Can Donald Trump be Tried as a Terrorist?

Jump to Last Post 1-13 of 13 discussions (293 posts)
  1. My Esoteric profile image86
    My Esotericposted 13 months ago

    Personally, I think he can.

    The definition of a terrorist is "a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.".  Clearly, the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers and al Qaeda and the Taliban fit that definition.  But does Trump? 

    You might say that Trump has never personally physically harmed anybody to further his political agenda, but neither did (as far as I know) Osama bin Laden.  Yet everybody thinks bin Laden is a terrorist.  Why?  Because he led and directed those that did.

    How is Trump any different than bin Laden in that regard?  Consider:

    1.  He used violent rhetoric throughout his candidacy and presidency to stir up supporter to violence - often successfully as many who were on the receiving end of his supporters assaults have testified (including the Capitol Police)

    2.  He created the Big Lie about not losing the election for his followers to rally around

    3.  He frequently suggested that TAKE ACTION which resulted in assaults on several government agencies that culminated in the January 6 insurrection against America

    4.  In a call to arms, he gathered them in one place with the sole intent of marching on the Capitol.

    5.  He exhorted them to march on the Capitol and STOP Congress from doing its Constitutional duty

    6.  When they did what he wanted, he did nothing to stop the violence he instigated until he knew it was way too late.

    7.  In his rhetoric and actions, he provided material support to known domestic terrorist organizations such as the Proud Boys and Qanon.


    So I ask you - How Can Trump Not Be Considered a Terrorist Leader?

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Probably by recognizing that your points 1 through 7 are all false, with nothing but exaggeration and spin behind any of them.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        You know as well as I do, everyone of them is true and can be proven (and hopefully will be by DOJ)

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          For sure.  In his "call to arms" (that he never made) he  incited an insurrection...by people with no intel (they didn't even know the floorplan and no idea where their supposed victims were), had no equipment (barely managed to break through glass doors) and roamed the building taking selfies of themselves hanging from wall ornaments and sitting in the chair of the rich and powerful.  A real serious attempt to take over the government, right?

          So...no call to arms, no actual insurrection, no encouragement.  Just another ordinary riot as we saw for months in liberal cities all over the country.  The only difference in this one was that it scared the lawmakers by happening on their turf rather than that of a 60 year old woman operating her tiny store in Portland, Seattle or some other left wing city.

    2. Castlepaloma profile image74
      Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Same old crap for centuries , just worst with Biden.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        How so?  You think Joe Biden is more of a criminal than Trump, lol?  Based on what?

        1. Castlepaloma profile image74
          Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          US in general has the worst war and criminals rap sheet anyways. Politicians are a waste of time and energy.


          Trump tried to slow down the monetary currency collapse and the covid

          BIDEN COVID 19!!!and his spending more than wars combined.
          Crime has skyrocketing too. Many store chains are closing because theft is causing too great of lost to stay open.

          By the end of 2020, Chicago police reported more than 750 murders, a jump of more than 50% compared with 2019. By mid-December, Los Angeles saw a 30% increase over the previous year with 322 homicides. There were 437 homicides in New York City by Dec. 20, nearly 40% more than the previous. This is the stuff that always made headlines. Now covid is blamed for gang shooting drive.
          More human and constitutional rights violations broken I've ever seen in my lifetime. Violence riots I've not seen since the 60s and 70s. Leftism nationism and wokeness unforgiving. Don't get started on vaccines.

          The story continues...

    3. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

      My --- you need to move on.  Nothing you have listed is factual.

      I suggest you don't hold your breath waiting for Trump to be arrested for anything.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Actually, EVERYTHING I said was factual.  And no true patriot can move on when somebody is threatening American democracy like Trump is.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Yes, I understand ...  You are so right ah-ha .

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

            I am glad you finally have joined the real world and agree.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image74
              Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

              Lol

    4. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Two latest developments:
      1.  Lt. Gen Mike Flynn (Ret) said yesterday that a Myanmar-style military coup should happen ​in America.
      2. Trump says he will be reinstated as president by August (Two latest developments: (https://www.rawstory.com/trump-reinstated-president/)

      Regarding Flynn's calling for a coup, it happened this way at a QAnon event where he was speaking.  A Marine in the audience asked him [i]"I want to know why what happened in Minamar (sic) can't happen here?"[/] To this, Flynn replied "No reason, I mean, it should happen here. No reason. That's right,"  Now THAT is pretty clear, isn't it?

      As a side note, I learned today that retired military are still subject to the UCMJ - which means Lt. Gen. Flynn can still be courts-marshalled!!!  Already a congresswoman and a former White House ethics lawyer is calling for just that.

      As to Trump, since he is still pushing the Big Lie and agitating for his storm troopers to come to his aide again and now with Flynn calling for a military coup, I can see why Trump thinks he will be reinstated.

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        OMG, Eso - "rawstory" is what you use to get your dirt on Trump?  I begin to understand your rants and false claims a lot better!

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          Hey, you use conservative Fake News.  At least Raw Story presents real facts.

    5. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      It turns out Trump's Chief of Staff, presumably at the micromanager's behest, pressured what is supposed to be in an honest world an independent DOJ to investigate the baseless conspiracy theories that is now known as the RINO BIG LIE about the election results.  Well, DOJ did investigate and they found the Big Lie was just that, a Big Lie - Trump lost fair and square.

      But then facts do not have a place in RINO world and they and Trump push on destroying our way of life in America.  It absolutely amazes me how many so-called Americans want to live in a Russian-like society where truth does not matter - just what the dictator says.

      SAD

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/05/politics … index.html

    6. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Trump continues his assault on the TRUTH and DEMOCRACY in his speech to RINOs in North Carolina.  While these particular lies do not rise to the level of terrorism yet, they are the precursor to the destruction of American democracy.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/06/politics … index.html

      It starts out "Donald Trump's speech before the North Carolina Republican Party Saturday night was a reminder of the danger the former President poses as he undermines America's election system while attempting to reassert himself as kingmaker on the national stage."

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Must admit I did not listen to the speech Trump gave last night. I am too busy keeping up with the news of today. The new administration gets my attention at this point.

        Following what Trump said or might do in the future is on the back burner. It the new administration that is more important at this point.

      2. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        WOW! Now we learn that Donald Trump, shortly after his WH counsel Don McGann told him to take a hike when Trump asked him to Obstruct Justice and then Lie about it, had McGann and his wife spied on.

        And this is what Trump supporters think America should be like - a Russian state.  SAD!

        https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/13/politics … index.html

        I have to ask Trump supporters again - What is the difference between Trump, Putin, Xi, Un, Assad, Erdogan, Maduro, and Ali Khamenei?

        I really don't see one myself.

    7. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

      Liz Cheney is another Real Republican (although not a Lincoln Republican) who thinks Trump is a terrorists (what she accuses him of fits the definition).

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/06/politics … index.html

      1. Castlepaloma profile image74
        Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Only impressions President I was ever impress and inspired me was JFK. Maybe a part of Jimmy Carter as an honest and good person. Much of the rest, were a humanitarian waste of time.

      2. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Liz Cheney was removed from House GOP leadership due to lots of rhetoric or should I say statements that have not been proven. I don't think she ever called him and as you put it "terrorist. The conference made their voices heard a majority voted her out of her position. It well appears the majority of Republicans have will support Trump.

        She had the right to speak her mind, as those that voted her out had the right to have their voices heard.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

          "Liz Cheney was removed from House GOP leadership due to " - Telling the Truth.

          I didn't say she did, but as I said parenthetically, what she has described in many different ways fits the definition of a terrorist - "causing harm for political ends"

          I must agree that "It well appears the majority of Republicans have will support Trump." when applied to elected Republicans.  It is probably true of ones that will vote".  Fortunately, there is a large and growing segment of Republicans who reject Trump.  It was enough to give Trump an embarrassingly large loss.  And, I have to believe there have been a significant number of additional defections in response to the Trump-led insurrection on January 6th.

          And yes, they all have those rights, but it just shows you how brainwashed/corrupt/hypocritical (those that voted her out after keeping her in) they are. 

          It makes me remember that the majority of Jim Jones followers supported Jim Jones (until they died).

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 13 months agoin reply to this

            Again, I don't think she ever called him and as you put it "terrorist. Not sure why you made that claim.

            "Liz Cheney was removed from House GOP leadership due to " - Telling the Truth." 

            Perhaps your truth, as well as her truth.  However, she has offered nothing but opinion that lacks facts.   As I said she has a right to her opinion.

            I would think Trump would certainly do very well if he ran in 2024. I think it depends on the shape of the country is in, and who he was running against.  Four years is a long time...  I certainly wish Trump did not lose and would have felt more comfortable having him in the White House. In my view, this administration is chaotic, and ineffective at problem-solving.

            I think with Manchin and a few other Moderate Dems ready to help us, Republicans out,  we will be able to minimize the Bidens socialist agenda.  I am feeling a bit more encouraged at this point.    Plus, I truly have faith that many Biden voters already have buyer's remorse.

            And then there is the Border mess, and  President Alejandro Giammattei of Guatemala blaming Biden for inviting his citizens to make their way to America, and Biden's foolish move to do away with Trump's immigration policies.  The President of Mexico some months ago offered the same opinion. 

            https://thefederalist.com/2021/06/07/gu … te-change/
            https://cis.org/Arthur/Mexicos-Presiden … urge-Biden

            Harris was met with a large crowd of a protester with signs -- Go Home -- Trump won --Kamala, Mind Your Own Business. 
            https://nypost.com/2021/06/07/guatemala … trump-won/

            With the new administration already appearing to be crashing quickly  I would think many that voted for Joe are have big-time buyer's remorse.  Actually, I can't keep up with the trail of. messes this bunch is leaving behind them.

    8. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      WOW!  First we find out that Trump, through Barr, attacked journalists by subpoenaing various records and keeping a gag order in place.  Now we find out Trump further abused his power, through Barr, by subpoenaing records of Democrats who criticized him along with the families and a minor child.   You should worry if you ever communicated with one of these people; Trump may have read what you said.

      Tell me this isn't Russia.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/10/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        The first paragraph in the article says it all --- "CNN)Prosecutors in the Trump administration Justice Department subpoenaed Apple for data from the accounts of House Intelligence Committee Democrats -- including Chairman Adam Schiff -- along with their staff and family members as part of a leak investigation, an Intelligence Committee official and a source familiar with the matter confirmed to CNN."

        Not a night would go by when


        Stilwell and Schiff were on nighttime media frequently saying things about Trump that were proven to be lies by the Mueller report. The IMO they are both slimy individuals.

        Let me remind you the AG had every right to investigate anyone he felt he had reason to investigate. The AG certainly needed to find and prosecute anyone that was leaking information that by law should not have been leaked.

        Not sure why you feel anyone is above being investigated. Many of the leaks appeared to come out of Schiff's committee, information that only committee members and their aids had.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "Let me remind you the AG had every right to investigate anyone he felt he had reason to investigate." and "Not sure why you feel anyone is above being investigated. "  - I feel that way because I am a liberal and believe in personal freedom.  I don't want to live in Russia or Iran or North Korea or China or ... where that is exactly how they do it and which you are clearly suggesting we do the same here.

          "The AG certainly needed to find and prosecute anyone that was leaking information that by law should not have been leaked." - Yes he did - legally.  Let me remind you that in America law enforcement can't investigate people for no reason at all, like you suggested the AG can do.  They need probable cause.  Just to pick an extreme example - what do you suppose their probable cause was when they had Apple turn over the records of some minor child family member?

          This appears to be such an egregious violation of constitutionally protected right to privacy, that I hope they look very closely at the reasoning the use grand jury used to grant subpoenas for family and friends of Congress people and their staffs and the judge who granted the gag orders.  This stinks to high heaven and heads need to roll.

