 6 constituted a concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish the peaceful transfer of power in this country. Under any viable definition, this constituted an insurrection
...
Yes, and the 4 CO justices who voted to remove Trump from the ballot committed treason by doing so (where are they now? Especially Ms. Hart?) Not a very good example but I was referring to the national election, now what a corrupt state voted to do.
You can't commit any crime when voting on an opinion in a supreme court. You literally are the last word in your jurisdiction, and your opinion is the law (when majoritarian in the court).
Being reversed by a superior court is at most a shame
Playbig and BJ doing a solid job of representing the average/stereotypical MAGA chode ITT. Dumb & ignorant af conspiracy theory peddling compulsive liars, just like their leader.
You can't commit any crime when voting on an opinion in a supreme court. You literally are the last word in your jurisdiction, and your opinion is the law (when majoritarian in the court).
Being reversed by a superior court is at most a shame
This decision was upheld by the only superior court that looked at it.
Playbig and BJ doing a solid job of representing the average/stereotypical MAGA chode ITT. Dumb & ignorant af conspiracy theory peddling compulsive liars, just like their leader.
How is anyone surprised by this?
rumble, heritage and 2000 mules? These are guys who jerk off thinking about you trying to convince them they’re wrong when they don’t care what the truth is
How do you expect people to keep up with that mess?
Their stated goal was to delay the certification of the election.
Was the certification of the election delayed due to their actions?
And the coup memo outlined a plan to replace legitimate electors with criminals. That Eastman is incompetent is not really a defense.... who in the Trump orbit was actually good at their job even just according to Trump? Again not very bright guys things got out of hand.....but CREEP and the Plumbers would have a legit 40 IQ points on the modern Trumpy cultural conservative thugs.
