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?
What Trial in Maine ? There wasn’t a trial
Bottom line I think it helps Trump by them doing this
I actually hope the Supreme Court says they can do it
Oh look, it's "I'm not-a-Trumper!!!!" lozen hoping for something that he supposes will help Trump. This is a shocking turn of events.
What Trial in Maine ? There wasn’t a trial
Bottom line I think it helps Trump by them doing this
All 7 were Democrats . I guess the Supreme Court will decide that . Would you be upset if they removed Joe Biden from the ballot because he took bribes through his son ( I’m not saying that happened but if they said it )
I actually hope the Supreme Court says they can do it
Oh I see you actually did try to answer somewhat, you just hid it in a quote box.
Alright, well you're wrong (again). Only 2 majority voters were democrats. 3 were un-affiliated (2 of those voted with the majority) and the chief justice is Republican.
As for your question about Joe Biden, if a constitutional argument could be made that he was not qualified to be president and it was ruled on to be correct, no, I would not be upset. Why would I? I wouldn't want to vote for someone that cannot be president. That would be throwing away my vote.
I agree that no matter what restriction you put on voting it will end up reducing voter turnout.
Do you believe that reducing turnout is the point of the exercise, or is that just a happy coincidence for Republicans who claim to be concerned about election fraud?
Would you support the following laws and if not please explain why you support laws that intentionally reduce voter turnout:
1. every county in the country to be required to send full stocked limos to every voters house to drive them to the polls
2. for polls to be open 24/7
3. for each county to be required to have at least the same number of poll workers as the county's total population to ensure absolutely no lines
4. for voting to be held over a 6 month period
5. anyone can text in their votes from any phone (remember poor people don't always have their own phone) by just saying their name and who they want to vote for
6. anyone can vote in any state they choose (we don't want people who recently moved to be shut out of voting)
I'm sure every state is different but in my state a valid ID costs $2.87 a year so let's no act like it is super expensive. I would also be up for a program that allows everyone a free ID that last 8 years once every 8 years (if you want more than that you can pay the $2.87/year).
Why do you think young people have a harder time to the polls than really old people? Most really old people can't drive and aren't mobile. Don't you think your ageist opinion that every county should be required to send a limo to everyone to drive them to the poll hurts old people the most?
If appropriate security measures are in place, what is the argument against allowing people to vote using their phones? It can't be much of a technological hurdle. We are comfortable enough with security to allow people to wire six figure sums using their phones.
I also think it is absurd to hold elections on a single weekday, although that concern is mitigated if you can vote early by mail.
What I said was that you can't go back a year or so and find if most types of voter fraud even occurred. This simply isn't true with bank or identity fraud - an investigator could very easily look at a 10 year old case of either of those frauds and still see an electronic record of money moving out of an account.
In many states they don't require an ID to vote so let's not pretend the US has sufficient measures in place to reduce voter frau
I disagree with you about the specifics of the laptop incident, but even if your suspicions about it are all true, that has nothing to do with the security of the voting systems.
States striking the presidential candidate off primary ballots
States not having primary elections at all and declaring their preferred candidate the winner
Oh wait you said republican
The first thing you mentioned here certainly doesn't prevent single person from voting, and it is done all the time by non-partisan state election officials.
The second is rightfully completely up to the party. There is nothing in the constitution about primary elections and I don't think the government should have them at all. If political parties wish to have them, they should do them on whatever terms they desire (or not) and pay for them.
I am blaming the democrats as they elected the seven justices on the state supreme court that ignored the fact that the former president has never been convicted of an insurrection or charged with it . As for the Maine one that is a clear cut case of a state official that is clearly a biased democrat choosing to ignore due process and remove the former president from the ballot
You apparently have a different definition of insurrection than most people seem to have. I would consider the suit in progress about the events of January 6 to charging Trump with insurrection.
Do you believe that reducing turnout is the point of the exercise, or is that just a happy coincidence for Republicans who claim to be concerned about election fraud?
If appropriate security measures are in place, what is the argument against allowing people to vote using their phones? It can't be much of a technological hurdle. We are comfortable enough with security to allow people to wire six figure sums using their phones.
I also think
E-voting has to be the way froward., it will come eventually and this is the sort of thing the left/progresives should be working on enacting. Instead of the often ridiculous debate about the other sides intentions, we should use the debate to advance progresiev answers.
so a 'lift to the voting booth' argument turns into 'bring the voting booth' to them argument.
Robert E Lee was never charged with insurrection either. Clearly the intent of section III was to prevent people like him him who mass murdered Americans from holding office. That's why it doesn't say you have to be charged or found guilty by a court. It's simply did you engage in insurrection. Simplest reading is Trump did.
Trump was charged. That's what the post office impeachment was. He was not convicted
Trump and Clinton both John Does in the Epstein docs
I have every confidence in the world MAGAland will consider this Clinton’s smoking pedo gun but will say trump did nothing wrong
Trump and Clinton both John Does in the Epstein docs
I have every confidence in the world MAGAland will consider this Clinton’s smoking pedo gun but will say trump did nothing wrong
bro clinton was best buddy and donnie kicked him out after an incident at mara lago and then canceled friendship.
clinton got mentioned 36 times out of 50 jon does or what?
wtf?
bro clinton was best buddy and donnie kicked him out after an incident at mara lago and then canceled friendship.
clinton got mentioned 36 times out of 50 jon does or what?
wtf?
trump said that just like he said he didnt know or never heard of all the people that sue him.. it's a lie. trump made the corrupt ada that helped epstein the secretary of labor.. you are the type of person we are laughing at
One of the girls even testified that she was told Clinton likes them young .
After he got his first sweetheart deal of house arrest how does anyone associate with this man ?
Donald J. Trump’s businesses received at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments during his
presidency, he received overseas transactions while he was in the White House, most of it from China.
“repeatedly and willfully violated the U.S. Constitution by failing to divest from his business empire and
allowing his businesses to accept millions of dollars in payments from some of the most corrupt nations on earth.”
U.S. Supreme Court — rejected the matter just days after the
Republican left office, saying Trump’s departure rendered the matter moot.
Trump did the very thing that Republicans have falsely accused Biden of doing.
One of the girls even testified that she was told Clinton likes them young .
After he got his first sweetheart deal of house arrest how does anyone associate with this man ?
It's really easy to type "and Trump" every time anyone wants to mention Clinton and his dealings with Epstein. In any event, I have conditioned myself to add it mentally.
Trump and Clinton both John Does in the Epstein docs
I have every confidence in the world MAGAland will consider this Clinton’s smoking pedo gun but will say trump did nothing wrong
Trump can do no wrong. He knows that and stated it clearly in 2016 when he stated that he could shoot someone on 5th Ave or whatever he said.
Anyone who has has raped underage children should go to jail. Doesn't matter who they are.
Trump did the very thing that Republicans have falsely accused Biden of doing.
I do believe there's a discoverable pattern here.
Donald J. Trump’s businesses received at least $7.8 million from 20 foreign governments during his
presidency, he received overseas transactions while he was in the White House, most of it from China.
“repeatedly and willfully violated the U.S. Constitution by failing to divest from his business empire and
allowing his businesses to accept millions of dollars in payments from some of the most corrupt nations on earth.”
U.S. Supreme Court — r
So your saying once Trump took office he should have sold all his properties?
Let me add if your coming to visit Trump or a member of his staff at the Whitehouse kind of makes sense to stay at the property 1/2 a mile away and than you can say I stayed at your beautiful Hotel .
Id like to know what good ole MSNBC considers payments ? the fee for the room? meals and drinks?