    9. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Trump's spying on Congress will be the second greatest scandal in modern history (the first is Trump's insurrection).  He always talked about the Republican sponsored investigation into him as a "witch hunt", which of course it was not.  On the other this certainly was one,

      While Trump's insurrection qualifies as a terrorist act, this probably doesn't.  But it does parallel what his authoritarian friends do in Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, Venezuela, etc.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/11/politics … index.html

    10. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      This opinion piece highlights why Trump needs to be held accountable for his terrorist activity.

      70 to 80% of RINOs believe in Trump's Big Lie about the election even though Homeland Security, DOJ, and the judicial system found little fraud (and what was found was committed by Trump supporters so far).  Homeland security declared the 2020 election to be the most secure ever.  DOJ defied Trump's order to find fraud and declared the 2020 election fair and secure.

      Here is the thing.  So long as Trump and his surrogates can go around spreading the Big Lie the chances of him causing more political violence like the Jan 6 insurrection is high.  And, according to DOJ and DHS, it is getting higher every day.

      It behooves America, for its own safety, to bring Trump to the bar of justice so that he can pay for what he has done to America.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/12/opinions … index.html

    11. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Interesting.  The Trump of Israel, Netanyahu, just called Republicans who believe in term limits - fascists.  This darling of the RINOs just turned on his American supporters (much like Trump often does) to show his gratitude for their years of support. 

      He said, referring to speculation that the new government would impose term limits or make it illegal for someone who has been indicted to be Prime Minister, "You call yourself the guardians of democracy, but you are so afraid of democracy that you are ready to pass fascist laws against my candidacy -- the language of North Korea and Iran -- in order to maintain your regime,"

      I guess that means Netanyahu thinks our Constitution is fascist since it term limits the president.

    12. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Interesting.  The Trump of Israel, Netanyahu, just called Republicans who believe in term limits - fascists.  He is the darling of RINOs, yet this is how he repays their fealty (just like Trump would, lol).

      ""You call yourself the guardians of democracy, but you are so afraid of democracy that you are ready to pass fascist laws against my candidacy -- the language of North Korea and Iran -- in order to maintain your regime," he [ said, referring to speculation that the new government would impose term limits or make it illegal for someone who has been indicted to be Prime Minister.

    13. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Does it just make you sick to your stomach that 21 RINO House members saw fit to vote against awarding the Congressional Gold metal to the policemen who saved them from Trump's insurrectionists on Jan 6th?  It does me.

      https://thehill.com/homenews/house/5586 … capitol-on

    14. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Speaking of terrorism - here is a report about a Florida Republican congressional candidate, William Braddock, threatening to kill his Republican opponent, Anna Paulina Luna.

      This isn't illegal why?

      https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/1 … uad-494976

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Not a lawyer, but I would hazard to guess that because it was not a public statement, because it was recorded "secretly" it is not illegal.  How many people have threatened to kill someone if they don't do as demanded?  Someone threatening their child or their spouse?  An employee turned down for a raise/promotion?  Someone getting arrested? 

        I could be way off base, though.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Probably not off base.  Further, he was telling somebody else that. 

          BTW, the "secretly" is state-based.  In Florida, it appears to be illegal to have a one party record a conversation without the other knowing, Maryland too.  In Virginia, I think it is perfectly fine.

          Had Luna been an elected federal (don't know about state) official, however, it would have been illegal, but running for office probably doesn't count.

          Here is a question - if somebody runs up to me and says they are going to kill me (and I believe them and they are capable), why couldn't they be arrested for assault?  I think all that is required is that I be in fear of my life or being harmed.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Yes, the "secretly" is state based; I know in my state of Idaho it is quite legal to record with only one party aware of it.

            But that's not really what I meant; it just seems there is a vast difference between angrily telling a collegue "I'm going to kill so and so" and going public with the same statement.  One is not a threat, it is just anger venting.  The other, however, IS a threat and should be taken quite seriously.

            Your question; I think the "stand your ground" laws could come into effect here.  Not so much in arresting someone for threats (although that can sometimes be done, depending on the believability of the threat), but in your reaction.  For instance, the threat to kill you, out of the blue and without backup evidence, isn't much of a threat.  But if the person runs at you with a raised knife shouting in anger it becomes something else entirely.

    15. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Well, the RINOs blew their chance at being part of the solution, so now Pelosi is going to form a Republican-style Select Committee to investigate the origins of the insurrection on Jan 6th.

      Finally, the truth will come out.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/22/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Got to give it to Nancy, great slop to keep some busy lapping at it while following an investigation that will go nowhere, and keep their brains from overload with all the current problems that the Dems are drownding in.  Wonder when Congress will get around to making an attempt to keep any of the promises old Joe made?  This is getting sort of fun to watch.

        Did you ever consider they want you to look one way for a reason? Maybe they just don't want you to you really see what is truly happening right before your eyes.

        This administration is failing on all counts, and they are now grasping for anything to make an attempt to grab headlines to deflect.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          :"Wonder when Congress will get around to making an attempt to keep any of the promises old Joe made?" - You do know the RINOs will do everything in their power to stop any of Biden's initiatives to become law, don't you?  That is why it is so important for Democrats to do well in 2022.

          "This administration is failing on all counts, " - The opposite is true, save for those things the RINOs can stop such as giving everybody the right to vote.

          I did see what happened right before my eyes.  I saw and listened to Donald Trump lie to you and everybody else about the election, I read and heard him call his army to the Capitol, and I watched and listened to Trump inciting his army, and then I watched them conduct a violent insurrection where the Trump supporters attacked the police and maim them and were responsible for several of them dying.

          What did you see?  People acting normally, I suppose.

          "making an attempt" - Seems like that is a false statement since the House has sent many pieces of legislation to the Senate only to watch McConnell and the other RINOs kill it, like they have for the last two years.

          It seems to me you would get tired of the RINOs not governing.

          "following an investigation that will go nowhere," - OH, it will go everywhere and you know it (and are afraid of I imagine, certainly Trump is).  We will finally, in spite of RINOs burying their collective heads in the sand, will have documented why the insurrection happened.  It will clearly connect the dots, with evidence, between Trump's and his minion's words and actions and the assault on the Capitol and our democratic government.

          The TRUTH will come out.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            "I read and heard him call his army to the Capitol, and I watched and listened to Trump inciting his army, and then I watched them conduct a violent insurrection"

            Sorry, Eso, but you didn't see OR hear Trump inciting an army.  Nor did you watch a "violent insurrection".  You may try to spin it that way, you may try to use emotions to convince readers, you may try to repeat it enough times to cause belief in the gullible.  But when all is said and done you did none of those things.

            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Of course I watched and heard all of that - I watch and listen to the real news and not that propaganda you consume all of the time.

              When I watch Trump supporters beat a policeman unconscious with flag poles and things they stole from other police, I perceive that as violence.

              When I watch Trump supporters bear spray and beat a policeman who the next day mysteriously died of a stroke, I perceive that as violence.

              When I watch Trump supporters break windows and invade the Capitol building, I perceive violence

              When I watch the process of Congress stop because Trump supporters are trying to break into the their chambers to kill them, I perceive a violent insurrection.

              You can keep you head in the sand until you suffocate, but the TRUTH is the TRUTH and your lies or brainwashed view of the world won't change that

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "I read and heard him call his army to the Capitol, and I watched and listened to Trump inciting his army, and then I watched them conduct a violent insurrection"

                What call? What did Trump say to incite people to riot? "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard," Trump said in his speech. "  Cspan --  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_A-jnovP-A

                He talked about cheering on our Congress to do the right thing, he in no way asked for violence. The tone of his voice was in no way angry throughout the speech.

                Funny in your comment you seem to sum up who was responsible for the violence --- "Trump supporters". Yet you support a Congressional committee to conduct an investigation.  I would think it is very clear that some Trump supporters or some American citizens attacked the Capital. It would seem more than obvious why they attacked the Capitol. They were protesting the outcome of the election. That is actually a right. Not a right to become violent.  What the hell could an investigation prove? It is clear the Capitol was attacked by American citizens that were not satisfied the election was fair. And they were willing to become violent to get their point across.   You may not like the fact these people attacked the Capitol. But they did, and the bigger problem is we have people so dissatisfied with our Government that they would attack the Capitol. We have a true split, and people at this point willing to dig in and fight. That should be your concern, not who is at fault.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "It is clear the Capitol was attacked by American citizens that were not satisfied the election was fair."

                  Irrelevant and immaterial.  Also not to be mentioned or discussed: what IS important is that the riot can be grossly exaggerated into an "insurrection intended to overthrow the American government".  This can then be used to demonize a President that asked for a peaceful protest...if one simply ignores truth and fact and instead promotes a false report of why it all happened.  All one has to do is assign motives into rioters that were never there at all.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    I respect your opinion in regard to the protest/riot and agree it was grossly over-exaggerated.  There was actually very little damage other than chemical dust being found on art, and a couple of antique light fixtures broken. And yes overturned furniture. The facts are there for those that choose to look for them --- That's why I brought up  a factual quote  from Trump  speech  on Jan 6th ---    "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard,"

                    I also offered a link to check out those factual words,  which also provides the quality of his tone when he made that very statement. His tone was actually very calm and pleasant.  Facts are hard for some to digest.

                    He asked them to march peacefully to the Capitol.

                    As I said, what really bothers me and would seem a bigger problem, that we have people so dissatisfied with our Government that they would attack the Capitol.  Again just my view. But it is clear this subject is not important to some. So many at this point are stuck in believing anything media feeds them, and have lost all ability to think for themselves. What is also interesting the media seems to keep them in the past, replaying all the Trump rhetoric over and over. So, it odd they can ignore all that is actually going on in the failing Biden administration.  I wonder when the day of awakening will come?  Gosh, we have a president that is drowning faster than any other in our time, yet crickets.

                    Many are out for a pound of flesh. And are willing to ignore facts. Many have taken on Biden's attitude, and opted to believe -- " truth over facts..."

                  2. My Esoteric profile image86
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Of course EVERYONE, but Trump supporters, knows it is you who "ignores the truths and fact and instead promotes a false report of why it all happened?

                    Also, nobody is "assigning motives to the rioters".  They tell us exactly why they did it - TRUMP.

                2. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "What call? What did Trump say to incite people to riot? ", LOL, you should listen to the insurrectionists more.  They are quite clear on why they were there and why they did what they did - Trump called them and they answered and they did what he wanted them to do.

                  I heard him and they heard him.  How come you didn't?

                  https://www.businessinsider.com/capitol … ton-2021-1

                  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/17/nyre … ardon.html

                  https://news.yahoo.com/capitol-rioters- … 43116.html

                  https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 … s-rioters/ (Yeah, I know it is Mother Jones, but just read the quotes from the insurrectionists)

                  https://www.newsday.com/long-island/pol … 1.50147245

                  The law requires that those who heard his words perceive them as incitement and they clearly did even though you didn't.

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Not a single one of your links provide a link to Trump inciting a riot or calling for people to break into the capital.  Not one.

                    So where did you hear him tell them to?  You claim you heard it - where?  Give us a link, but until then you are stuck with the conclusion that your claim is 100% false, and I wouldn't believe a rioter being charged with a crime any more than I would you.

                    (Do you?  Do you believe those rioters trying to absolve themselves of responsibility?  Why?  What evidence did they produce that has you concluding they are telling the truth?)

              2. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                ""I read and heard him call his army to the Capitol, and I watched and listened to Trump inciting his army"

                You forgot to mention that your claim of watching and hearing Trump incite an army did not happen.  Yes, we all watched a riot happen, but not a single person watched or heard what you claim you did.

                "I watched them conduct a violent insurrection"

                You also forgot to mention that gross exaggeration and the use of loaded, scary terminology does not make it true; your claim is, again, no more than nonsense as there was no insurrection.  Just another riot, no different than those that had been happening for months and months.  Except, of course, that it could be spun into evil actions by Trump if the truth is not important.

