Court Dumps Trump Lawsuit Claiming Hillary Clinton Rigged The 2016 Election He Actually Won
from the election-was-fraudulent,-claims-election-winner dept
Sooooooo… this was something that happened.
Trump, the commander of a fine legal team that has included, over the years, plenty of people facing indictments, sanctions, and lawsuits of their own, sued the Clinton campaign for trying to throw an election he ended up winning.
Perhaps Trump was as surprised by his victory as millions of Americans were. But millions of Americans simply went on with their lives, hoped for the best, started dying in droves, and then took him for a ride to the farm golf course in the 2020 election. An attempted insurrection followed and somehow millions of Americans still believe the best thing for the country is Grover Cleveland 2.0. And I mean that pretty much literally.
Cleveland, like a growing number of Northerners and nearly all white Southerners, saw Reconstruction as a failed experiment, and was reluctant to use federal power to enforce the 15th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guaranteed voting rights to African Americans…
Although Cleveland had condemned the “outrages” against Chinese immigrants, he believed that Chinese immigrants were unwilling to assimilate into white society. Secretary of State Thomas F. Bayard negotiated an extension to the Chinese Exclusion Act, and Cleveland lobbied the Congress to pass the Scott Act, written by Congressman William Lawrence Scott, which prevented the return of Chinese immigrants who left the United States. The Scott Act easily passed both houses of Congress, and Cleveland signed it into law on October 1, 1888.
The sorest winner in presidential history still thinks a federal court should force Hillary Clinton to pay him actual money for allegedly conspiring against him to… allow him to ascend to the Oval Office following the Electoral College vote.
Long story short, Trump sued Hillary Clinton over an election he won. His allegations were, well, seemingly incomprehensible. Trump’s lawyers are being paid per word or per ream of paper. But, either way, the court is mostly unable to figure out if Trump’s complaining contains any actionable complaints. From the decision [PDF]:
Plaintiff’s theory of this case, set forth over 527 paragraphs in the first 118 pages of the Amended Complaint, is difficult to summarize in a concise and cohesive manner. It was certainly not presented that way.
This is followed up by a judicial sigh of resignation.
Nevertheless, I will attempt to distill it here.
So shall I. Trump alleged Clinton “colluded with a hostile foreign entity” to elicit “spurious opposition research” (referring to the Christopher Steele dossier) and another report claiming to tie Trump hotels to Russian financiers via DNS records (a report that was immediately debunked by everyone with an understanding of how internet traffic works).
According to Trump and his lawyers, this is irrefutable evidence the Clinton campaign conspired to prevent him from winning an election he won. The court is far less certain this is evidence of anything. When it comes to legal claims, quality is preferable to quantity — something Trump’s lawyers clearly don’t understand.
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is 193 pages in length, with 819 numbered paragraphs. It contains 14 counts, names 31 defendants, 10 “John Does” described as fictitious and unknown persons, and 10 “ABC Corporations” identified as fictitious and unknown entities. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is neither short nor plain, and it certainly does not establish that Plaintiff is entitled to any relief.
Brevity isn’t always wit, but in this case, brevity would be preferable to sprawling narratives with no cognizable claims. Longer is not better. An amending a complaint to make it longer, but no better, doesn’t do much else but waste the court’s time. The length of the complaints is only part of the problem. The real problems are the complete lack of anything actionable.
More troubling, the claims presented in the Amended Complaint are not warranted under existing law. In fact, they are foreclosed by existing precedent, including decisions of the Supreme Court.
Tossing in a belated, unsupported wire fraud claim in an attempt to salvage doomed RICO claims only made things worse for Trump. (Emphasis in the original.)
Not only does Plaintiff lack standing to complain about an alleged scheme to defraud the news media, but his lawyers ignore the Supreme Court’s holdings that the federal wire fraud statute prohibits only deceptive schemes to deprive the victim of money or property. It is necessary to show not only that a defendant engaged in deception, but that an object of the fraud was property.
An election is not “property.” While it might be possible to insinuate that depriving Trump of the presidency deprived him of money, the dozens of pages and hundreds of paragraphs failed to show how this alleged conspiracy deprived Trump of anything. He still won the election. And, on top of that, it did not deprive Trump of money or property. He retained his (frequently overstated) wealth. And he did not lose any of his property. Instead, he gained a brand new, rent-free address located in the one of the most upscale neighborhoods of the nation’s capital.
It’s just one benchslap after another for Trump and his legal reps.
Many of the Amended Complaint’s characterizations of events are implausible because they lack any specific allegations which might provide factual support for the conclusions reached.
Back to criticizing the convolutions and length of the complaints:
Plaintiff has annotated the Amended Complaint with 293 footnotes containing references to various public reports and findings. He is not required to annotate his Complaint; in fact, it is inconsistent with Rule 8’s requirement of a short and plain statement of the claim. But if a party chooses to include such references, it is expected that they be presented in good faith and with evidentiary support. Unfortunately, that is not the case here.
Citing a DOJ Inspector General’s report on alleged election interference? Possibly good. Misstating its conclusions? Definitely bad.
Plaintiff and his lawyers are of course free to reject the conclusion of the Inspector General. But they cannot misrepresent it in a pleading.
Never a subheading anyone filing a complaint wants to see in a court’s response to a motion to dismiss.
Shotgun Pleading
Doubling down on bad pleadings is even worse.
To say that Plaintiff’s 193-page, 819-paragraph Amended Complaint is excessive in length would be putting things mildly. And to make matters worse, the Amended Complaint commits the “mortal sin” of incorporating by reference into every count all the general allegations and all the allegations of the preceding counts.
This subheading? Also seriously bad news for unserious lawyers filing unserious complaints on behalf of an extremely unserious person.
Fictitious Defendants
Much more discussion follows, mainly because the sprawling complaints have forced the court to address a ton of facially invalid arguments. Among those is the statute of limitations for RICO claims, which, at four years, gave the Trump people until October 2021, at the latest, to file. They chose not to do so until 2022. His lawyers claimed Trump should have rolling tolling, applicable until the end of his presidency in January 2021.
The court says this simply isn’t the case. The president was or should have been aware of the incidents and reporting underlying this federal complaint since October 2017. That he chose to sue several months after the statute of limitations had expired is on him. The court can’t (and won’t) save him.
And so it continues for another 25 pages. There is nothing in here Trump can continue to pursue. It’s a shutout. The entire thing (both the original and amended complaints) are dismissed with prejudice as far as the non-federal defendants are concerned. The lawsuit is still (barely) alive (dismissed without prejudice) in terms of federal defendants. But, given Trump’s inability to amend a complaint cohesively, concisely, or comprehensibly, it will only be a matter of time before those claims are dismissed definitively by this same court.
Trump won. Maybe he should just enjoy the win, rather than claim people conspired against him to keep him out of an office he ultimately held for four deeply regrettable years.
Filed Under: donald trump, elections, hillary clinton, rico, standing, statute of limitations
Comments on “Court Dumps Trump Lawsuit Claiming Hillary Clinton Rigged The 2016 Election He Actually Won”
'Oh woe is me, give me money.'
Trump won. Maybe he should just enjoy the win, rather than claim people conspired against him to keep him out of an office he ultimately held for four deeply regrettable years.
But if he does that how’s he supposed to stoke the victim-complex his cultists base their lives around and more importantly get money from them?
Yeah this positively screams ‘Publicity stunt and fundraiser’ and while I’d like to think it will fail at both history has made a compelling case that that’s wishful thinking on my part.
It’s not RICO. It’s never RICO. And of all people, I should know! My name is Rico, and I never claimed to know or like this sore winner of a President!
Thanks for reminding us about Grover. History is our guide–and it’s an honest historical take on the “evil Chinese” too.
But:
I think you frequently forget the PR value of frivolous lawsuits to pander to the populace menace. Populism requires estrangement from standard narrative, without which the locals cannot separate themselves from the globalists, who control the narratives.
It may seem an insignificant point, but “the locals” are our mothers and fathers. That isn’t insignificant.
As for how Trump pays his lawyers, it’s part relationships (the exact same identical system as the “Chinese”) and part standard wages, plus access.
Hardly a point worth heralding here, methinks–it works both ways, and guess what? Some of Trumps lawyers were ALSO Clinton’s lawyers back in the day of blowjobs and blue stained dresses–did that elude you?
I know what's behind this lawsuit...
Trump’s obviously trying to deflect the blame for his win from the Russians that helped him get into the Oval Office by claiming it was Hillary Clinton who scuppered her own chances of being the POTUS. Just more ‘alt facts’ from the original King of Bullshit.
Re:
‘Every accusation a confession, every self-given label a rejection of’.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Well done on proving true previous accusations against you.
Re: Re: Re:
… said nobody literate, ever.
Re: Re:
By ‘self-given label’, do you mean the time Trump implied he was America’s saviour for “stopping Covid in its tracks,” despite the fact that Covid’s still very much here?
Re: Re: Re: 'One rule for me, another for thee'
That would probably serve as a specific example but I was talking more generally like claiming to be big fans of free speech and personal responsibility when their actions show them to be anything but.
Because in the end he is the biggest victim of this unfair plot.
Its not a legal filing, its copypasta to keep his faithful riled up about how unfairly he’s been treated after he incited an insurrection, stole secret documents, got an untold number of spies murdered.