                1. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  And you, for whatever political reason, are trying to whitewash and hide what happened. 

                  You go ahead and believe your hogwash and lies, it is your right.  But know that by spreading these lies, you are aiding and abetting terrorists.

          2. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            "You do know the RINOs will do everything in their power to stop any of Biden's initiatives to become law, don't you?  That is why it is so important for Democrats to do well in 2022."

            As I have said, Biden knew when he made lofty promises how Washington works. he well knew he was just pandering as all politicians do. But Biden took his promises too far... This is just one reason why his approval rate is starting to slip, another is inflation. That is what will bury the Dems in 2022. Along with his failure to keep any of his lofty spending promises. If not, I will owe you an "Oh boy was I wrong"...

            "This administration is failing on all counts, " - The opposite is true, save for those things the RINOs can stop such as giving everybody the right to vote."  I am not and never will be sure how the media sold this bill of goods to liberals. 

            "More votes were cast in the 2020 presidential election than in any other U.S. election in history, and the turnout rate was the highest in more than a century."  https://www.npr.org/2020/11/25/93724865 … rd-turnout

            It would seem unintelligent to feel voters were in some fashion surprised from voting. It appears all did fine casting their ballot. Most states used the voting laws that were on their books, some did add the right to vote via mail-in with little checks and balances due to the pandemic.

            The HR1 bill was just a power grab by the Dems that failed. The bill was unconstitutional in several aspects. It was all about statehood for DC which was neatly tucked in, and the media did not address it. I for one am so proud the Republicans stood to protect the Constitution. And I am sure will continue to stand strong when considering the Infrastructure bill, which is overloaded with fooling costly earmarks. I am hoping to see an infrastructure bill pass, with all the fluff removed. If the Rep can't rid the bill of fluffy earmarks, I hope the bill is added to the heap.

            Some states have been changing their voting laws to add options to make it easier to vote. Like I said not sure how the media sold the concept that people were suppressed from casting their votes... History was made --- that's a fact. It may not be a fact you can accept, but nonetheless a fact.

            I don't think there is anyone that does not realize we had a riot at our Capitol on Jan 6th. Not sure what can be accomplished with another investigation. It seems the FBI and the DOJ have done a good job finding and prosecuting many that broke the law on that day. It would seem you are looking for someone to blame. Again if this was organized by a group or one person it's the FBI and DOJ to prove that. Not a bunch of Congressmen that at this point have more important things to deal with. IMO it's a nice bit of feed to deter those that need to look away from the Biden administration's failures. Can you not see what this bunch does? The Dems always use the same ploy, deflect away from their failures. Oh well, whatever.

    16. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      The dominoes are starting to fall and bad behavior punished.  Rudy Giuliani can't practice law in NY anymore.  :-)  I suspect his words on Jan 6th will come back to haunt him as well as he is tried for insurrection.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/24/politics … index.html

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Some more dominos will shortly be coming down.  At least the Trump Organization and Allen Weisselberg will be criminally charged, apparently for what brought down Al Capone - tax evasion. 

        I will be interested to see if any of the kids who were responsible for the Organization are indicted as well.  The prosecution wouldn't say if Trump would be part of the indictment.

        https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/25/politics … index.html

    17. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      It is true, polls show RINO's no longer believe in democracy.  They have fallen hook, line, and sinker for the biggest subversive of all - former wanna be dictator Donald Trump

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/24/politics … index.html

    18. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Your terrorist former President says to shoot protesters - Really?  That is who you believe should lead the world?   WOW!

      https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … ad-vpx.cnn

    19. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Apparently Trump doesn't understand the difference between protesting bad white cops murdering Blacks and other minorities and an armed attack to stop gov't from functioning. Even when you separate the summer riots from the many peaceful protests, the purpose of the riots was gratuitous vandalism and not to stop gov't from functioning.

      That gets to the core difference between wanton vandalism and destruction during the summer riots and the armed insurrection at the Capitol.  The armed insurrection had a purely political purpose.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/25/politics … index.html

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        "gratuitous vandalism"?  You mean as in taking over part of Seattle and refusing entrance to any govt. entity?  As in taking over police precincts?  As in attacking federal buildings, trying to burn them down?  They, too, were armed, much the same as capital rioters were and they, too, attempted to take over govt.

        That kind of "gratuitous vandalism"?

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "You mean as in taking over part of Seattle and refusing entrance to any govt. entity?  " - Actually, that didn't happen the way you imply.  That was done with Gov't concurrence and when it didn't work as hoped, the gov't shut it down.  PLEASE tell the whole story rather than mislead the reader to your false point of view.

          Tell me, what was the summer rioters political agenda??  What gov't process did they say they wanted to prevent from happening?  The way I saw it was you had a bunch of criminals taking advantage of the peaceful protests to vandalize and cause destruction.

          We know what the objective of the armed, violent, insurrectionists at the Capitol was - to carry out Trump's order to stop the certification -  that is what Trump and the other insurrectionists told us.  BUT, What was the stated objective of the armed, violent, criminals who infected about 5% of the peaceful protests?

      2. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Wow! Cnn once again... Just not reputable.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          And that explains why you have such a myopic view of the world - you only listen to propaganda sources that lie to you or twist reality into their own authoritarian view.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            You do not or will not see me supporting anything but facts. It is you that listens to propaganda, and holds on to it as it means your very life. You delve into nothing but conspiracies if comes. I note you don't join in on much of anything current, and when you do you bring the conversation back full circle to Trump.  Lots happening each day with the new failing adminstration. Lots of brand new political news. You are stuck in conspiracy land, and I really don't think you will ever break away.

            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Sorry, but "You do not or will not see me supporting anything but facts." is simply not true.  Your comments clearly show you buy into all these RINO conspiracy theories.

              Name one piece of propaganda I push?  Is it that Trump clearly lost the election?  Is it that Biden has done a wonder job subduing the pandemic.  Is my conspiracy theory saying that Biden did a great job of realigning America's interests with our allies and against our enemies while Trump did exactly the opposite? 

              Everything I comment on are facts or well reasoned opinion.  Show me one time when that didn't happen.

              On the other hand, I can point to say this statement from you "The point is there was no real context to even bring up the subject. ".  That is simply false because had you listened to the whole of what he said rather than a biased clip from Fox or where ever you would have heard the context which was Climate Change and Environmental Policy of which he was a major supporter of while in the Senate and as VP.

              Another example is the Trumpian habit of making fun of how people talk with "I have not noted CNN covering Biden's speech yesterday where he used a tone of strange whispering,".  Again, a false and insulting characterization of a stage whisper for emphasis which I happened to see on - wait for it now - CNN.

              BTW, if Trump were so great, why is ranking at the bottom or almost at the bottom of every presidential comparison analysis.  In this analysis, Trump ranks third from the bottom.  The two they rated worse than Trump is James Buchanan who arguably was instrumental for the Civil War and Andrew Johnson who was unarguably responsible for the failure of Reconstruction and the gutting of the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments.  With time, Trump may make it to the bottom for causing a new Civil War.

              An interesting line in this article is this observation:
              "In the Siena survey, Trump received the lowest rank — 44th out of 44 — in the categories of integrity, intelligence, and overall ability.

              His highest ranking — 10th — came in the "luck" category."

              https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/presid … st-best/3/

              As to "circling back to Trump".  Tell me, what is doing this weekend?  He is holding rallies in order to whine about losing his election and spreading lies and descension. This is proof he is still trying hard to destoy American and maybe start a new Civil War and that is why I am so passionate about stopping him.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                You push nothing but propaganda and conspiracies...

                "Also, there is PLENTY to find out like what was Trump's involvement?  Why are all of those terrorists saying they were doing the bidding of Trump.  Was there a more insidious reason why the Capitol police weren't  allowed to be prepared?  What involvement did some Representatives and Senators have in the insurrection happening.  As I say, lots of questions."

                "We know what the objective of the armed, violent, insurrectionists at the Capitol was - to carry out Trump's order to stop the certification -  that is what Trump and the other insurrectionists told us."

                "The fact is - YES, this was planned - by Trump.  He spent months agitating his army, feeding them lies, riling them up and then calling them to Washington on Jan 6 to ultimately attack the Capitol and cause an insurrection.

                Of course the the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and others planned their insurrection in advance; they had to in order to carry out Trump's directive to stop the certification of the vote -"

                All unproven accusations, none of which are based on truth, only your thoughts of conspiracies.

                1. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "You push nothing but propaganda and conspiracies..." - As I asked before, name me some.  Tell me what propaganda and conspiracies I have pushed.  If you come up blank, which you will, or stay silent, then everybody knows your claim is false.

                2. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "All unproven accusations, none of which are based on truth, only your thoughts of conspiracies." - LOL.  Then please tell me why they have been indicted for exactly that??   Do you think DOJ indicts people on unproven accusations, none of which are based on truth, ?  I don't think so.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Not sure you can prove that Trump "directed the Proud Boys and others to attack the Capitol. Anyone indicted was indicted on crimes they committed at the Capital. Nothing whatsoever to do with Trump.

                    "USA TODAY gathers details of those cases as the FBI continues to find and charge those responsible for the attack that left five people dead and sent lawmakers and Vice President Mike Pence fleeing to shelter.

                    Included are those arrested on charges federal prosecutors have filed since the riot, and those arrested by Capitol Police and D.C. Metro Police for entering the Capitol or for crimes related to weapons or violence. "  Prosecutors have also charged roughly 30 defendants with conspiracy out of more than 480 persons arrested.

                    You really need to prove your statement in regard to Trump's ordered or planned the Capitol attack otherwise it would appear you are pushing a conspiracy theory that has not been proven to involve President Trump.

                    Here is a factual list of who has been arrested, and the charges they occurred. The website is the DOJ's official website. So I assume all that they have presented is factual.  https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases

                    "Capitol Breach Cases
                    Below is a list of defendants charged in federal court in the District of Columbia related to crimes committed at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C, on Wednesday, Jan. 6, 2021.

                    Every case is being prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. Following arrests or surrender, defendants must appear before district court magistrate/judge where the arrest takes place, in accordance with the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure."

                    You continue to promote conspiracies that have not been proven factually.
                    I have offered the facts from the DOJ.  President Trump is not on the list of people arrested for breaking the law at the Jan 6th protest against the 2020 election.

                    You seem to think as you have now for years that Trump will be arrested.
                    Do you never tire of accusing this man of crimes?

        2. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          WOW! I see Fox News polling has Biden at 56%

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this
            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Thought you might do that. Here are their ratings with biases (+ Blue, - Red)
                                                               Rating   Bias
              The poll I saw Fox - Beacon.       A         +1.8
              Rasmussen                                 B         - 1.5
              National Review - This wasn't a survey
              Forbes - Behind a fire wall
              Des Moines Register - Not a national poll
              en.as.com - Spanish Newspaper, but they reported on a Monmouth poll
              Monmouth - ``                            A            + 2.1

              I am surprised the Fox-Beacon has such a strong Democratic bias; the other pollster Fox uses has -0.3 bias.  They are a good poll which is why I always pay attention to them.

              The Monmouth poll and Fox poll contradict each other since both have a strong D bias.  I can explain the Monmouth poll as a bunch of pissed off progressives, but not the Fox poll.

              But here are others:

              Reuters-Ipsos              B-         +1.6  Biden 53
              Rasmussen-Don't know which survey you picked but the latest one has Biden at 51
              Economist/You Gov     B+         + 0.7 Biden 52
              Politico/Morning Con.  B           + 2.9  Biden 54
              Your Monmouth                                  Biden 49
              Gallup                          B+         -0.6    Biden 56

              According to your view of Biden, he should be about 20 or so.  I, on the other hand, expect his numbers to max out at about 60 since roughly 40% are attached at the hip to Trump.