Re: This - the empty folders
The public MUST be allowed to determine what confidential data was in those empty folders and what HumInt assets might have been exposed (sold/traded) by Trump to foreign entities. This isn’t idle or leftist talk, these are men and women who pledged their lives to protect this country and, in some cases, may have paid the ultimate price. Every American should be worried about this.
Re: Re:
Then again, there’s the very good chance he or staff simply consolidated.
Re: Re:
The public? No. The Department of Justice? Absolutely.
Lawyers are getting paid?
“Trump’s lawyers are being paid per word or per ream of paper.”
Yes, but paid by who? These lawyers should know that Trump has a long history of not paying his bills, from building contractors to the IRS. So why do these lawyers think they’ll get paid?
Or are they representing him to score points with Republicans?
But since Trump won the election and there were no damages done, maybe the judge should take action against the lawyers for bringing such a worthless case before the court.
Then we’ll see how many lawyers represent Trump if there’s a chance they’ll get disbarred.
The longer it gets.
The more convoluted it gets.
The more wired it gets.
The simple facts get hidden, and fouled up.
Might as well be a corp IRS statement.
When you win so hard you have to frame others for your win…
Re:
Or you are so paranoid that everything that happens to you is the work of others.
Baffling
Trump definitely follows the old saying…”If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.”
How many weapons did they bring to that insurrection?
Re:
Let’s see, pipe bombs, a truck full of guns and molotov cocktails, a gallows to hang then-Vice-President Mike Pence…
Re:
An insurrection does not have to be armed.
Re: Re:
True. Trump was certainly unarmed.
Re: Re: Re:
Enough with the tiny hands jokes. Or are you referencing the apocryphal “I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed man” here?
Re: Re: Re:2
None of the above. I was referencing the fact that Trump didn’t have any firearms on him when he sent his MAGA minions on their rampage on Capitol Hill.
Re: Re: Re:3
What definition of “weapon” do you employ that an armed mob of people without enough of a brain to do their own thinking doesn’t meet?
Re: Re: Re:4
*whoooooosh!*
Re:
As a literal outsider looking in I found it fascinating how things went down.
Rally and protest march of questionable merit, containing groups of questionable morals, yet the streets were not lined with law enforcers in full battle array.
Well not anywhere like the thousand man or the mothers against or LGBT or any other marginalized group of any tint where the enforcers are fully armed and ready to put their toys to immediate use.
Funny that. It’s almost as if that the various independent enforcement groups supported the message.
Re: Re:
It’s like that old proverb says: Some of those that work forces are the same that burn crosses.
Re: Re: Re:
That’s no a proverb, it’s song lyrics. Lol.
Just sayin…
Re: Re: Re:2
That’s the joke.
Damn, Trump is really rewriting the definition of “sore winner”.
Re:
He’s so far removed from reality he can’t accept he won…
or
He’s so used to losing…
steaks
casinos
wines
university
and so many more…
that he just assumed he lost.
Lostinlodos last seen sobbing inconsolably…
Re:
It’s hard to sob when you’re on your knees, carrying water with your lips surgically grafted onto the prosthetic sausage of a madman who grabs women by the pussy.
Re:
Uh, no.
Re: Re:
When you so often say, “I know Trump did some bad things, BUT CLINTON’S EMAILS!” that’s actually an “Uh, yes.”
Re: Re: Re:
You appear stuck on a right-wing talking point that I haven’t declared illegal, post review by investigation.
Her idiotic mishandling of classified materials was legal at the time.
No, my hatred is deep and has existed long before her email stupidity. First they came for our movies, they they came for our music, then they came for our video games. Now her supporters, friends, and cronies seek to censor by law on the internet.
That all is besides her personal involvement in the rise of a manic anti-Russian semi-dictatorship in Ukraine that went on to systematically target by aggressive means, including death, small populations of Russians within Ukraine. While ignoring and personally enriching herself within Chinese circles.
Her emails were not criminall, just another sign of her mentality. Her stupidity. Her self aggrandisement.
Re: Re: Re:2
Keep looking for those parking tickets, chumley. Your hero had four years to make something stick.
Re: Re: Re:3
Her opponent has a bit of an issue looking at reality. I doubt he’d be able to do anything worthwhile against here.
Re: Re: Re:4
You, on the other hand, need to come to terms with how voting for the opposition doesn’t make said opposition hero(es).
Maybe some day the power brokers of the dems will allow a legitimate candidate to run. There’s much to be gained by those outside of the top. But I doubt that will happen any time soon. Obama, the outsider, was a fluke. You can see all the political internal corruption they went through to keep Sanders out!
AOC has great ideas despite her intended implementation being knee jerk and extreme. But the dems and their money lines don’t want people like that. People that care. People that do, or try to do, what they say they will.
The power brokers don’t want progress and change. They want to keep control and line their pockets. The “maybe next time” keeps them in power.
Independents can’t stand them.
Re: Re: Re:5
The Republicans are racing to see which one of them gives less of a shit about anyone but the richest assholes who donate to their campaigns, and you’ll still vote for them because—as you’ve put it so very often—they’re not Hillary acolytes. After all, you yourself said that’s why you voted for Trump (twice). I have to believe you’ll vote for him a third time just to piss off people who give a shit about other people—to Own the Libs™ at all costs.
Prove me wrong, fucker.
Re: Re: Re:5
But apparently this wasn’t enough to stop you from voting for him twice.
Lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.
See, this is what separates the rest of us from useful idiots like yourself. Hilary was an absolutely shit choice, and we’d admit that – but despite four years of Trump and all the damage he did, most Republicans simply can’t bring themselves to admit that he was a thoroughly terrible choice to represent them. You can keep claiming your alleged atheism and logician abilities to separate yourself from them, but anyone reading your post history knows otherwise. Just look at all the times you made excuses on his behalf, whining that people made fun of him or that he did his best – but you’ll scream at how Hilary must be nailed to the wall for any offense, no matter how minor.
You’re a Trump fluffer through and through, up until it stopped being convenient for you, and you’re still on your knees desperately gobbling his phallus in hopes he might find a traffic violation he can rape Hilary with.
Re: Re: Re:6
It’s kind of hilarious: Lots of conservatives say “let’s go Brandon”, yet liberals/progressives are more likely to actually say “fuck Joe Biden”. We know Biden was (and still is) a shit choice—but he was a better choice than letting Trump have another four years to literally make himself a king.
Re: Re: Re:2
Son, who the fuck do you think is behind the moves to ban books in public and school libraries, alter school curriculums so that the teaching of slavery (among other subjects) is whitewashed and watered down, and ban anything having to do with queer people in public places (e.g., drag queen reading events in public libraries)? Because it sure as shit ain’t Killary Clinton and the Twenty Genocides She Committed Yesterday.
And if you think those same assholes will stop with meatspace? Congratulations, you played yourself. And it’s all because you helped put Donald Trump into office in 2016. He emboldened the transphobic, racist, ableist, sexist, homophobic people who voted for him to come out in droves and start trying to enforce their TRASH morals, their TRASH beliefs, and their TRASH way of life onto everyone who isn’t like them. This doesn’t stop with the swatting of queer streamers or bomb threats called in to children’s hospitals that treat trans kids. This only ends one of two ways: They get what they want or they give up because it’s too much of a fight to get what they want.
And you? Well, they’re counting on you to be a useful idiot again in 2024 when, barring a major legal catastrophe, Donald Trump will most likely run for POTUS one more time. They’re counting on you to ignore his TRASH opinions and his TRASH supporters and his TRASH policies for the sake of Owning the Libs™ one more time. They’re counting on you to ignore the fascism so you can tell the Dems to suck your dick.
The people who want to burn books want you looking the other way when they start burning people. So far, I haven’t seen you say a goddamn thing in opposition to their tactics. Are you someone who gives a shit about other people who don’t look, think, talk, and act like you—or are you just a useful idiot for right-wing TRASH who would sooner curbstomp you into Hell than give a shit about you?
Re: Re: Re:3
I didn’t say the right wing cloud people worshippers were any better at the moment.
Hopefully the dems will give us a real option so we can stop that from happening
I voted against Clinton.
Actually, I think it was more the party as a whole.
You blame Trump for that? Maybe, focus on the turds that actually do these acts? Because Trump isn’t in office. This is happening under Biden. Not that bigotry didn’t exist before him.
Well, they can count all they want. Do you really think Biden is going to be the ticket? Or Harris? I doubt it. And sincerely hope not. The Dems have a good chance to win if they do with an actual human and not an elitist monster, dementia patient, or idiot who can’t figure out that shopping isn’t the border.
Why would I want to do that. I am a liberal.
The dems need to dump the elitist leadership. The dictatorship of the likes of Clinton and Pelosi et al.
Let’s look for a moment though.
How different is the far right, and their anti-culture stance, and the Dem elites? Who to this day attempt to ban materials they don’t like.
that’s the real problem!
We have two groups of self-righteous turds heading the two major parties. They’re all crap in some way or another.
A single choice in time doesn’t make a picture, it makes a spot.
Given most of my votes since being of age have gone to the left of centre… I’m hardly a fan of the religious based policy of the republicans.
But the dems didn’t give us any better in 16. Nor in 20.
I understand you have a deep hatred for trump, and why. But I feel and felt that way over Clinton.
2020 was extremely difficult for me. But I, personally, am no better, and actually worse off, today than I was two years ago.
Trump is unlikely to win the republicans nomination. If the Dems put up an actual candidate, one outside of the NWO politics of the leadership of both parties: they have my vote. Given how few places I disagree with dems, and how many I disagree with the republicans, it’s not a hard choice. Especially since we have a states’ rights SC that won’t take away the public’s right to hunt and protect themselves.
Most dems don’t support illegal immigration. Most dems do support law and order. And most dems support freedom. All they have to do is run candidates that haven’t proven to be anti-American-citizens. Candidates that aren’t beholden to their own little cross-party table of elitism.
Re: Re: Re:4
You’re about to see what happens when queer, non-binary, furry, yaoi content creators, and other abused minorities get pushed into a corner.
You started this fight. We’re going to finish it.
Re: Re: Re:4
And yet, you rarely call them out with the same fervor, hatred, and utter venom as you reserve for talking about Democrats. If you want me to believe you’re not a fan of the kind of lawmakers who support Donald Trump so much that they’re willing to sacrifice American democracy for the sake of electing him again, you’re gonna need to do a better job than what you’ve been doing so far, champ.
Rationalize it however you want; the result is the same: Your vote went to Donald Trump.
And who emboldened the GOP to start acting like Trump? Because it sure as shit wasn’t Liz fuckin’ Cheney.
I blame Trump for helping raise the collective ire of conservatives to a point where they feel that using violence or threats thereof against their opponents (real or perceived) and the enemies of society (e.g., the media, trans people) is a good thing to do. No one in Trump’s orbit is willing to fully denounce political violence—and that fact, combined with what happened on the 6th of January 2021, should scare the holy hell out of you. (It won’t, but it should.)
Biden isn’t encouraging it. Think of it like the difference between the Trump and Biden approaches to COVID-19: Biden isn’t exactly doing that great a job, but he’s still doing better than the guy whose at best lackadasical response to a pandemic helped kill four hundred thousand people.
No on both counts. Biden is too old and Harris is too problematic in other ways. I doubt Bernie will run again, too, so that’s not an option.
Then again, I don’t much care who the Dems run in the grand scheme of things. I’ll vote for a goddamn ham sandwich before I let fascists like Trump or DeSantis ever have my vote. At least voting for the ham sandwich won’t make me feel like I betrayed my principles, my ethics, my morals, my empathy, and everyone I care about.
And yet, here you are, whining about liberals being literal demons from Hell.
I don’t see the “Dem elites” trying to take over state legislatures so they can control who can vote, how and when they can vote, who gets to count the votes, and who gets to say “we win” if the vote doesn’t go to the Dems. But I see more Republicans trying to do that shit than anyone should be comfortable with. The fact that you have never once raised that point of concern—and possibly see that set of events as a good thing—speaks to how deep in a conservative media bubble you truly are.
As for bans on books and such: Yeah, it’s a dumbshit move when Dems do it, just as much as it’s a dumbshit move when Republicans do it. But the Dems, for all their fuck-ups, at least try to target TRASH speech/expression instead of going after works made by/for/about queer people, people of color, women, and any potential intersection of those groups (e.g., queer Black women). Conservatives are the ones going after kids’ books that only say “sometimes a kid has two dads” as if that admission is putting the idea of graphic homosexual orgies in the heads of kids who happen to read that sentence. You wanna worry about content bans? Start speaking out against the conservatives who are doing that shit instead of saving your ire for Killary and the Demoncrats. Otherwise, you’re a hypocrite.
And yet, you voted for Trump twice. You literally voted for the religious policy that has since rescinded abortion protections out of deference to a bunch of religious fuckwits who think a woman should be punished for having sex by being forced to bear a child—even if the woman was raped and even if the “woman” is herself a child. That blood, for however much your vote counts towards Trump being in office long enough to put those wheels in motion, is on your hands. I voted for Clinton and Biden; for all their flaws, my hands are clean on that shit.
And yet, for all her flaws and fuck-ups, she didn’t put American democracy in danger, place three religious zealots on the Supreme Court with the intent to undo abortion rights (among other things), didn’t let hundreds of thousands of people die from a pandemic, and didn’t encourage political violence either implicitly or explicitly.
She was never the President of the United States. Trump was—and could be again. Who’s the bigger threat to the American Experiment right now?
The only way he doesn’t is if he doesn’t run. If he runs against DeSantis in the primaries, that’ll be a toss-up: DeSantis is smarter; Trump is more charismatic and still has millions of people ready to fight and die (and possibly kill…) for him. But if Trump runs unopposed, he will win that nomination—at which point I assume you’ll have made up your mind about who you’ll vote for in 2024.
Are you gonna tell me that you believe in the Illuminati, too? (Besides, I’m more of a Wolfpac guy.)
And yet, you voted for Trump twice.
That same Supreme Court literally revoked the right of pregnant people to self-determine their own future and have full autonomy over their bodies. Some states give more rights to corpses than they do to pregnant people—but hey, small price to pay for putting Trump in office, I guess~.
Donald Trump incited an insurrection that attempted to prevent American democracy from declaring him the loser in an election he provably, fairly, and unquestionably lost both electorally and popularly. I can’t think of anything more un-American than trying to undo the very system of democracy that makes America what it is today.
But you’ll still vote for him because he and the party he controls hurt the right people: undocumented immigrants, “out of control” liberals (especially if they’re women!), transgender people, and poor people.
Stop acting like you’re going to vote for anyone but him if he runs. You’re not that convincing and I’m not that stupid.
Re: Re: Re:5
You know better. There’s only one politician I have venom for
You have the right to believe whatever you want.
My vote went against Clinton, the the only other person with a chance of winning
That’s funny, since trump was a long time democrat. The party didn’t act like trump, they just earned a majority of fat right nutters.
Breaking the law is breaking the law. And should be prosecuted
That a few dozen extremists showed up at a protest? That’s been going on for years. Every BLM protest had extremists.
Sure, the anti law enforcement rhetoric doesn’t encourage violence. If you say so
It’s your right in a free country to vote for who ever and what eve you want.
Not at all. I simply call out a would be queen for her shite beliefs. Clinton called herself a Dem but she’s not remotely liberal.
You can’t be serious
See, that’s your own ignorant opinion. Attempting censorship is evil. Period.
I voted against the bytch. That vote happened to coincide with my belief I. Rule of law.
Online record will show I’ve remained pro choice since the 90s
And no the SC didn’t make abortion illegal. I the absence of federal law state law has precedence. Period.
The only way trump winds is if the dems run another elitist buffoon.
A cross-partisan group of elites that serve none but the money mastered? Yes
Bullshite. They simply returned the debate to the states since the federal government made no movement on it in law.
Again bull. A few dozen individuals who may or may not have been trump supporters, out of many thousands, commented illegal activities of their own choosing.
Believe what you want.
But the chance of my 2024 vote going to trump is nearly zero
Re: Re: Re:6
And yet, you constantly demonize other Democrats as being acolytes of someone you seem to believe is a literal, actual, not-fucking-joking-here demon from the depths of Hell. I hate Donald Trump with every atom of my being and even I’m not so far gone as to believe he’s the spawn of Satan.
And to Donald Trump. Rationalize it however you want; the result is the same: You voted for Donald Trump, and everything he did in office is, in its own small way, on your hands. I voted for the person who wasn’t going to use the White House as a backdrop for the world’s worst reality TV show; my hands are clean.
Trump was never really a Democrat—registered, maybe, but never fully on-board with Democrat policies and platforms. (After all, look at how nuts he went when Barack Obama was elected.) He eventually figured out how to convince conservative voters that he was their answer to brown people entering the country and liberals doing things like letting pregnant people have abortions and letting gay people get married. Once he knew he could play their asses like a fiddle, he became a Republican and never looked back.
The party had been attracting “nutters” for decades. (It wasn’t left-wingers going around bombing abortion clinics, killing doctors in churches, and blowing up federal buildings, after all.) The election of Barack Obama brought the worst ones out of the woodwork; the campaign, election victory, and presidential term of Donald Trump gave those “nutters” license to be their worst selves with the implicit stamp of approval of the POTUS himself.
Several hundred people marched on—and into!—a citadel of American democracy to purposefully disrupt the process of American democracy, but you want to paint only the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers who were there as the “extremists”. What do you think that says about you?
The only anti–law enforcement rhetoric I’ve seen from a POTUS (current or former) lately is Trump denouncing the FBI and the DOJ for doing their goddamn jobs. I don’t recall Biden ever saying anything overtly as anti–law enforcement as that at any point. But I’m sure you’ll come up with something that you think is anti–law enforcement even when it’s not. Also: If Biden is as rabidly anti-cop as you want so desperately to believe he is to justify your Killary-adjacent hatred of him and everything he says and does, do you really think he’d be saying—in public and on open mics—that we need more cops and more funding for cops?
I’m sure that will be a great comfort to the families of the people who died from COVID-19~.
Two things.
Oh, I’m sorry, have you never heard of voter roll purges? Have you never heard of Republicans rolling back voting laws that proved beneficial to Democrats in even the smallest of ways? Do you not know about the Georgia gubernatorial race between Brian Kemp and Stacey Abrams, wherein Kemp literally oversaw his own election and did some underhanded shit to keep as many people as possible who might’ve voted against him from voting?