              Now, where does Trump stand?

              Overall for his 1st and only term - 42.8  and in Jan 2020 - 41.1

              Compare that to:

              Obama - 47.75 for 2 terms with Jan 2017 ending up at 57.2 (must be buyers remorse after Trump won)

              Bush Jr. - 48.75 but his 1st term was very high and his 2nd term very low.  Jan 2009 was only 29

              You can tell Trump hasn't lost much of his base as his favorability is at a low 41.5 with a range between 37 and 45.

              Only briefly, in Dec 2016, did his positive favorability almost catch up to his negative favorability - 44.0 to 48.2

              Face it, most of America does not like Donald Trump nor do they think he did a very good job.  What do they see you don't?

    20. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      This articles headline as "A Bad Week For The Big Lie", Trump and his minions attempts to subvert democracy in America.

      1. A Republican Senate in Michigan, attempting to replicate the fake audit in Arizona, ended issuing "a report that eviscerated Trump's lies about voter fraud. " Further "The report included a stinging condemnation of the lies about voter fraud pushed by Trump and his supporters."

      2. "in Georgia on Thursday, a judge dismissed most of a lawsuit that claimed fraudulent mail-in ballots had been cast in Fulton County ...in last year's election -- a blow to the pro-Trump plaintiffs' bid to conduct an in-person examination of nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots with high-powered microscopes." The part of the lawsuit the judge did allow to move forward was a request digital images of the ballots.

      3. Rudy Giuliani, one of the most prodigious spreader of the Big Lie, was temporarily disbarred from practicing law in New York. The "court concluded that "there is uncontroverted evidence" that Giuliani ... communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump's failed effort at reelection in 2020." Further, the court found that "Giuliani's "conduct immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law,". FINALLY, some consequences for spreading Trump's Big Lie.  Hopefully there will be many more to follow as the forces of good continue to battle against Trump's forces of evil.

      From the source of Truth and Honesty, CNN - https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/27/politics … index.html

    21. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      You know who use to be huge Trump supporters?   Brian Sicknick and his significant other Sandra Garza.  Now Brian is dead, effectively killed by Trump supporters and Sandra calls Trump the mastermind behind Brian's death.

      She says she kept thinking as she watched the insurrection: "Where is the President? Why is it taking so long for the National Guard to arrive? Where is the cavalry?"

      And now she says ""To know that some members of Congress -- along with the former President, Donald Trump, who Brian and I once supported but who can only now be viewed as the mastermind of that horrible attack -- are not acknowledging Brian's heroism that day is unforgivable and un-American."

      I bet Trump or any other RINO will never get her vote and the vote of anybody she can convince of who was responsible for her guys death.
      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/27/opinions … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        I must point out  all of this --

        "How is Trump any different than bin Laden in that regard?  Consider:

        1.  He used violent rhetoric throughout his candidacy and presidency to stir up supporter to violence - often successfully as many who were on the receiving end of his supporters assaults have testified (including the Capitol Police)

        2.  He created the Big Lie about not losing the election for his followers to rally around

        3.  He frequently suggested that TAKE ACTION which resulted in assaults on several government agencies that culminated in the January 6 insurrection against America

        4.  In a call to arms, he gathered them in one place with the sole intent of marching on the Capitol.

        5.  He exhorted them to march on the Capitol and STOP Congress from doing its Constitutional duty

        6.  When they did what he wanted, he did nothing to stop the violence he instigated until he knew it was way too late.

        7.  In his rhetoric and actions, he provided material support to known domestic terrorist organizations such as the Proud Boys and Qanon."

        Do you see a connection to all of your points?  He said... Yes, words. words that have been spun out of context MUCH of the time.

        Can't you see what media is perpetrating? My God wake up.

        Look at your own words... None of them are evidence, they are conjecture on your part. PURE conjecture.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          " Yes, words. words that have been spun out of context MUCH of the time." - What spin?  Which of those things could possibly be considered spin.  There is evidence for all of them.

          "Can't you see what media is perpetrating?" - If you are talking about the Right-Wing media, I absolutely agree.  If you are talking about the main stream media, then all I do is take their truthful reporting, analyze, and draw conclusions

          "None of them are evidence, " - There is evidence backing each and every one - no conjecture at all.

    22. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      " Former President Donald Trump is facing a wall of accountability and truth as new revelations and investigations expose his abuses of power, delusional lies about the election and business conduct to ever greater scrutiny.

      Just consider what has taken place over the last several days:

      - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Monday announced a House Select Committee to investigate the January 6 insurrection Trump incited. - And let me note it will a bi-partisan committee

      Details in new books about Trump's misconduct in office underscore the depth of his autocratic threat.

      A stunning report revealed that former Attorney General William Barr thought his voter fraud claims were "bull---," shattering Trump's voter fraud lies. - But only saying this to recoop his image after walking up the edge in pushing Trump's Big Lie

      A GOP-led report into Trump's delusional claims of a stolen election in Michigan turned up nothing. - As will the fake and flawed audit in Arizona

      Trump's chief propagandist of voter fraud, Rudy Giuliani, already suffered the consequences for his campaign of falsehoods by seeing his law license suspended. - and is still under investigation for other Trump-related malign activity

      And, perhaps most seriously for Trump, the ex-President's lawyers met prosecutors on Monday in a last-ditch effort to stave off criminal charges possibly targeting the Trump Organization and its namesake's longtime financial guru, Allen Weisselberg. - with other investigations continuing

      And let me add -

      Mike Pence calls Trump's actions on Jan 6th unAmerican

      DOJ is probably investigating Trump for Jan 6-related crimes

      The DC Attorney General is investigating Trump for Jan 6-related crimes

      At least one District Attorney in Georgia is investigating Trump for voting-related crimes.

      And you wonder why I think that man is a Clear and Present danger to American democracy.

      The calculus is simple, if someone supports Trump, they oppose democracy whether they know it or not.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/29/politics … index.html

    23. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Is another Trump-inspired "Jan 6" moment in the offing?  According to his supporters it is.

      https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … x-ebof.cnn

    24. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      I know conservatives think that people shouldn't use their brain to critically think about things and use reasoned, informed analysis to form judgments about a situation but here is a couple pretty good analyses about the potential criminal charges coming up surrounding the Trump Organization, its executives, and Trump himself.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/29/opinions … index.html

      https://www.brookings.edu/research/new- … cable-law/

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        IMO I think this forum is very open to opinion-oriented discussion

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          That is true, but many opinions from the Conservative side suggest they think "people shouldn't use their brain to critically think about things and use reasoned, informed analysis to form judgments about a situation "

          I argue, and many studies have shown, that when people (normally conservative) chose a leader to blindly follow, such as those who have chosen Trump, leave their critical thinking capabilities behind.

          "Those who score high on the RWA scale are submissive to authority but can be aggressive on behalf of that authority. They are conventional in their thinking and behavior, highly religious, have less education, are highly prejudiced against other groups, oppose equal opportunity, lack critical-thinking skills, and often hold inconsistent positions. "

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/ … story.html

          If you want to see where you fall on the RWA scale, you can take a test on my hub about the subject at - http://hub.me/aapSE (one of my most popular hubs) or here - https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/RWAS/ for a more generic version.  For comparison, I scored 14.2 on the psychometrics test and scored 0% on my version of the same test.

    25. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      I wonder why the Department of Homeland Security thinks Trump supporters will turn violent AGAIN, come August?

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/30/politics … index.html

    26. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Well, it isn't terrorism - yet - but the next domino has fallen.  The Manhattan Grand Jury is indicting the Trump Organization and its CFO Alan Weisselberg on CRIMINAL charges. 

      The DA will charge the Trump Organization and the CFO on Thursday, probably with an array of tax crimes.  Most of them have to do with perks given out, without taxes being paid on them.  What may push this into the criminal realm is cash bonuses given without paying taxes.  This should be the beginning of more serious charges to follow.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/30/politics … index.html

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Sounds like you missed out - again - on finding Trump guilty of anything.  But don't give up - watch long enough and you may find him jaywalking.  Surely a crime worthy of prison!

        Shoot, you may even be able to convict some of his associates of the crime of not paying taxes on all of the bennies they got from their job.  Sounds much like the first claim against him (colluding with Putin to fix the election), where nothing was found so anyone associated was "investigated" to within an inch of their life.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          As I said, just one more domino on the way to 1) indicting Trump and 2) convicting him.  Of what, who knows, there are SO MANY to choose from, lol.  He is under investigation or being tried for a whole host of malign activities from tax fraud, to voter fraud, to insurrection, to defamation, to obstruction of justice, to - and the list goes on and on (and it doesn't include jaywalking but might include contempt of court if Trump violated a gag order the judge in the Trump Organization trial might impose - just saying)

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I need to remind you, you have been waiting for domino's to fall for over 5 years. In each witchhunt, Trump has not been charged with a crime. New York has Trump's tax records, and it would seem they also have egg on their faces. I would think this man has a host of tax attornies that have worked on his personal and business taxes. Which actually are responsible for in the end. Not sure if you thought about that.

            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              And I need to remind you that in the 1st impeachment trial, {b]over 50%[/b] of the Senators felt Trump was guilty.  The ONLY reason he wasn't convicted is because of the cowardice of the remaining RINOs, the evidence was clear.

              And I need to remind you that in the 2nd impeachment trial, the forces of good barely missed the 60% threshold which means well more than 50% of the Senators felt the evidence was strong enough to convict.  The ONLY reason Trump wasn't convicted is because of the cowardice of the remaining RINOs, the evidence was clear.

              You apparently don't understand how responsibility works.  Trump is the micromanaging head of his company.  He cannot claim ignorance (remember he is a self-proclaimed genius, lol) as a defense. He owns the company and bears ultimate responsibility.

              He cannot hide behind his tax accountants when it is common knowledge (like 1+2 = 3 in any number system) that not taking taxes out for certain benefits and cash bonuses is illegal.  Even I agree he is not THAT dumb.

              Now that the DA has stopped the clock from running out, he can turn his attention to the more serious crimes of manipulating the books to reduce tax liability and fool banks into giving him loans.

              Of course we sitll have the investigations into:

              - Insurrection
              - Defamation
              - Voter Fraud
              - Obstruction of Justice
              and all of the others that are on going.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                The DA of New York has all but dropped the entire investigation. Nothing was in Trump's taxes, he was not indicted for anything. Even the CNN pundits today claim it's all over. There never was any there to be found. Those indited will be exonerated, perks, like they received, are very much the norm. They all plead not guilty. IT's all but over.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  It will be interesting to see; I recall some 30 years ago when the tax requirements for cars given to employees had to suddenly be taxed.  Highly illegal not to pay taxes on that "income" and the company I worked for gave raises about equal to the tax that would be owed to compensate employees for the extra tax burden.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    These cases will be interesting. Some punnets are claiming these charges should have been civil charges. Wonder why these employees were charged with a criminal offense vs a civil offense  Maybe overkill.

                  2. My Esoteric profile image86
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    That was one of Reagan's initiatives.  In addition, the company has to pay taxes on the car AND the raises (as does the recipient)  One of the things the Trump Organization (and Weisselburg) is accused of is not paying taxes on these things for the last 15 years!! totaling $1.7 M (which is probably why this is a criminal prosecution rather than a civil one like most are)

                2. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "The DA of New York has all but dropped the entire investigation." - And YOU say that I jump to conclusions with no evidence?  What was that?

                  "Those indited will be exonerated, perks, like they received, are very much the norm. " - YES, that would be true.  But is ALSO the "norm" is that the company and recipients pay taxes on those benefits and perks.  Why are you misleading the reader?