…wait, sorry, never mind; I forgot you’re stuck in a conservative media bubble. Of course you haven’t heard about those things—conservatives aren’t going to tell you they’re changing the rules to make the game easier for them and harder for anyone who might challenge the idea that Republicans aren’t ordained by God to rule the United States.
And yet, you only seem to show up on the comments sections of articles that accuse Democrats of trying to censor people, and you never shittalk Republican censors with the same fervor and spite you reserve for Democrat censors. Curious. 🤨
Two more things.
By undoing Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court made abortion illegal in every state with an anti-abortion law that went into effect soon after that ruling. They didn’t load the gun, but they knowingly pulled the trigger—and the only reason they were able to do so was because Donald Trump was able to put three anti-abortion judges on the bench.
You voted for that, by the way. “I vOtEd AgAiNsT tHe DeMoN bItCh FrOm HeLl” and claiming to be pro-choice are not valid excuses.
You underestimate the grievance-driven agenda of the GOP and its conservative voter base—including their desire to win elections by any means necessary. If it means getting Trump back in the White House to Own the Libs™ and hurt the people conservatives want to see hurt, I’ve little doubt that Republican voters will vote for him regardless of who runs against him.
That you think an actual goddamned Illuminati exists in any way other than coincidence is disturbing. But hey, when you’re willing to believe one Big Lie, the rest come pretty easy.
Yeah, and how’s that been working out?
Remember: You helped put into office the guy who stacked the Supreme Court in favor of gutting abortion rights across the country for no reason besides religious zealotry. Yes, Democrats should’ve tried harder to codify abortion rights into federal law, but that doesn’t excuse Republicans from stealing a SCOTUS appointment from Barack Obama and stacking the deck in favor of anti-abortion zealots across the country. That wouldn’t have been possible without
DipshitsVoters Like You™.Again: No, it’s not.
oh my god are you still trying to claim that antifa super-soldiers were behind the insurrection oh my god 🤣
Again: You’re not that convincing and I’m not that stupid.
Re: Re: Re:7
And republicans on a regular basis.
His choice. Don’t care
No, just court houses and police stations
I’m proud to help put him in office. Whatever the cost was down the line
Why is it nobody can show evidence of that.
That I live in reality and believe in the right to protest peacefully.
A few dozen entered the building illegally. A few dozen more were allowed entry by police.
Um, defund the police. Which Biden supported before he was against it.
But it’s funny you think Biden is the only democrat. That’s been a rallying cry from Democrats.
I don’t hat him. I hate his pointless career of crap and nonsense. his dementia has made it impossible to actually blame him.
It’s a great comfort to all those who survived.
May want to tell that to the people who screamed about the EC and how she won.
When they remove dead people and ineligibles?
No. I don’t live in Georgia.
Wait, when did NYT and WSJ become conservative?
Obviously you don’t read my comments much then. Such as calling truth censoring scum?
Ok. But I’ll use bytch. Moving on.
I’m still waiting for god to come down here and blow me. I’ll believe when that happens.
I believe I do that just fine. I helped prevent Clinton from taking office.
Yes. That’s how this country works. Absent federal legislation and/or regulation states set their own laws.
You way over estimate.
Trump barely one, despite a near total take of the Republican vote. He needed non-R votes and gatherer them. I you think he’d pull off more than half the independent vote facing a rational candidate… your in a dream land.
I don’t for a second think some dude is floating I. The clouds controlling everything.
…oh, you mean the “stolen election” idea. Interesting premise, since I’ve more than once backed my idea with links that there simply wasn’t enough fraud to turn the election.
Exactly how the constitution set it up.
Those four points fit every BLM rally too. Just because you only support protesters you agree with won’t change my belief that all have the right to protest within the boundaries of the law
My only claim is anyone who broke the law should be punished. All few dozen of them.
You believe what you want. I doubt the dems are stupid enough to run clinton again. Making my choice easy.
Re: Re: Re:8
Funny, I don’t see you doing that here “on a regular basis”. All I see you do is whine about the Homicidal, Genocidal, Omnicidal Death-Dealing Bitch from Literal Hell and how Biden is destroying the country because he isn’t giving in to Republican demands to destroy the country their way.
Funny, I don’t see (and have never seen) Biden condoning such actions. But the GOP—Trump included—never really condemns violence carried out in the name of their pet causes, at least in a way that seems genuine and sincere and is followed up on by a softening of their own language to lower the temperature of political discourse.
We can and have. Your refusal to accept the existence of the concepts of subtext and stochastic terrorism is not our problem.
I can’t imagine why police let a few dozen angry, possibly violent people into a barricaded area where those same police were later attacked for trying to prevent people from entering the Capitol and disrupt the election certification process. Nope, can’t see any reason why that would have happened~.
How hard did he support it—did he say the phrase once or twice, or did he actually promise a major push to defund the police across the nation? Anyone can say they “support” a thing; what they do that matters more than what they say, and I haven’t seen Biden do a goddamn thing to back up his “support” for defunding the police.
I don’t, but hey, keep calling me a fucking moron by implication and see how far that gets you.
But I thought he was an acolyte of Killary Clinton, The Literal Worst Person to Have Ever Lived in the History of Everything Everywhere All At Once. How can you not hate someone you legitimately believe is an agent of Chaos Herself?
Yeah, sure, never mind the effects of Long COVID—knowing they’re not one of the hundreds of thousands of people who died because of Donald Trump’s election-driven unwillingness to address the pandemic until after thousands of people had already died is a huge comfort to those who caught COVID and lived through it~.
There ain’t that many people doing that these days, and those that are can be ignored. Besides, for all the grousing and bitching about the EC in 2016, people didn’t storm the Capitol in January 2017 because of the election results. Your kind—fervent ass-kissing Trump supporters, that is—did that shit in January 2021 because y’all couldn’t stand the idea that Trump lost because y’all are the kind of people who are likely think any and every Democrat victory in an election is obtained through both cheating and defying God’s Divine Plan.
I honestly try not to. And no, I don’t see you in the comments spitting as much venom about Republican censors as you do towards Democrat censors. Maybe if you were willing to denounce the GOP and its censorious bullshit with the same fervor that you use to decry Killary the Super-Devil, I’d take notice. But you aren’t. So I don’t.
Ah, so you’ve chosen the path of the stubborn little bitch who has to find some way of being a special snowflake.
You installed into office a man who brought the U.S. to the brink of fascism. Rationalize it all you want by saying you prevented the ascension of a literal soul-sealing demon from literal Hell; you can’t escape from the fact that you voted for an American fascist twice (and will likely vote for him a third time).
Not for fifty years, it wasn’t. For fifty years, we lived in a country where even if abortion access was more heavily regulated than access to everything the ATF oversees, it was still legal in the states with even the most stringent abortion regulations. Then SCOTUS did a “whoops, sorry, there go your rights to full self-determination” and revoked that access in states with anti-abortion trigger laws. Like I said: They didn’t load the gun, but they knowingly pulled the trigger.
No, I really don’t. Or did you forget that Donald Trump ran for president in 2016 literally because Barack Obama insulted him?
And yet, when anyone presents you with links to well-cited evidence of the atrocities of the Trump administration, you go “not good enough, more evidence plz” as if nothing short of God telling you the Objective Truth will convince you that Donald Trump was one of the worst presidents in U.S. history. Curious. 🤨
I don’t think the Founding Fathers intended for U.S. citizens to need interstate travel for the sake of accessing a viable healthcare procedure—or for access to that healthcare procedure to be restricted unless someone was sexually violated or literally dying on the table. But hey, let’s go ask Clarence “I would be a slave and my marriage would be illegal if I really respected what the Founding Fathers intended” Thomas about that.
BLM rallies never endorsed violent action, even implicitly. Trump has a history of endorsing violence, including at his own rallies. Therein lies the difference. If you can’t see it, that’s your problem—and you can fix it yourself.
I support anyone’s right to protest. Doesn’t mean I can’t mock them for protesting stupid/inane bullshit. Also doesn’t mean I can’t call out violence—including a violent invasion of a citadel of American democracy that intended to disrupt American democracy—when I see it.
Last I checked, several hundred people were charged with crimes related to the insurrection. Do you think a few hundred of them deserve to get off scot-free because they weren’t within some magical boundary that marks a line between legal and illegal acts?
And yet, you shittalked Biden as an acolyte of Killary the Horrible. By your own admission, you voted for Trump the second time specifically because he was an agent of the woman you believe to be the literal Satan. You keep finding excuses to vote for Trump; I’ve no doubt that you’ll come up with another one, regardless of who the Democrat candidate is, should Trump be on the ballot in 2024. Again: You’re not that convincing and I’m not that stupid.
Re: Re: Re:9 Trump has no 24 chance
Not that I expect you to read every comment, but it’s a rather common practice for me.
I’ll skip over the bin-equivalence of condone and condemn
I’ll stick to what’s actually said. Not some imagined “subtext”.
Based on all the footage msnbc refused to run, because those that were let in were non-violent, not overly combative, and completely unarmed?
My hatred is reserved for one person.
Given the early indications, it was not believed to be as problematic at the time. Obama did no better with swine flu. Notice I do complain much on that either despair permanently harming a family member.
But trump supported the vax from day one. Among other drug possibilities prior to the vax being available. It was the democrats who spent months pounding against it.
Apparently the fud from them was just that as the development and release was scientifically sound. Given us having one of the highest survival rates in the world.