                  "Even the CNN pundits today claim it's all over. " - not the ones I listened to.  I do know one criminal defense lawyer said she thought it would be possible that no more indictments were coming, but was rather tentative in that assessment - the rest thought that wasn't the case and these charges were filed to stop the statute of limitations clock, which makes sense.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    All prediction, and opinion...

          2. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            LOL  We've seen boxes and boxes of "dominoes" over the years.  We've seen SO MANY claims of criminal activity.  We've seen years of the entire might of the US justice department thrown at Trump.

            And not a single conviction.  Not even an indictment unless you count the 2 politically based, fake impeachment efforts.  Both of went exactly nowhere, just alike all the other.

            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              "We've seen years of the entire might of the US justice department thrown at Trump." - IN WHAT world do you live, not the real one obviously.  The DOJ was in Trump's pocket for the entire term of his presidency.

              "2 politically based, fake impeachment efforts.  " - OH, you mean the ones where over 50% of the Senators said it WASN'T politically based and that over 50% of the Senators said the impeachments WEREN'T fake.  Is THAT what you are referring to?

              In fact, the only people who think what you falsely claim is true are the brainwashed Trump supporters.  The rest of America knows the TRUTH of the matter.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                Yes.  The impeachment effort(s) where the vote was almost 100% along party lines for over 300 politicians.  If you can't understand that as being politically based I can't help you.  Anyone that actually thinks about it, and is honest with themselves, does understand.  We even had high ranking Democrats explain that it was a political move right from the start; that ALL impeachments are about politics rather than truth or justice.

                1. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  "Yes.  The impeachment effort(s) where the vote was almost 100% along party lines for over 300 politicians." - 1) I am glad you agree.  2) Also, the operative word was almost meaning it wasn't 100% along party lines There were a few sane Republicans who aren't living in Trump's malign fantasy world telling the Big Lie over and over and over again following Joseph Goebbels maxim that if you tell a lie often enough a bunch of mindless RINOs will believe you.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Just curious -- what will you think if Arizona finds that widespread voter fraud did occur?  It's a possibility, the report should be coming soon.

                    Are you not at all beginning to feel Trump may have not done anything you feel he had? So, much of what the media accused him of has been proved to be untrue.

                    The photo op at the church, the report Trump knew about bounties on our soldiers, the Russian hoax, the tax crimes... and so much more all nothing but media lies.

                    Makes me wonder about Arizona's recount, and how they have had no leaks... So what if there was huge fraud on the part of the Democrats?

    27. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Like with the hush money payments to Cohen, here is instance of how Trump may be charged.

      "According to the indictment, Weisselberg received perks including $359,058 in tuition payments for Columbia Grammar & Preparatory School for two of his grandchildren. Those payments were made by checks from Donald Trump's account signed by Trump himself, and later from the Donald J. Trump revocable trust, the indictment said."

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        When I worked for a small manufacturing location of a large company we signed the checks as somebody in the head office.  All done by computer, with the key carefully locked away.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Are you saying the great narcissist himself, Trump, didn't sign the checks.  But in any case, in the very unlikely chance he let a machine take the glory, he authorized it which is the same thing.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            What do YOU think?  Did Trump sign and mail the checks personally or did the business do it?

            Of course he authorized it; he "authorized" every check written, from the bill for soda pop to the janitor's wages.  Whether he knew where each dollar went, and approved of the purchase is another matter, of course.

    28. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Were this heavily armed militia Trump supporters?  Probably.  Were they going to train for the next Trump insurrection?  Probably.  Only time will tell.

      https://boston.cbslocal.com/2021/07/03/ … -in-place/

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Yes, only time will tell. It sure looks like many are not willing to buy Biden's spending or crazy ideologies.  The country is at crossroads. This could be very dangerous.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "It sure looks like many are not willing to buy Biden's spending or crazy ideologies. " - I think you misstated that.  It should be "It sure looks like a few are not willing to buy Biden's spending or crazy ideologies.".  Most Americans think Biden is doing a great job over all

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            I guess we will need to wait to see. Oh but , polls say differently. He is tanking as I said fast.

            Unfortunately, he does not seem to be able to control crime in the Dem cities. You know the cities, the ones that Dems called to defund the police last summer. So unfortunate the Democrats supported violence last summer. It now seems to be biting them in the butt. Even with their backflip, trying to blame defunding of these Dem cities on the bad old Republicans.  Yeah like the Republicans had any power in let's say, New York, Chicago, Portland, San Fran... LOL, They don't only look stupid, but hypocritical.

            New Yahoo News/YouGov poll: Biden's approval rating falls, as both Republicans and Democrats grow more concerned about crime
            https://news.yahoo.com/new-yahoo-news-y … 06661.html

            Support for Biden erodes among Democrats -poll
            June 30   https://news.yahoo.com/support-biden-er … 40345.html

            How unpopular is Joe Biden?
            https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/

            https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewst … 4bb6863d1b

            Biden support slips below 30 percent in new poll
            https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-america … -democrats

            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              This is why people have to wary of the links you post.

              "Biden support slips below 30 percent in new poll
              https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-america … -democrats" is a 2019 poll, LOL.

              Your Forbes article is a bit deceptive.  It doesn't show the breakdown between very liberal and liberal to explain the 4-point drop.  I have said this before, of course you will see a drop like that because the very liberal don't like Biden trying to do the right thing and be bipartisan. 

              Your 538 poll shows a very steady approval rating, so I am not sure what point you are trying to make here.  His range is a low of 51.7 to 55.5 and is currently at 52.9.

              Your June 30 Yahoo report doesn't say which Ipsos poll they used, but it reads like the one Forbes referenced - in other words a duplicate just make it seem more impressive.

              I couldn't find the poll the other Yahoo news was reporting on, but it seemed to be talking about crime.

    29. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      Now we find out Trump and is surrogates attempted to subvert the Arizona election in the same way they tried in Georgia.  Georgia started an investigation of Trump for that, will Arizona?

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/02/politics … index.html

    30. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      I am surprised at myself for not thinking of the insurrection in military terms given my background.  But as the numbers come out regarding the number of "troops" that attacked the Capitol. 

      There are 535+ people currently charged for invading the Capitol and the FBI is looking for at least another 350 they have pictures of.  That totals a minimum of 885 individuals who participated.  There were an additional 9,000 support troops that didn't actually attack the police but the police nevertheless had to deal with.

      Now consider what a 1970s infantry battalion is made up of.  A typical battalion has 5 companies: 3 infantry companies, 1 support company made of various indirect and direct fire weapons, and 1 HQ company.

      An infantry company has 3 infantry platoons, a heavy weapons platoon, and a HQ platoon.

      An infantry platoon is made of 3 infantry squads and a heavy weapons squad and no support units.

      A squad is roughly 9 men and women.

      Working backwards, an infantry platoon has about 4 x 9 = 36 combat troops

      An infantry company has about 4 x 36 = 144 combat troops (plus the HQ platoon)

      That means an infantry battalion has about 4 * 144 = 576 combat troops (plus the HQ)

      So based on those numbers, Trump brought just shy of 2 battalions (2/3s of a brigade) of troops to the Capitol to stop the vote that day.

      No wonder they overwhelmed the Capitol police which the ill=prepared for the violent attack (another goal of the Select Committee is to find out WHY they were so ill-prepared for this event while they were armed to the teeth and out in larger numbers for the relatively peaceful BLM protest earlier that year.  Was there collusion with the Executive Branch?)

      And on Dec 19, Trump tweeted: "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!".  Well they certainly went wild alright.

      Wilderness - I think that is a bit more than the "handful" you claimed, lol.

    31. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      My God!!  What is happening to the conservatives?  White Supremacists, Nazis, Fascists, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers - and now this.  Where does the attack on America stop?  It certainly won't stop until Trump goes to jail since he won't stop agitating the violent parts of his base with his Big Lie

      And now a new book reports Trump told Gen Kelly that [i]Hitler did a lot of good things[/b] - Gee, where have I heard that before?

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/07/politics … index.html

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Maybe when BLM and other liberal factions quit providing such fine venues for the riots that really ARE "attacking America"?  Have to say that the year long rioting did far more damage (100X?  1,000X?) than the one riot you attribute to Trump did.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Yes, the summer of love was caused far more damage and death... And IMO set the precedence for the historic crime rates in Dem cities.

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            As I proved to you both earlier, on a per hour basis, the Insurrection was way more violent and destructive than any given summer riot.  It took a whole summer of riots to equal or surpass one four hour long insurrection on the seat of our government.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Not an insurrection but a protest that clearly got out of hand. Little violence occurred, and people have been arrested and charged.  I also pointed out a while back how Vp Harris raised money to bail out protesters. Protesters ended up being rapists and violent criminals.  And in regard to damages many cities last summer businesses were looted, burned, and these cities were left in shambles. I also pointed out the double-digit death toll due to those summer riots. You have nothing in regards to proof of an insurrection.
              https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news … ting-trial

              "How much damage was done to Minneapolis?
              At cost of $350 million, approximately 1,300 properties in Minneapolis were damaged by the rioting and looting, of which nearly 100 were entirely destroyed."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Fl … Saint_Paul

              Protests cost $23 million in damage, lost business, Portland police say. Night after night, groups of demonstrators advocating against racial injustice and police brutality gather in downtown Portland. The protests have been occurring regularly for about six weeks.Jul 8, 2020
              https://katu.com/news/local/portland-po … x%20weeks.

              https://www.axios.com/riots-cost-proper … cea9c.html

              As you can see facts just show you are not correct in your assessment of the cost to liberal states for the liberals to promote their violence.

    32. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      The Headline says "McCarthy nailing down GOP members for Capitol riot panel as Republicans' defense strategy comes into view"

      I am confused.  What is McCarthy defending against? The purpose of the committee is to dig down to the roots of the insurrection, what caused it, and how to prevent it from happening again.  Maybe he is defending against the TRUTH from coming out rather than his whitewash of what happened in the worst attack against American democracy since 1812?  Maybe he wants it to happen again, which DHS says there an increased chance of happening the longer Trump keeps telling his {Big Lie[/b]

      At one time this RINO supported an independent commission - then he didn't.  Then the RINOs defeated the independent commission outright forcing those looking for answers to this Select Committee. 

      I really prefer an America with two, honest, patriot political party's.  Unfortunately, what used to be the Republican Party has left the field and replaced it with a bunch of conspiracy theory believers.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/07/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        IMO, it seems more like the Democratic party is doing something they are well known for ---  Labeling it a crime (insurrection) and then half-assed looking for something to prove the crime. In other words, it is what in days of old was called a witchhunt.  And by the way, all the Jan 6th "protest went bad" hype is feed -- feed to feed the frenzy that many on the left are addicted to.  Just another leftist conspiracy, like all the rest --- "This time Trump will be charged, he will go to prison!" My God give it up this looks all so foolish IMO.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          "Labeling it a crime (insurrection) " - THAT is because it was.  More than a battalion of armed Trump troops successfully stormed the Capitol with the sole purpose of stopping the certification vote - which they did.  That perfectly fits the definition of insurrection to an unbiased mind.

          INSURRECTION - "a violent uprising against an authority or government."

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            You have no proof to back up such a hyperbolic statement.  IMO it was a protest against the election. Legal in America.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              Of course it was; even the most die hard liberal will tell you that it was because of the "Big Lie", causing people to think the election was stolen.  All they wanted was a fair, legal election, but that part is forbidden to mention.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                I actually think that some liberals need their own dictionary. It must be hard using ours. Of course, it must get very hard for them to change the definitions of words to suit their needs.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  It's not a matter of a dictionary or understanding.  It's a matter of using terminology and spin to give a false impression, to convince people that a falsehood is true; a lie in plain, simple words.

                  1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    Yes, very true... However, they certainly do twist a given word out of context.