In fact despite the reduced testing period the vaccine has less than a fraction of a fraction of a percent point of side effects.
No, they shut up after Biden won. Most trump supporters shut up at this point too.
It’s not my fault nobody pays attention to all the times I do so. Just too hard to accept I may be closer to what I say than they believe?
Yes. Partly genetic. Partly environmental. Stubborn. And occasionally bytchy.
Ok
The wrong decision, one in violation of the constitution, lasting for 50 years doesn’t change it being wrong. Maybe if the Dems had done their job and codified it into law, as so many current rights are…???!!!
I can’t forget what I didn’t know (if it’s true). I didn’t follow the process. Just the vote. Her, or him.
Link. So often to a list that I half agree with and half disagree with.
The majority just showing he’s a jerk.
Dems have had 50 years to codify the right properly. Maybe ask why they didn’t even when they had both houses AND the executive?
Yet, where the quote where Trump called for violence? Time and again I say quote him. Yet you don’t.
As I have constantly done since that day?
Have you once condemned the burning of an occupied court house? The looting. The assaults. The lawlessness that accompanied the fringe of BLM protests as you do the fringe of Jan 6?
If it’s not illegal, it’s not. If it is, it is.
Partly. I was completely clear on that. The other major concern being who would actually be directing the motions of a man suffering from dementia.
Come 24 there’s a good chance the likes of the current elite is powerless enough the party ultimately runs a young, rational candidate. One very likely to appeal to me.
I also don’t see trump being the main party candidate. He’s too divisive. Too uncontrollable. Too unhinged.
The new and now we’ll documented Greenland saga makes that clear.
Re: Re: Re:10
Damn, but you really will go to bat for all those poor, misunderstood Trump fanatics, won’t you?
Re: Re: Re:6
Dude, Trumps still not gonna fuck you.
Re: Re: Re:7
The one upside Lostinlodos has over Chozen is that Lostinlodos at least doesn’t want Trump to fuck his ass…
So if you fail in your crimes, you can never be held to account?
Got it.
Re:
If helps if your supposed ‘victim’ can’t actually present anything of substance regarding your guilt and only seems to care enough to bring legal action years after the fact, but sure, if that’s how you want to read it knock yourself out.
Bad advice
He really needs to dump his legal team.
Everything she did, as distasteful as it may be to some, was legal. Misinformation and propaganda are just part of the process.
Be it fake news or hiding and ignoring real news. It’s just how political campaigns work.
Re:
Everything she did, as distasteful as it may be to some, was legal.
😲 You finally admit it!
Re: Re:
I’ve never claimed otherwise. I said ‘if you look long enough and hard enough, you’ll find something somewhere’.
That goes for anyone in this country though.
Re: Re: Re:
Some people don’t bother hiding the rope that’ll hang them. For example: You admitted that you voted for Donald Trump out of spite—twice.
Re: Re: Re:2
Just once. As for 2020 I believed, and believe, Biden incapable of the position, and thus being a figurehead puppet of those that make the decisions.
I chose to go with a known, who was only partly problematic.
My biggest hopes being finish the wall and stay out of foreign matters.
Re: Re: Re:3
Of course you wanted the wall finished. It represents everything that Donald Trump stands for: xenophobia, racism, and scamming everyone out of as much money as possible for a project that would never be finished and would ultimately fail at what it was supposed to do even if it had been finished.
Congratulations, Lostcause. You supported a hateful con man. Do you feel proud of what you helped accomplish—all the book bans and the abortion bans and the bomb threats to children’s hospitals? Because Trump’s win, which was bolstered by votes from assholes like you who couldn’t put their overblown grievances aside to recognize the obvious goddamn peril Trump presented to the country, made possible the political climate in which book bans, abortion bans, and bomb threats to children’s hospitals are a regular occurence that we all have to learn to live with. It’s like how kids have to learn to deal with school shootings, only with a slightly lower chance of fatal violence breaking out.
Re: Re: Re:4
The wall represents LEGAL vs illegal.
The federal government has failed to address this issue. Absent federal law all remains a state leve issue
HS nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with psychopathic fuck Tard’s
It’s unfortunate more kids don’t get to take their bullied anguish out in video games ala Doom as I did
Re: Re: Re:5
The wall was a sad, pathetic attempt to play towards the most insecure segments of the US population and beggar them of resources they already had limited quantities of. The Trump administration had four years to get that shit going. It was the meme that catapulted their party into prominence, and just like the imprisonment of Hilary they couldn’t even pull that off. You can scream and moan about what the wall was supposed to represent, but so long as it didn’t come to fruition, we have every right to mock it for the failure that it is. If your feelings get hurt as a result of Trump’s reputation getting besmirched, I offer you Trump’s own brand of wisdom: Fuck your feelings.
You can keep trying to distance yourself from the worst of who Trump’s rhetoric enabled, Lodos. It won’t work.
The same videogames that the Republicans are actively trying to undermine and destroy? You really do know how to back a winning team don’t you chucklenut?
Re: Re: Re:6
The wall would have been completed in his first term if the dems didn’t find every tiny reason to hold up construction.
Trump didn’t say attack the capital building. Anyone who broke the law should be punished.
The same games both parties try to condemn.
Re: Re: Re:7
While the Republicans were in charge to make sure things did go through? See, this is why you’re a predictable little partisan simp. Every time you insist you’re not carrying the water of Republicans you find a way to bend over backwards to soothe their ruffled feathers.
No, he certainly didn’t. Just held so much sway over a non-insignificant bunch of idiots to the point where they were desperately hoping that he’d bail them out of trouble, the same way he did for his toadies while on the way out.
It’s likely, however, that his nigh-tacit approval by refusing to acknowledge the level of violence and heed the warnings of his advisors caused far more disruption and damage that was actually necessary. As to whether he broke the law, that’s what the investigations will be for, including a juicy collection of correspondence from your boi Alex Jones.
Not nearly in the same percentages.
Re: Re: Re:8
It’s almost as if Lodos believes Democrats are the ones in charge of everything even when they don’t have power and things just happen to Republicans even when they have the power. Imagine that, a perfect excuse for why Trump didn’t save the country and bring about world peace~.
Re: Re: Re:9
I understand majority beyond in charge. I also understand politics enough to know how filing complaints locally slows things down. Such as the EPA. It took years to build I355 well over a canal marsh because a few people complained to the EPA.
Until 2016 the wall wasn’t partisan. I supported it when Bill clinton spoke of it. Bush II, who got sidetracked with 911 and his holy crusade. Obama as well.
In fact, go back to an earlier discussion here you’ll find I don’t even like trump’s wall plan. How disruptive it would be to wildlife. Endangered wildlife such as the spotted sand crawler, the northern jaguar, and the southern dark puma subspecies.
But any wall was better than no wall and it could be ‘fixed’ later.
Re: Re: Re:10
And yet, you supported it. Curious. 🤨
Re: Re: Re:11
Re: Re: Re:12
Yeah, and how well has the wall we do have been workin’ out?
It’s almost as if The Wall isn’t the solution to immigration issues, but you’re too much of a fucking coward to admit that because all the other ways of fixing those issues involve getting the U.S. out of foreign countries that it’s heavily invested time and energy into fucking up as well as treating undocumented immigrants like people instead of using them as
“products” in state government–sanctioned human trafficking operationsprops for partisan political stunts driven by pettiness, racism, and xenophobia. Imagine that.Re: Re: Re:13
That would be a great thing. We have zero business being involved in other country’s affairs.
As for immigration, the best solution is more courts to deal with the requests.
There’d also be many less trying to get in if we stopped propping up dictatorships. 80 years of dictators to fight atheism, er, communism.
Re: Re: Re:14
And yet, you still think the better solution is The Wall. Is that because The Wall is a tangible symbol of how much Americans should hate people from other countries—to the point of calling them “invaders”?
Re: Re: Re:15
A border fence or wall is a method of security used across the world.
The vast majority of this country is immigrants.
We should shore up and accelerate legal immigration.
However if your fast act of entering the country is a crime, you should be deported, and without the ability to return.
I have never called them invaders. I’ve used correct and accurate terms such as trespassers, criminals, illegal aliens, but I’ve never called them invaders.
Re: Re: Re:16
The guy you twice voted for in part because he wanted to finish The Wall sure as hell did. Does it hurt to keep self-owning yourself like that, or did you learn how to stop feeling shame from a class at Trump University?
Re: Re: Re:7
The wall would have been completed in his first term if the dems didn’t find every tiny reason to hold up construction
Oh?
It had nothing to do with the republicans who controlled both houses of congress not appropriating any funds for it? So much so that trump diverted funds from military projects to try and jumpstart it, subverting the will of congress? Of course, that was after Mexico told him to go fuck his mother when he asked them to pony up some support.
Such ineptitude amazes me. Imagine not being able to execute any of your party’s platform despite controlling the presidency and both houses of congress.
But yeah, tell me more about how much better a choice that was.
Re: Re: Re:8
Lostinlodos is a student of the school of Republican explanation: blame the Democrats, LGBT+ community, immigrants, etc for everything, even in the face of verifiable information. Of course, that’s not to say he’s good at it…
Re: Re: Re:5
HS? Maybe stop frothing at the mouth, go outside and touch grass, before you make more typos in a feverish rage because your boy Trump got mildly insulted.
Maybe what you should have done is not play videogames, but get arrested and handcuffed when you were bullied as a sacrificial lamb for the school. After all, it’s what you supported.
Re: Re: Re:6
Trump is an egotistical self righteous king.
But he wasn’t Clinton.
Re: Re: Re:7
You chumps had four years to scream “BUT HER EMAILS” and bring her to justice.
You failed.
Re: Re: Re:8
Her email server wasn’t illegal under the law. That doesn’t make it smart.
Re: Re: Re:9
No, it doesn’t. Neither was screaming about it for four years like it was something worth a damn. If it was something worth a damn, you would have nailed her to the wall for it.
Idiocy isn’t illegal, and your team is incredibly lucky that this is the case.
Re: Re: Re:10
Worth a damn? It’s a prime example of self righteous stupidity.
And they did nail her to the wall for it. Every investigating party officially condemned or denounced her actions.
Then they changed the law. So no other turds could repeat her utter stupidity and not be held accountable.
Re: Re: Re:7
And you voted for that king twice. I expect you to vote for him a third time, too, because you’ll find some way of calling the next Democratic POTUS candidate “a Killary acolyte who was born from a neighboring firepit in the seventh circle of Hell”. Congratulations, you voted for conservative Christian theocracy just to settle a personal grievance against someone you don’t even know on a personal level and doesn’t even care you exist.
Yeah—he was worse than she ever would’ve been. I mean, unless you think Hillary would’ve done at least half of the atrocities Trump did while in office.
Re: Re: Re:5 Me neither
Remember when Mexico paid for that shitty wall that’s already falling down?
Re: Re: Re:6
Only idiots took that to mean cash pay.
Re: Re: Re:7
Then pray tell, if it wasn’t going to be in cash, what did you think it was going to be given your insider Republican knowledge? Resources? Reputation? Fucks to give? Because Mexico gave you none of that.
Again: your team failed to deliver. You can either live with that failure or be mercilessly mocked for backing a feckless loser you claim to hate but verbally masturbate to at every single opportunity.
Re: Re: Re:8
Stopping illegal immigration would greatly reduce the expense of resources in their trespassing here.
Such as healthcare costs not paid by them, ICE reductions in operations, jobs going to legal workers.
There’s a long list of reduced expenses.
Re: Re: Re:9
Why do you think people/companies hire undocumented immigrants as workers, son? (Hint: It ain’t so they can make full-pay jobs look enticing.)
Re: Re: Re:10
Because they work for less and don’t require employer taxes
Re: Re: Re:11
And you think building a wall would have prevented the overreliance on outsourced, cheaper, foreign labor? This is a problem in most developed economies. Where I am you’ve got degree-holders from India and Bangladesh building our infrastructure, and there’s been absolutely none of the bogeyman scenarios painted by illegal immigration painted by the US.
It matters little – you might claim that only “idiots” would believe that Trump meant that Mexico would pay cash, but that was precisely what made the claim attractive to much of his base. Then again, pandering to idiots seems to be your thing.
Re: Re: Re:9
I’d like it if the CIA funding was dialed the fuck back too.
I’d also like it if the USA stopped doing whatever it takes to secure themselves as the sole superpower too. It’d at least invalidate the ethical arguments China, India and all the other non-American, non-European powers are using to “justify” using entirely American methods.
But…
Sending money and aid to build up countries isn’t profitable in the long run amd is likely to be forgotten or misappropriated, while blackmail, CIA nonsense, “realpolitik” and all that other bullshit makes for a war economy.
There’s also things like streamlining legal immigration, for one. Oh, and STOPPING WARS. IN PARTICULAR, THE WAR ON DRUGS THAT FUCKED OVER A TON OF LATIN AMERICA. That made for a ton of immigrants.
Re: Re: Re:10
We fully agree. But move out from the CIA to cover all the alphabet.
Again, I think we are way over involved in foreign issues.
Re: Re: Re:
Four years wasn’t enough for your team to find something, somewhere?
Re: Re: Re:2
Wasn’t my team. “My” team would pour over local records finding civil violations to run in adverts.
“My” Team would run non-stop ads on her history of censorship
“My” Team would do everything post to show how big of a traitor and utter failure to the American public she has been
“My” Team would have worked harder to put sanders on the ballot and not that self righteous bytch, sanders who would have defeated trump.
Re: Re: Re:3
Saying that you would do everything, even stooping below the lengths Trump went to, is not the winning defense you think it is. In fact the degree of your obsession, to the point where you’d even highlight traffic violations as unforgivable crimes, makes me relieved that a madman like you will never rise to power.
Re: Re: Re:4
He doesn’t have to rise to power. He just has to vote for someone who thinks like him that has a chance of rising to power.
Why do you think he voted for Trump twice? I mean, other than the racism and the xenophobia and the sexism and the classism and the decades of conservative grievance propaganda that convinced him to believe Hillary Clinton is an actual subhuman demon borne from an actual pit of fire in actual Hell, that is.
Re: Re: Re:5
Clinton started her career as a censoring piece of short. End of my concer
Re: Re: Re:6
Keep looking for those parking tickets, you special snowflake. Be the hero the Republicans deserve! Which is to say you’re going to uncover jack shit and fuck all, just like they did during their four years of joyriding the country into the ground.
Re: Re: Re:6
And yet, despite all of her ‘shortcomings’ she’s not the one under multiple investigations, despite months of simple-minded rubes gathering together to compare how many teeth they had left while chanting ‘lock her up!’
Either you folks with a hard on for putting her in jail are impotent little people who have been outsmarted by a pantsuit wearing woman for the last 30 years, or she didn’t do anything.
Which is it?
Re: Re: Re:7
Can’t it be both? 😁
Re: Re: Re:7
Hilary could not even sell uranium to the Russians without a fuckton of people poring through the documents, the uranium and the receipts.
And that was on a deal that was APPROVED.
Hilary’s deeply unlikable, yes. But she’d be, at best, dronestriking people and fomenting wars, aka the shit ALL THE FUCKING PRESIDENTS DO. Her policies are effectively the Democrat position. I think.
Trump managed to fucking drag down the US while simultaneously aiding China, Russia and fascism, either through his greed, his petty hate or his sheer incompetence. Sometimes all 3.
Re: Re: Re:8
Which, again, really goes to underscore how absolutely dogshit Lodos’ arguments are. He genuinely thinks that maybe one or two grievances about Hilary was enough to justify throwing his lot behind a madman who had no business being in politics, only starting to vaguely criticize them (read: distance himself from undeniable evidence) when it became inconvenient to continue sitting next to them. He actually thinks “Buh Hilary would maybe probably kinda sorta have been worse than Trump” is a legitimate bedrock rebuttal.
Re: Re: Re:6
“End of my concer”
Oh you finally ran out of bullshit to spew to justify trying to suck off Trump.
Re: Re: Re:7
I don’t care who it is, if they oppose her.
Re: Re: Re:8
We get it, Hilary kicked you in the nads, pissed in your oatmeal and slept with your mom after calling you a white cuck soy boy, and she’s haunted your nightmares ever since. In exchange you supported an egotistical fucknugget who had no business holding presidential power and ran the country into the ground for shits and giggles. Some revenge, mate.
Re: Re: Re:9
Seeing that the only president in recent history to run the country into the ground is Biden, your not helping your case.
Re: Re: Re:10
“I’m not a Republican, I just suck their cock every time they ask me to after meanie poopoo pants leftists insult their feelings!” whimpered Lostinlodos.
Gads, but you’re predictable.
Re: Re: Re:11
As always, point to something other than national security and armament rights where I agree with them. We won’t hold our breath.
Re: Re: Re:12
Well, you did say in a different comment that you don’t believe in freedom of religion, and I’m pretty sure Trump and his GOP allies would absolutely agree with you on that…in the sense that they don’t think anyone should be part of any other religion besides Christianity. (Remember: You voted for someone who has emboldened Christian nationalism to the point where lawmakers and candidates are actively identifying as Christian nationalists, and all so you could get your precious invader-stopping Wall of Hate.)
Re: Re: Re:13
And yet, my religious views are and remain the exact opposite of republicans.
Re: Re: Re:14
Irrelevant. Your voting for Trump helped embolden the kind of Christian nationalism that would have me branded a heretic and a traitor to the country for being an atheist.
Re: Re: Re:15
Unintended consequences.
Mind you they’ll hang me befor you, I’m a card carrier
Re: Re: Re:16
And yet, you see nothing wrong with twice voting for the guy willing to let that happen.
That says a lot about you—and frankly, I’m not even sure you realize exactly what that says about you, other than “I’m a massive fucking hypocrite”.
Re: Re: Re:17
Trump had no history of being a practicing conservative christian before going into office.
I have not seen any executive action in his two terms that damage my safety in any way.
Re: Re: Re:18
Bit of wishful thinking there, huh? Guess you weren’t as opposed to the insurrection as you’d like us to believe.
Re: Re: Re:19
A few dozen nutters a thousand miles away? Who ignored the president’s call for peaceful protest? No, not concerned. The actual lawlessness was quickly stopped. I have no problem with every one of them being tried.
I do wonder if any of this would have occurred at all if they had the national guard on hand, as Trump requested.
But the actions of others are their own.
So once again, I’ve not read any executive action by trump that was a direct concern to me. I don’t deny it may exist, I haven’t read every one. But I’ve yet to see it.