                    "We believe truth not facts"  LOL

                  2. My Esoteric profile image86
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    "It's not a matter of a dictionary or understanding. " - Classic nonsense.

                2. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  Sorry, but that is exactly what you are doing.

            2. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

              An armed insurrection by a battalion + of Trump troops is a peaceful protest.  Now I have heard everything.  Simply amazing!


              And what so-called "proof' do I need beyond what I saw with my own eyes.  Armed men, rioting through the halls of Congress looking for people to kill in order to stop the certification.

              Have you gotten to the point you don't believe your own eyes now.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                ARMED?  No one has shot but a protester? Kill? Seems you may be incorrect or just offering a view.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  But they were armed.  With baseball bats, pepper spray, a fire extinguisher and a flagpole.  Oh, and one had a police shield.  And everyone of them had two fists as well.  Wonderful weapons to topple the strongest military might the world has ever seen, isn't it?

                  Again, it is all in the spin and terminology.  "Forget" to mention that "armed" does not mean with guns or other conventional weapons and it sounds so much better.  Enough, perhaps, to convince those that don't bother to think or research that there really was an "insurrection" when it was no more than another ordinary riot, with simpler weapons than many rioters carry.

                  1. crankalicious profile image93
                    crankaliciousposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    I think that's probably fair. However, bombs were found around the Capitol, including Molotov cocktails and pipe bombs. In addition, the purpose of the riot, in the protestors own words, was to hang Mike Pence and potentially murder members of Congress.

                    What would Trump had done if the rioters had been successful and stopped the certification and murdered their intended targets?

                  2. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    I assumed he was referring to guns. Like "armed and dangerous". My common sense tells me if there was any kind of planned insurrection they would have come armed to take over the Capitol. Bat. flag and such would not be very ineffective against the armed law enforcement.

                    I want to point out something very interesting, a fact. The policemen that shot and killed the woman protester that was climbing through a window (unarmed) stated --- I did not feel threatened or did I feel she threatened anyone in Congress.

                    "The investigation revealed no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 242.  Specifically, the investigation revealed no evidence to establish that, at the time the officer fired a single shot at Ms. Babbitt, the officer did not reasonably believe that it was necessary to do so in self-defense or in defense of the Members of Congress and others evacuating the House Chamber.  Acknowledging the tragic loss of life and offering condolences to Ms. Babbitt’s family, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and U.S. Department of Justice have therefore closed the investigation into this matter."    Source ---    https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/depa … li-babbitt

                    Sad this woman was killed, and the video is very disturbing to watch. The officer just pointed at this woman, from many feet away and shot her.

    33. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this
    34. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

      About the Fake AZ "audit".
      "Workers sitting at tables in colorful shirts watched ballots swing by on a turntable, marking down results for the presidential and U.S. Senate contests, the two successes for Democrats on an Arizona ballot where Republicans mostly swept other races."

      So, I gotta ask - why aren't they counting the votes that Republican's won???  Are they thinking the fake ballots they are looking for properly counted Republican votes but not Democratic ones? 

      This is [b]more proof[b] this is a highly partisan exercise to (probably unwittingly - sense they don't have very many wits to start with) help Russia, China, and Iran destabilize American democracy.

      They claim to be done counting, so why haven't they issued the results?  Could it be it didn't go the way they wanted it to?  They have pushed off any announcement until after Labor Day.  Any bets this just fades away into the sunset?

      https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/ar … count-ends

      Here is a wonderful timeline analysis of the Maricopa voting and the subsequent fake audit.

      https://tcf.org/content/report/arizona- … ng-rights/

    35. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      I see that one group of Trump the Terrorist enablers is dying out - the White Evangelicals.  The latest broad survey on religion finds this sect on a precipitous decline from 23% in 2006 to 14.5% in 2020.  In fact, religious affiliation in mainline Protestant (read moderate to liberal) and Catholic also declined significantly until 2016 and 2018, respectively.

      The one group of growth are the Unaffiliated.  They grew from 16% in 2006 to 25.5% in 2018, before sliding to 23.3% in 2020.

      What looks like is happening is the radicalism of White Evangelicals was driving out members, mainly to Unaffiliated.  Then in 2016, more started joining mainline Protestants and in 2018, some Unaffiliated were returning to the moderate/liberal Protestants.

      The decline in White Evangelicals is pretty steady at .6% a year.  So by 2024, that sect will be down to 12% or a loss of ~700,000 Trump voters.

      It is nice to see that people are finally realizing the radical Right is not the place for them.

    36. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Trump is clearly prepping his army for more terrorism and insurrection.  It is a good thing so many of the most violent ones are in jail.

      One telling observation -  His speech at CPAC, the Trump cult, was "a rambling, vain and lie-filled speech by Trump lacked coherence and any kind of aspirational appeal, instead highlighting his characteristic cocktail of racial demagoguery, personal swipes at enemies, mountainous falsehoods and desperate trawling for personal adulation."

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/12/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Again CNN -- why not just post CSpan's you tube of the speech in full. The context just matters to most.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Yes, CNN again.  WHY?  Because they tell the TRUTH, unlike your sources.

          But here you go so you can verify the veracity of what CNN reported.

          https://www.c-span.org/video/?513311-1/ … conference

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            I thought it might be a useful exercise to go through the transcript to see how many of Trump's lies, including the Big Lie you defend.

            https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/do … -dallas-tx

            Trump couldn't get 52 seconds into it without his first tall tale:
            I’m thrilled to be back in the heart of Texas with the proud conservative patriots, who are courageously leading the battle to frankly save our country.   - FRANKLY, the truth is everybody else is trying to save America from conservatives.

            Do you feel insulted with this statement? And they (talking about mainstream media) were right, except it was totally in play for me. For me and you, actually. No, it was in play for me.

            Where do I start? we will defeat the radical left,... and the critical race theorists.[i/] What he is saying here is you and he will rewrite American history. [i]...We will secure our borders. We will stop left wing cancel culture.[i/] And how about the Right-Wing Cancel Culture?  [i]We will restore free speech and fair elections They [b]already are[/u] free and fair. , and we will make America great again.   IS THIS TRUMP admitting he failed as president?  Sounds like it to me.

            I'll save this so as not to lose it to bit heaven and then continue on.

            1. crankalicious profile image93
              crankaliciousposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              A recent court case in Michigan illuminates more of the big lie. Not a single lawyer representing Trump admitted to doing any due diligence on the fraud claims they used. Those claims were frequently second and third hand accounts of supposed fraud with claims like "it appeared to be" and "what was in the bag?" sort of "evidence.

              This was a RECENT case. Yet, none of the fraud lawyers had bothered to look into the claims one iota. It was merely enough that the claims were being made despite NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER.

              This is the kind of stuff Republicans are hanging their hats on - using to disenfranchise voters across the country, enact new laws, and overturn democracy.

            2. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              More from CPAC

              The Big Lie 1 - Thank you. It’s true. We all won. We all won. (the election)

              The Big Lie 2 - We were doing so well until the rigged election happened to come along.

              Trump lies about this as well Right here in Texas we are the epicenter of a border and migration crisis unlike anything anyone has ever seen before in the history of our country. - Everyone knows it was much worse under Reagan and Bush II.

              Yet another lie - At the same time, they have totally obliterated your energy industry. - Oil prices have recovered and we are producing more energy than ever.

              He almost told the truth here - We ended the horrible catch and release, where we catch a criminal and release him into our country. - 1) it wasn't horrible, it was humanitarian and 2) the program didn't apply to criminals.

              We stopped asylum fraud - since there was no fraud, this is a lie.

              We reduced drugs pouring across our border by the highest percentage ever. - NOPE, not true either.  The pandemic helped some, but they are still flowing into the US at roughly the same rate as when he took office.

              We dealt a crippling blow to MS-13. - Surprisingly, that may be true.

              Now he is back to lies - we built almost 500 miles of border wall, the exact wall that the border patrol wanted. - Here is the TRUTH.  Trump built (and Americans paid for) a total of 452 miles of wall during his four years.  Of that, only 80 miles of wall were built where none existed before.

              Then there is this rambling, incoherent set of words - I thought we could use nice concrete plank. Just knock it out. They said, “Sir, we want steel, concrete, and rebar. And it has to be wired, sir. So we can all the drones the Democrat…” Remember they wanted drones? I said, “Drones are not going to stop people.” Do you remember the statement during the campaign? Two things. Everything’s obsolete like two days after they come up with it nowadays. Computers, everything obsolete. They got a better one.  - Can someone please tell me what he just said?

              Yet another Trump lie - You come in illegally, and we’ll also bring your mother, your father, your grandparents, your brothers, your sisters, your aunts, your uncles. Anybody else want to come in? Come on in.  He just makes things up because he knows his supporters don't think through any thing he says.


              I'll save this so as not to lose it to bit heaven and then continue on.

              1. My Esoteric profile image86
                My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                Let's continue on (btw, I am only 10 minutes into his speech and look how many lies he has told to you):

                Quite an imagination - We were fighting sanctuary cities, and doing very well. They’re meant for criminal aliens. That’s what they’re meant for. - No they weren't.

                Oh, such a lie - Biden’s border crisis is also helping drive an unprecedented crime wave, and you see the crime wave. - What is driving the crime, among other things, is Trump's hate speech and too many guns on the street.

                Disinformation equals this - The Democrats know their policies on crime are so unpopular, so radical, so crazy, they are now trying to pretend they never led the defund the police movement in the first place. Disinformation. - The Democrats didn't lead the Defund the Police so-called 'movement'.  It is just like saying all Republicans are insurrectionists just because a thousand+ were.

                I'll save this so as not to lose it to bit heaven and then continue on.

                1. My Esoteric profile image86
                  My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                  To continue on with quotes from the serial liar at CPAC:

                  Trump falsely states that In New York City, crime is out of control. It’s at record levels with nobody being prosecuted except of course innocent Republicans are being prosecuted. - Another LIE. The truth is "For the month of February 2021, New York City saw continued reductions in every major index crime category with the exception of grand larceny auto. Additionally, there is a 42 percent decrease in hate crimes. However, there continues to be an uptick in anti-Asian hate crimes."

                  And now he LIES about the 2nd Amendment - The same far left Democrats who are defunding police are also leading an all out crusade to strip you, the law abiding citizens of America, of your God given Second Amendment rights. - Not a word of truth in that statement. Democrats ARE NOT out to strip you of anything and the 2nd Amendment is not a "God given right" - it is a James Madison given right because he is the one that penned the 2nd Amendment.

                  This LIE is 19 minutes into his stream of falsehoods at CPAC - The big tech election interference in 2020 was an outrageous assault upon our Republic and upon the American voter. - What can I say about that?  He just made that up out of whole cloth.

                  Here is another funny LIE.  Trump falsely says Furthermore, these big tech companies interfered with and undermined the sacred integrity of the ballot box by censoring any honest discussion of election fraud.   - This is part of his Big Lie scheme.  There was no "interference" because there was no fraud to speak of.

                  Trump often says Every time the media references the election hoax, they say the fraud is “unproven. And while there is no evidence … ” No evidence? There’s so much evidence. - Everyone has to ask "What Evidence? Neither Trump nor anybody else provided any so-called "evidence" they claimed they had.  Bottom line, they LIED about that.

                  More LIES - They found 35,000 votes. Then they deleted in Georgia over 100,000 votes. Because they were so bad voters, - As I said, more LIES.

                  How about this revisionist history - The governor of Georgia and Georgia secretary of state let us down. They let us down. - The TRUTH is they protected American democracy while Trump was trying to subvert it.

                  More to Come.

                  1. My Esoteric profile image86
                    My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                    Now we are 25 minutes into Trumps stream of lies, falsehoods, and disinformation.