Re: Re: Re:20
I Don’t Know How To Explain To You That You Should Care About Other People
Re: Re: Re:13 Wall?
Was it a wall of hate when Obama and bill clinton promised to build it?
Re: Re: Re:14
No, because they didn’t refer to Mexicans as rapists and thieves as part of their political campaigns. Trump did that shit—you can watch him say it on YouTube if you think I’m lying—and his whole pretense for wanting to build/finish The Wall was xenophobia and racism.
Re: Re: Re:15
So it’s the reason it gets done that you care about. Got it.
Re: Re: Re:16
That’s part of it, yes. Other presidents at least paid lip service to the idea of national security and terrorism without sounding like a white supremacist. Trump flat-out admitted to racist motivations in addition to those other reasons—and he did it in the opening remarks of his campaign, no less.
Re: Re: Re:10
If Biden is running the country off a cliff—and “if” does a lot of carrying there—he’s only doing so because Donald Trump and the GOP turned the train in that direction.
You really do refuse to acknowledge how much damage Trump and the GOP did to this country, huh? I mean, I knew you were the kind of person who thinks Trump is a flawless godking whose only possible faults were caused by Democrats, but this is something of a new low even for you.
I mean, it wasn’t Biden who stacked the deck against abortion rights/bodily autonomy (as well as the rights of queer people) in SCOTUS with a stolen SCOTUS seat. It wasn’t Biden who handed out a sweet tax deal to corporations that working class people don’t get to enjoy. It wasn’t Biden who dragged his feet on the initial COVID-19 response that led to more than 400,000 people dying of the disease in the span of year. It wasn’t Biden who said there were “very fine people on both sides” of a protest-turned-riot where one side was heavily populated by out-of-state white nationalist agitators. It wasn’t Biden who had protesters teargassed outside of a church for the sake of a photo-op with an upside-down Bible. It wasn’t Biden who lost his shit at The 1619 Project and started trying to literally whitewash American history. It wasn’t Biden who told his supporters that he’d love to be able to beat up people who protested his rallies. It wasn’t Biden who encouraged his supporters, his allies, and his presidential staff to indulge in their worst (and possibly criminal) impulses. It wasn’t Biden who refused to be bipartisan and work with the other party to reach compromises and stop partisan gridlock.
All of that was Trump and the GOP. But I suppose you’re going to tell me that they’re just victims of circumstance—that they’re not responsible for governing the country when they’re in charge, and anything that happens to the country while they’re in charge is completely out of their control even (and especially) when it isn’t. Go ahead, tell me they’re crybullies; at least you’d be honest about your feelings for the GOP for once.
Re: Re: Re:11
Simply put, I just don’t see it.
You immediately go to abortion, but I’m a constitutionalist. A strong supporter of states’ rights.
A court can not make law, only judge the law as it stands. RvW was a bench law. And thus unconstitutional use of power.
Abortion rights, trans rights, must be codified in federal law.
Just like race and voting and women’s rights were.
No, and I disagree with both parties, and you.
Tax breaks for corporations hurts the population. But I also completely agree with income caps and taxing individuals more.
Especially since the Dem method would decimate the financial standing of much of middle-class America with the bizarre attempt to tax money that is non-exchangeable. Eg stocks.
I disagree with your belief in numbers without context re covid.
We were one of the best response by population outcomes in the world. A large chunk of those deaths occurred in Democrat controlled cities. Showing it wasn’t purely Republican failure.
There were lawful protesters on both sides. You may disagree with their stance, but that doesn’t make them any less of a person.
We have a different view on how to handle historical reality.
For one thing: having a good cause doesn’t absolve you from criminal activity. And while many who support civil war monuments are or represent racist ideology, it wasn’t the whole. As much as you want to focus on one of the primary issues alone, it was neither the only issue, nor the only major one.
Nor was it trump. That was done outside his chain of command. The idea has been debunked by many left-leaning sources as well.
Is so factually flawed as to be a direct threat to historical education.
The rest: Trump is a bull-headed self aggrandising mega-turd.
A bully with or without power. I hate much of his personality.
Trump made many bad choices and it’s clear today that he would have been far worse without his cabinet keeping things realistic and on track.
But you should keep in mind, enough independent voters cast for him to win. There’s a deep independent hatred for Clinton for many reasons. Some legit, some less so.
But, would trump have been elected if the Dems didn’t rig the system against sanders?
We’ll never know. But I find it doubtful.
Re: Re: Re:12
I bet you have some kind of Confederate flag in your possession.
And if they’re not, well, fuck pregnant and trans people, huh?
It would be nice to have those rights codified into law, sure. But until they are, Supreme Court rulings that say “you can’t stop people from getting abortions” and “trans people have the same civil rights as everyone else” will work just as well.
(Yes, Dems should be working to codify abortion rights into federal law. That doesn’t get the majority of SCOTUS off the hook for undoing fifty years of precedent for the sake of pleasing their magic sky daddy and his zombie son.)
And yet, you (twice!) voted for someone who gave massive tax breaks to corporations.
What, and the Republican method of “fuck everyone but corporations and the obscenely wealthy” is better?
And nearly a half-million people still died under the watch of Donald Trump. Hundreds of thousands of lives could likely have been saved if Trump had cared less about his poll numbers and more about people who weren’t him and his family. Even his own fucking wife told him he was fucking things up on the COVID response.
Gee, it’s almost as if non-sentient viral diseases don’t give a rat’s ass about a person’s political affiliation and a large number of major cities in the United States lean liberal/Democrat. Imagine that~.
On one side: A shitload of racists and white nationalists. On the other side: A shitload of people who weren‘t. “Lawful” doesn’t mean “morally righteous”, and you should stop thinking that. After all, slavery was once legal. Hell, people fought a war to keep it legal—modern supporters of the Confederacy call it a “states’ rights” issue these days.
But they still defended monuments to the Confederacy. You can’t defend those without defending what the Confederacy stood for—and by the words of the Founding Fathers of the Confederacy themselves, the Confederacy stood for condoning, defending, and keeping intact the racist practice of chattel slavery.
Not every person marching on the side of the racists and white nationalists that day was a racist/white nationalist. But there’s a saying about a Nazi and ten people all sitting at a table that applies to the situation.
He also never formally denounced the teargassing (he initially called the first reports of the teargassing “fake news”). Even if he didn’t order it directly, he sure as hell didn’t disapprove of it.
If it’s so flawed and not to be taken seriously by educators and historians, for what reason are Republicans going out of their way to give it any semblance of credibility by trying to outright ban its usage in any educational institution?
And you voted for him twice.
And you voted for him twice.
Probably. You underestimate hatred and the anger of right-wing grievance—a rocket propellant as volatile as it is potent, and frighteningly self-sustaining.
You should know: It’s what fueled you to vote for Donald Trump twice.
Re: Re: Re:13
No, but I refuse to single-issue the war either. Like how you simply blow off the illegal raid of a state munitions depot.
Well, 50-some years and the Dems didn’t think to do a damn thing? You think they care beyond talking points? Don’t be naive!
Very few of our rights are not in words on paper.
Not a wise decision on his part to sign breaks.
Not better, a different type of bad. The difference, though, is the Republicans just keep finding ways to help the wealthy get wealthier.
The dems are looking at taking real taxes from non-tradable insecure value.
Taxing fluctuating value in stocks is going to hit any American with a bank account to some degree.
But much of this country has investments. They will hit a family at $50,000 per year by going after their stocks. That doesn’t help. It creates more people in need.
Both parties are shite on finances.
But only one actively try’s to hurt the middle and lower class.
Again, the sooner the old rich fucks in the party get dumped the sooner the party can actually fix things.
I see you read the times review of the new book. Looks to be an interesting read despite the clear bias of the authors.
Without a vaccine, I’m not sure what more he could of done legally.
He tried to shut down inbound travel from China but was opposed.
Maybe more strength on social distancing.
But the reality is the majority of deaths took place under democrat policy. Trump may have been able to have been better but he’s not alone in fault.
No, it means lawful.
As for the civil war, … do you know what percentage of the population owned slaves? It’s a fallacy to say it was a war about slavery! Keep in mind Lee was offered, and considered, General of the Army by Lincoln. An offer he turned down because of the act, that may well have been treason, of violating state sovereignty by military force and occupation.
No, the civil war was purely a constitutional war. Self governance. Slavery was one (albeit large) part of that.
Education should be factual?
Refer to official vote counts. Trump didn’t win on republican votes. There weren’t enough. He won by the independent vote combined.
Clinton was that bad a choice for many, such as (true) socialists, libertarians, greens, etc.
the same groups that would have stood behind Sanders, myself included.
Her globalist, pro-intervention, corporate placating, media censoring, … policies were far too much for the left leaning independent vote
Re: Re: Re:14
Dude, the Confederacy’s primary reason for existing—according to the men who willed it into existence!—was to preserve the enslavement of Black people. Every other possible cause that might have led to the Civil War is either connected to or can take a backseat to the cause of preserving slavery.
Says a lot that you don’t think Republicans should’ve done something.
You say that as if he was trying to avoid signing tax breaks for corporations.
If a family of three or four only brings in 50k a year in income, I don’t think they’re doing the kind of investing that would make them penniless come tax season.
He could’ve asked his Republican friends to actually enforce lockdowns and mask mandates until such time as infection numbers dropped to safe levels. He could’ve encouraged citizens to voluntarily wear masks and respect social distancing at a far earlier point than he did. He could’ve let scientists speak for themselves instead of trying to denounce them (and science in general) because they weren’t saying what he wanted them to say.