                    Can any one decipher this, it makes no sense? So I only speak the truth. So true. And the reason the Attorney General of the United States is going after Georgia is it’s so bad what they’ve done, and they’ll probably win, and that defense won’t take place. - Scratching my head trying to understand this string of unconnected sentences.  He starts out with a bald-faced lie - So I only speak the truth. So true. - No he doesn't, he RARELY speaks the truth.  It is true the AG is suing GA.  Who is "they"? Georgia?  The AG?  You get the picture.

                    LOL, he is losing it. And now we have those brand new F-35s and everything’s brand new, and we have a great military, or it’s coming soon and they won’t be able to stop it. - No, the F-35 came under Obama's watch, I even worked a little bit on the cost analysis for the program back before I retired in from the Air Force in 2008.  In fact the first F-35 was delivered in 2009. But, of course, it is not unusual for Trump to take credit for things he had no hand in.  As to that last sentence - do we have a great military or not? Is he suggesting the "great military" will come under Biden's watch?  No one really knows.

                    He LIES And there is another set of rules for law-abiding, conservative Americans, happen to be Republicans, who simply want to speak their minds and exercise their rights, like to talk about a rigged election. - Is he talking about the thousand or so conservative, Republican, Trump militia that stormed the Capitol and caused an insurrection under his leadership?

                    Still More to Come.

    37. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Five more rioters were identified and charged - all from the same family.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/13/politics … index.html

    38. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Here are the takeaways from the three books coming out about Trump's last year in office (analysis by Chris Cillizza - The Point)

      * Faced with a once-in-a-century public health crisis, Donald Trump not only drastically mishandled some of the basics (rapid testing for Covid-19, mask-wearing) but also actively worked to undermine public confidence in the very doctors, epidemiologists and public health experts who were working to keep Americans safe. -(I must mention that Trump did sign off on Operation Warp Speed)

      * Unable to accept that he had lost the election, Trump sought to use the official powers of the government -- including the Justice Department -- to try to find non-existent evidence of fraud. He created an environment in which a large chunk of Americans believed this Big Lie about the election and then not only incited the January 6 crowd but also stood by for hours as they ransacked the Capitol.

      * Trump, who repeatedly told crowds during the campaign that he had done more for Black people than any president since Abraham Lincoln, failed to grasp either the gravity or the goals of the Black Lives Matter protests. He saw the racial justice protests as nothing more than an uprising against HIM -- and tried to force the military to deploy to states where the marches were most prevalent. - In case you missed it, those goals were protesting frequent killings of black people by bad white cops and then being treated by the police leadership that Black Lives Did Not Matter.

      Now, how can any rational person disagree with those obvious conclusions?

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/13/politics … index.html

    39. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Now I am giving you a chance to trash talk our top military leaders as they cement the idea that Trump fits the definition of a terrorists.

      As it turns out Gen Milley, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, really though the Trump might attempt a coup with his army and had made plans to not let it happen.  Or, in his on the record words "They may try, but they're not going to f**king succeed,"

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/15/politics … index.html

      And this is the comment he made about Trump militia supporters "Milley told a group of senior leaders, "Here's the deal, guys: These guys are Nazis, they're boogaloo boys, they're Proud Boys. These are the same people we fought in World War II. We're going to put a ring of steel around this city and the Nazis aren't getting in."

      OR

      In support of my comparing Trump to Hitler, Milley viewed Trump as "the classic authoritarian leader with nothing to lose," the authors write, and he saw parallels between Adolf Hitler's rhetoric as a victim and savior and Trump's false claims of election fraud.
      "This is a Reichstag moment," Milley told aides, according to the book. "The gospel of the Führer."


      AND

      I have made this comparison as well "Ahead of a November pro-Trump "Million MAGA March" to protest the election results, Milley told aides he feared it "could be the modern American equivalent of 'brownshirts in the streets,'" referring to the pro-Nazi militia that fueled Hitler's rise to power.

      So, it is not just me thinking those things, it is the top military leadership as well.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/14/politics … index.html

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

        One man, one opinion. Not interested in a book that nothing is substantiated. Very careful wording on all the accusations. Feed for people that look for dirty laundry. Myself, I don't grub around for dirt.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          One man, lol.  The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is just "one man".  I figured you would dis our military to protect your man.  BTW, how do you know "nothing is substantiated"?  You don't.  The fact is those reporters have recordings of everything they say was said.  Certainly more than you have.

          It is truly amazing how Trump supporters make light of something that scared the pants off of our military leaders - the very real possibility that Trump would attempt a coup.

          But I guess that should not be surprising since these people don't think an insurrection happened on Jan 6.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

            My Man? Well, my man appointed him to his job. And Biden can replace him, and he puts his pants on like any other man or woman... They have direct quotes as they did actually use. as I said the quotes were careful wording on all the accusations. All the quotes talk about Milley's fears, doubts and he will not even at this point comment on the book...

            1. My Esoteric profile image86
              My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

              "I said the quotes were careful wording on all the accusations. " - How do you know that?

              "Well, my man appointed him to his job. " - Your point?  So what?

              "he will not even at this point comment on the book..." - Again, so what.  You are just deflecting away from the real issue - the Joint Chiefs made plans to oppose Trump should he stage a coup as they feared.  Of course many Trump supporters have said what America needs is a good coup.  Are you one of those?

    40. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      This Monmouth poll results show Trump and the right-wing conspiracy theorists are still a terrible danger to the health of Society and the health of our Republic through their Russian inspired disinformation campaign.  (Why do conservatives keep pushing Putin's talking points about America?  They must believe in the same politics that Putin does I guess.)

      Anyway,

      - the poll shows that a minority of Americans, 34%, have not received a vaccine (enough to keep us from herd immunity) - a public health hazard
      - the poll also shows that a minority of Americans, 32%, thind Biden won fraudulently. thereby destabilizing American democracy

      While both numbers are a minority, they are still sizable.  They are that large because of right-wing conspiracy theories and Trump.  Absent this assault by conservatives, we might be very close to herd immunity by now and Red States wouldn't be passing all of these voter suppression laws.

      Here is what this poll found:

      - 80% of Ds have been vaccinated
      - 90% of Ds think the election was fair
      - 40% of Rs have been vaccinated
      - 43% of Rs think the election was fair.

      Why are only 40% of Republicans vaccinated with Trump's vaccines?

      Why do 57% believe in the Big Lie.  Why are they so gullible?

      I suspect that most of the 20% of Democrats that aren't vaccinated are Blacks who listen to the disinformation about things like the Tuskegee experiment

    41. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Trump supporter destabilizes American democracy even further by Falsely claiming 74,000 Maricopa ballots shouldn't be counted.  Either on purpose or because of gross incompetence the Fake AZ so-called audit compared two unrelated lists prepared for political parties (i.e. not really used in the counting process) and concluded that 74,000 names that did not appear on both lists were probably illegally cast.

      He either didn't know or ignored the fact that many names of voters which appear on one list should not have appeared on the other.  If they did, something would be wrong.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/18/politics … index.html

    42. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      The first of Trump's militia to be charged with a felony for his part of the insurrection was sentenced to eight months in jail; DOJ had asked for 16 months.

      The judge said he was lenient because the felon pled guilty very early in the process, was not in the Senate chamber very long, and was not violent.

      The judge also said - "He was staking a claim on the floor of the United States Senate, not with the American flag but with a flag declaring his loyalty to a single individual over the entire nation,"  So don't tell me this guy invaded the Capitol for America.  He didn't, he did it for Trump.

      The judge also said this - "When a mob is prepared to attack the Capitol to prevent elected officials from both parties from performing their constitutional and statutory duty, democracy is in trouble ... the damage that they caused that day is way beyond the delays that day. It is a damage that will persist in this country for decades." - Trump supporters, including the commenters in this forum, simply do not understand the concept Judge Moss laid out so clearly.  That is why Trump is so dangerous to American Democracy.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/19/politics … index.html

    43. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Here is another way Trump Supporters are destabilizing our democracy - Threatening Election Officials.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/21/politics … index.html

    44. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      The headline to this analysis-opinion piece is Trump and the GOP spin fantasies to hide his crimes against the Constitution. In it they speak the TRUTH and talk about the RINO whitewashing of the insurrection.  They point out Trump' insanity and separation from reality with quotes like this -  "They were ushered in by the police. The Capitol police were very friendly," Trump told the reporters, referring to the sacking of Congress and assaults on police officers by his supporters.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics … index.html

    45. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Trump's insanity and detachment from reality on full display.  Listen to his audio sounding like a drunk Nixon (except Trump doesn't drink)

      https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … 60-vpx.cnn

      https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … 60-vpx.cnn

    46. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Yet another of Trump's peaceful, loving insurrectionist arrested, this time for violently whipping police with a metal whip.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/23/politics … index.html

    47. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      It is clear that Trump is delusiona l (as his latest rally proves).  It is clear that these delusion present a clear and present danger to American society (so says the intelligence community). 

      Wouldn't it then make sense that he be detained and placed in a mental hospital for his and our own good?

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/25/politics … index.html

      As evidence of that danger is the fact that SO MANY of RINO candidates are tying themselves to Trump's delusion and coming up with these illogical and insane statements like

      Even though Trump won Oklahoma with 65.4 percent of the vote, Lahmeyer says he's concerned: "Do I believe there was voter fraud in Oklahoma in 2020? Yes," he told CNN, after visiting Arizona. "I believe there was voter fraud in all 50 states ... Who could possibly believe the idea there were 80 million votes for Joe Biden?"

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/23/politics … index.html

    48. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      How much more unhinged and crazy can Donald Trump become after this incoherent rant:
      "The county has, for whatever reason, also refused to produce the network routers. We want the routers, Sonny, Wendy, we got to get those routers, please. The routers. Come on, Kelly, we can get those routers. Those routers. You know what? We're so beyond the routers, there's so many fraudulent votes without the routers. But if you got those routers, what that will show, and they don't want to give up the routers. They don't want to give them. They are fighting like hell. Why are these commissioners fighting not to give the routers?"

      Say What?

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/26/politics … index.html

    49. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Trump supporters - please try to square your belief that the Capitol insurrection was a nothing-burger with this officers claim he thought the insurrectionist's were trying to kill him.  Do you think he his making his story up and the video of it is fake?

      https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/07/2 … x-lead.cnn

    50. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Testimony for injured Metropolitan and Capitol police calls the "defund the police" faction of RINOs whitewashing of the Capitol insurrection disgraceful

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/27/politics … index.html

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Interesting that your link indicates that every minute of the day in the White House will be investigated.  That the opening ceremony was about the "harrowing" stories from police (pure sensationalism without any facts over causes), with opinions from cops that had and still have no solid information.  That there is no indication that previous riots played a part at all.  That there is no indication that the actions of security or the House members played a part.

        In other words, the ONLY thing to be investigated is what Trump did or said - nothing else matters.  Yet it is not a some kind of "political game" in spite of looking at nothing but Trump's actions.

        1. My Esoteric profile image86
          My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          "Interesting that your link indicates that every minute of the day in the White House will be investigated. " - As it should be.  Who knew what? When did they know it? What actions did they take?

          "harrowing" - Obviously that means you think the police were  lying about how bad it was for you to make fun of how serious it actually was.

          "s that every minute of the day in the White House will be investigated.  That the opening ceremony was about the "harrowing" stories from police (pure sensationalism without any facts over causes)" - This is pure obtuse disingenuousness, one of your interesting characterizes.  OF COURSE, there was no facts over causes.  Why? Because they wanted to put the result of the insurrection on full display and get how terrible it was on the record.

          "and still have no solid information." - More obtuseness and not even correct.  They got it on the record that the terrorists believed that "Trump sent the terrorist there".