He could’ve done a lot of things to help mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in the early part of 2020. But he didn’t do anything of value or efficacy because he thought acknowledging the pandemic being in the U.S. would hurt his polling numbers. Remember: You voted for a man who cared more about his image than hundreds of people dying in hospitals every day. My hands are clean in that regard.
Did he try to shut down inbound travel from other countries that were becoming hotspots for COVID, too? Because I don’t recall him doing anything but trying to stick it to China.
You’re factually correct, but that ignores how Republican policy—Trump policy, to be specific—helped the pandemic grow from something controllable to something uncontainable. Nearly a half-million people died of COVID-19 during Donald Trump’s presidency because several million people believed the disease was a hoax or “just the flu” and didn’t mask, social distance, or even get the vaccine when it was available. Trump never forcefully encouraged people to take actions that would’ve mitigated the spread of the disease; if anything, he made people more likely to not do those things by whining about masks and social distancing.
For once, being technically correct is not the best kind of correct. Context is a bitch, son, and she’s in heat.
Again: The Founding Fathers of the Confederacy would likely disagree with you.
That’s sort of my whole point: For what reason would anyone try to lend the book any sort of credibility by implying that the facts of the book should be banned from being taught to anyone if the book is already factually flawed to the point of being useless as a teaching aid?
And if you think “independents” are on the middle about every last little thing up until it’s time to mark the ballot, you’re fooling yourself. Like I said: Hate and the anger of right-wing/conservative grievances is the fuel that propelled Trump to victory in 2016. The only reason he lost in 2020 was because hatred of Donald Trump had become a more volatile force.
And you still refuse to see the error of your ways: For all the reasons Clinton would’ve been a shitty president, odds are good that she still would’ve been better than Donald Trump. Hell, I’m pretty sure she would’ve cared far more about the pandemic than Trump ever did.
But sure, keep grousing about the Queen Bitch of Hell and her demonic acolytes doing everything they can to bring about the wrath of your personal godking. I’m sure you’ll be saying the same things about whoever runs against Trump in 2024. You haven’t led me to believe otherwise because you’re not that convincing and I’m not that stupid.
Re: Re: Re:10
Bill Clinton: Repealed Glass-Stegall. I will admit he’s done more to arrest the decline than the rest on this list.
GWB Jr: Started two fucking wars, the 2008 subprime bullshit, and I’m sure there’s more. Also made religion front and center in recent history.
Obama: Weak domestic policies. Managed to unfuck the economy. Came to realize too late that the Republicans weren’t playing ball.
Trump: No need to say more.
Biden: Dealing with the fallout from… quite literally the Cold War onwards.
Biden can’t run America into the ground more than Trump has. And mind you, Bill Clinton started the fall by repealing Glass-Stegall.
Re: Re: Re:11
Calling Afghanistan as Bush’s doing is a bit disingenuous. They attacked us first.
Wtf Iraq had to do with it…???!!!
The Obama story saddens me. I worked as a volunteer for both campaigns. And truly supported him.
But he got hamstrung by not just republicans, but elitist Dems well. He pushed for reasonable tax policy against corporations. But the Dems elites had different plans.
His push for reasonable green policy was fought by reps wanting less and dems wanting more.
Eventually he found his second term falling into just another table Dem. And he’s stayed at that table since.
Re: Re: Re:12
And then the U.S. military spent twenty years occupying the country under the pretense of protecting it from terrorism. You see how well that ultimately worked out. And yes, it is Bush’s doing because he’s the one who sent U.S. soldiers into Afghanistan and kept them there through the rest of his presidency.
For starters, it was a war nobody but Republican war hawks wanted that was built on a pretense that evaporated under even the smallest amount of investigation. Consider how that war, like the Afghanistan occupation, did nothing to improve U.S./Middle East relations, and I bet even you could figure out where to go from there.
But mostly by Republicans, who used the passage of the ACA (and capitalized on the kind of racist grievances that ultimately led to Trump’s presidency) to gain enough power that Obama and the Dems couldn’t govern through anything but executive order. For all that “elitist Dems” might’ve done to fuck over Obama, Republicans and their “we don’t care who we hurt so long as we always win and never compromise” mentality—a mentality that also led to Trump’s presidency as well as the insurrection—did him far, far, far dirtier.
Gee, it’s almost as if Democrats recognize the legitimate threat of global climate change instead of denying that it even exists and the Democratic Party is the only political party willing to at least try governing for the good of all people instead of merely governing for the good of only their campaign donors(’ bank accounts). Imagine that~.
Re: Re: Re:4
Unfortunately for you most politicians have some crazed ideas too. And personal vendettas. You try to tarnish me, but people like me are the non-party voters. Those most likely to give you the actual socialist ideas so many dems want.
Because I support free healthcare, free public education, social financial base, for every American citizen.
A slow, methodical shift away from oil energy.
Most people in politics who believe such things have some ideas that are a bit personal.
Like not believing we should supply anything to people who break the law day one.
Or the fact that I don’t support freedom of religion. I’m totally against public display in government. I’d ban all religious materials from public institutions.
But you keep your partisan thoughts nice and close. It’s the reason nothing ever changes in this country. There’s no compromise unless it’s extreme.
Re: Re: Re:5
And yet, you voted for Donald Trump, whose victory emboldened people who believe in the exact opposite of what you support to run for office during and after his presidency. Hell, it’s not like Trump and the pre-Trump GOP were in favor of those things, either. But hey, I guess that’s a small price to pay for getting The Wall and stopping all those rapists and thugs that Mexico is sending to the U.S., huh~.
Re: Re: Re:6
The price was paid to not have Clinton.
Getting the wall started was a bonus.
Re: Re: Re:7
Those two sentences say more about you than you’ll ever know.
And none of it is good.
Re: Re: Re:5
Oh, and one more thing:
…okay, more like three more things.
Re: Re: Re:6
You’re on the extreme on purpose here. So I’ll choose my words more carefully
Freedom of religion must include freedom from religion.
And you know exactly where I stand.
Start with taxing: Religious groups take in billions every year. They “give” out a few million, if that. You complain about Musk and Bezos and the like, wealthy people. And ignore the single largest money sink in the country!
They get building code waivers. They get tax waivers. They get existence waivers.
There’s a separation between public and private that has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with private rights.
Your own novel is quite fine as long as you keep it to yourself.
But your idea of ‘religious studies’ is the very slope you will die on. When you call it religion, vs belief or myth, and approach it as a a science rather than philosophy; that’s where we wind up with intelligent design.
you be-line to education. If killing public studies is the side effect of removing the 10 commandments from courthouses and cloud people from currency so be it.
Obama was a christian. You going to attack me for that?
You voted for Biden, a Catholic.
So a ‘you voted’ is a bit empty here.
Re: Re: Re:7
Your words: I don’t support freedom of religion. Choose your words far more carefully if you want to be understood.
Freedom of religion must also include the freedom to worship without the law (and the agents of its enforcement) telling you to shut up, sit down, and believe in nothing. For all the issues I have with organized religion, trying to outlaw, ban, or otherwise legally hamstring religion in the name of secular government is no better than trying to turn the government into a theocracy.
I don’t, actually. Religious rich folk aren’t any better than billionaires like Musk and Bezos—if anything, they’re worse because they use religion and the cloak of God to gain their wealth. That kind of exploitation is horrific, even if—like the exploitation we associate with people like Musk and Bezos—it’s all perfectly legal.
As far as taxing churches goes: If churches want to act like for-profit institutions instead of non-profits (e.g., they want to endorse specific political candidates), they should absolutely be taxed. Otherwise, they should be as free from government interference as possible.
Would’ve been nice for you to have said that instead of “I don’t support freedom of religion”.
Except it isn’t, because plenty of colleges and universities offer classes on religious studies that, y’know, study religions (note the plural). I’m not talking about religious indoctrination—I’m talking about studying religion/religious systems from a historical, philosophical, and sociological standpoint. I fail to see any problems with that, but I’m sure you’ll come up with something to whine and bitch about. 🙄
I don’t endorse intelligent design (or any similar religion-injected pseudo-scientific bullshit) and I still believe people can study religion/religious systems in the contexts of history, philosophy, and sociology. Prove me wrong, fucker.
Amazing. You like to claim you’re against censorship, yet by your own admission you would literally ban studies of religion/religious systems from all forms of public education out of your own hatred for organized religion. Dude, I’m an atheist who has issues with organized religion and shit, and even I’m not as far gone as you. That should tell you something…if you’re willing to listen, anyway.
I didn’t vote for presidential candidates who, either of their own accord or due to the wishes of their allies, expressed desires to turn this country into a fascist theocracy. You voted for Trump twice. Miss me with the attempt to shame me because I’m an atheist who voted for avowed Christians; you’re not that good at shaming people and I’m not stupid enough to fall for it.
Re: Re: Re:8
Don’t worry. We’re working on that. Any organization who doesn’t believe that femboys are life must be razed to the ground, then salted so nothing can ever grow from it ever again. We have lost too much to these bastions of hate.
Re: Re: Re:3
Principal Skinner “no it’s the kids who are wrong” intensifies
I haven’t yet seen a Trumpalo who didn’t lie about the Steele Dossier.