          "That there is no indication that previous riots played a part at all. " - what relevance is there other than to deflect from the insurrection? DUH

          "That there is no indication that the actions of security or the House members played a part." - PLAYED apart in what?  Gather all those Trump supporters there and egging them on to violence? (Although I assume testimony will be resented about a least one House members role in fomenting the insurrection.)

          "In other words, the ONLY thing to be investigated is what Trump did or said - nothing else matters. " - ONCE AGAIN Duh!  They are looking for the cause of what happened.  It is clear Trump caused it so why shouldn't they be looking at Trump.  He instigated it all with his [b}Big Lie[/b].

          That said, if they miraculously stumble on a different reason for the insurrection, then they should pursue that - but don't hold your breath.

          Bottom line, Trump used violence for a political end to disrupt the function of government.  The definition of a terrorist.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            "Obviously that means you think the police were  lying about how bad it was for you to make fun of how serious it actually was."

            No - obviously it means that the objective was to raise an emotional response rather than something factual.  Political posturing rather than a search for facts.

            "OF COURSE, there was no facts over causes."

            But there ARE facts over causes.  A summer of rioting for a background, refusal to provide adequate protection in the forum of national guard when cautioned about what was about to go down.  But neither incriminates Trump so it will not be mentioned.

            "More obtuseness and not even correct.  They got it on the record that the terrorists believed that "Trump sent the terrorist there".

            Which means absolutely nothing - what people believe has nothing to do with reality.  Take a look at religion for the biggest example in the history of the world.

            "what relevance is there other than to deflect from the insurrection? DUH"

            I'm truly sorry that you cannot (or will not) recognize what months of rioting without repercussions will do to willingness to violate the law.  Most of us DO recognize that.

            "PLAYED apart in what?"

            In encouraging the riot (no repercussions, no reason not to).  Plus using a security force much too small played a huge part as well - had the capital been ringed with 1000 national guard it would not have happened.  Once more, unfortunately, it does not incriminate Trump so will not be discussed.

            "It is clear Trump caused it"

            And there you said it.  The cause is known (at least to the committee composed only of Trump haters), so no reason to look at anything else. 

            Bottom line: this "investigation" is no more than the other ones about Trump.  A witch hunt to preclude his running in the next election.  A political ploy, then, and it is emphasized by the makeup of the committee Pelosi allowed to form.  Only those already convinced were allowed to participate - anyone willing to look at anything but Trump was kicked off before it even began.  Just as you say - the "investigation" is not about finding causes, it is about hanging Trump.

    51. My Esoteric profile image86
      My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      More evidence that another Trump inspired insurrection is on its way.

      https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/28/politics … index.html

      1. crankalicious profile image93
        crankaliciousposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Based on the recent revelations that Trump told the Justice Department to say the election was corrupt and he would take care of the rest, yet of all people, Bill Barr knew it was all b.s., Trump should be tried for treason. He tried to execute a coup and overthrow an election and is still trying to this day.

    52. Live to Learn profile image75
      Live to Learnposted 13 months ago

      If so then we’d have to try Biden for his ignorance and treason

      1. Castlepaloma profile image74
        Castlepalomaposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Lol. I would be a hypocrite if  suggested prison for him into a world record amongst jails already too crowded.

        He is closer to a mental hospital for old folks home puppeted by far  worst terrorist strings.

        Just lead your own feelings and thoughts. A-hole$ go away better when we ignore them more.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
          Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          He is not operating under the guidance of himself, but others too numerous to mention, or know. Someday he will be dead and gone and all we have is hologram of him. How many would be okay with that unreal reality, I wonder?
          LOL! lol

          1. Castlepaloma profile image74
            Castlepalomaposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            He makes a great dummy for the powers to be.
            The walking dead are easier to control yet, too cruel to put him in a nursing home, covid is most deadly there.

    53. Live to Learn profile image75
      Live to Learnposted 13 months ago

      I don’t know. Can any democrat who advocated violence and/or bailed out rioters be tried for treason?

      Is the witch hunt going to work all ways or are you just not over the orange man bad mania?

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 13 months agoin reply to this

        Well, since protesters aren't terrorists ...  and protesters weren't advocating bringing democracy to its knees ...  Does that answer your question?

        What Democrats advocated anybody to march to the Capitol and stop its functioning (insurrection)?  I know of none.

        I know at least four RINOs who did - Trump, one of Trump's sons, Giuliani, and Brooks.

        What Democrats told protesters to get violent?

        Which Democrat said "we will have trial by combat" to a riled up crowd who was ordered to march on the Capitol? (But Giuliani did)

        Which Democrat said "“today is the day American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass,” " to a riled up crowd who Trump ordered to march on the Capitol to stop the certification of an election?  (But Mo Brooks did)

        When is Trump going to stop being a clear and present danger to democracy in America?  That is when I will get over that crazy person with a big mouth which way too many Americans consider God.

        NO Democrat advocated an insurrection or even violence at a protest.

        1. Castlepaloma profile image74
          Castlepalomaposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          The US military Complex kills a million or millions a year. Lock them all up for treason and genocide.

          Your more likely to be killed by a baby with a weapon than a terrorist.

    54. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 12 months ago

      Originally, there were no term limits for the president. Madison believed that a president who wanted to be reelected should be able to continue with his aspirations and plans as long as the people wanted him in office.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        That is true, until one did (Roosevelt) and conservatives pushed through the 22nd Amendment (I think I said 29th earlier and forgot to check).  Now, Netanyahu is calling that fascist.

        I wonder if Madison had been aware of Trump, he would still hold that opinion.  One of his biggest fears he wrote about and which consumed many hours of debate during the Constitutional Convention was how to prevent demagogues like Trump from getting elected in the first place.  They hoped the electoral college (the way they designed it) would do the trick.  Clearly it didn't.

    55. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 12 months ago

      CNN, come on, not many would trust CNN to do any form of a poll.  CNN can't be trusted in any respect. 

      https://dailycaller.com/2018/08/31/cnn- … fake-news/

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Only Trump supporters say that about CNN and that is because CNN won't lie about things like Fox does.  The rest of the world, not just America, trusts CNN much more than Fox.  This is from a recent study I found.  In the list that included CNN and Fox, they provided a "Reliability Score" and a "Bias Score.  The higher the Reliability Score is, the more accurate the information provided is.  For the Bias rating, the more Positive the rating, the more the source is biased to the Right.  The more Negative the rating, the bias goes to the Left.  A near zero rating means the source is relatively unbiased.

        Highest Reliability: AP at 51.98 (bias is -1.06)
        CNN Reliability: 42.22 (bias is -5.69)
        Fox News Reliability: 26.76 (bias is +15.31)
        Lowest Reliability: World Truth TV at 7.41 (bias at +8.48)

        Most Conservative Bias: American Thinker at 29.82
        Most Liberal Bias: Wonkette at -31.15

        While not the most reliable, CNN ranks up near the top and is relatively unbiased while Fox News is rated much, much lower and is very biased.

        BTW, the Daily Caller scores a lowish 23.93 in reliability, worse than Fox News, an very biased to the Right with 20.06.  Consequently, I wouldn't trust them at all.

        https://techpresident.com/unbiased-news-sources/

        FURTHER - CNN doesn't conduct polls, they hire somebody to do it (just like Fox News does).  That is why both CNN (with a B rating) and Fox (with an A or A/B rating, depending on which pollster they use) polls are trusted. 

        https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/

        FURTHER STILL - If you hadn't succumbed to a knee-jerk reaction and actually read the article, you would have found that CNN didn't conduct the poll.  Rather "The research was conducted by the Democracy Fund, a nonpartisan foundation that studies voter attitudes toward democratic institutions and works to strengthen democracy in the US."

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

          I never mentioned bias... I inferred they lack credibility, which I offered just a few examples of the reports they had to retract.  Their ratings are in the tank.

          June 2021 --- Fox News Tops Cable News Ratings in May as CNN Loses Half of Key Demo Viewership   https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox … 02050.html

          https://www.carolinacoastonline.com/nat … 2a2ed.html

          https://www.thewrap.com/may-cable-news- … c-fox-cnn/

          https://www.thewrap.com/cable-news-rati … primetime/

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            You offer self-serving anecdotes while I offer a broad survey.  Which is to be believed?  Biased anecdotes or an unbiased survey?

            There is another huge difference.  While CNN and all other outlets make mistakes, they admit to them and retract them.  Fox and the resto of the right-wing propaganda outlets outright lie to your face and when caught, double down.  Trump was a great inspiration for that and the Trump supporters enable it while eating it up.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

              It is rare that Fox has needed to retract a report. They as a rule present facts backed by facts.  They stick to facts, and not hyperbolic reports that are well twisted out of context.  I am very fact-based, and I find CNN not only bias at what they pick to report, but much of the time dishonest.

              It is clear by some of your posts that you do not look for facts. In this very thread, you go on and on about statements you claim Trump made, and have no actual proof. You do realize any and all of Trump's speeches are available on Cspan. Which is a very reputable outlet. You are picking up innuendos from biased news outlets. This is a problem when it comes to proving facts. You are being told what to believe, not what the facts reveal

              This thread is a perfect example of the problem that is occurring due to fake news.  You continue to believe and perpetuate falsehoods.

              Even the articles you provided, yes make accusations, but no do not prove the accusations they are pushing.

              You need to present proof of the statements you claim Trump made. As I said Trump's speeches are available in their entirety.

              1. My Esoteric profile image86
                My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                "It is rare that Fox has needed to retract a report. " - LOL

                1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                  I gave you a few links that backed my opinion on CNN --- Fact

                  Could you offer up a list of Fox retractions, as I did on CNN's many serious retractions on fake news? Fake news that many have their teeth in and won't let go of it?

                  By the way --- I have not noted CNN covering Biden's speech yesterday where he used a tone of strange whispering, and telling an out-and-out lie. He claimed "I wrote the bill on the environment"... He has not written a bill since 2008.

                  I am thankful so many other media outlets pointed out his confusing behavior. This is no longer a fact the media or most of the media is willing to hide.

                  1. My Esoteric profile image86
                    My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                    You apparently missed my point, when CNN makes a mistake, they own up to it.  Fox, on the other hand, will not own up to any of their mistakes or outright lies.  They take the Trump approach and double down on their misinformation.  Obviously, that is why I can't offer you any Fox retractions while you offer ones CNN made.  Bottom line, Fox is dishonest and CNN is honest.

                    And why do you keep doing the Trumpian thing of making fun of the way other people talk yet stay absolutely silent when Trump frequently stands up there making no sense whatsoever.  As to the "environment" thing, you should be red in the face with shame for not telling the truth about that.  YES, Biden did write environmental bills when he was in the Senate.

                    https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … ress-hist/

                    1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                      Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

                      I would think the facts show that Fox is most honest they have very few reports on record that they needed to retract. Also, CNN is doing so poorly in the ratings, would this not indicate they have lost the trust of media viewers.

                      But Old Joe seems not to know what year it is ... His statement was very clear --- " I wrote the bill on the environment"...  He wrote a bill in 1987. The bill is not relevant for him to support. Biden has not written a Bill since 2008. His comment did not make sense in any respect.   

                      I actually posted a thread on this very subject today.

              2. My Esoteric profile image86
                My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

                The articles I provided give testimony from the people Trump was directing his comments.  It is their testimony in court that will, in part, put him away for leading an insurrection.

    56. emge profile image80
      emgeposted 12 months ago

      I am appalled somebody should think that Donald Trump the ex-president is a terrorist. There are pages being written about it and I wonder if these people were writing all these pages really know what terrorism is? I have taken part in counterterrorism operations and I know what terrorism is. It is not just a definition. Labeling  Donald Trump as a terrorist does no good to the American image all over the world and this is a sign of desperation and the end of the American domination of the world. Some people who labeled the ex-president as a terrorist? well, what can you say about it?

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

        "I am appalled somebody should think that Donald Trump the ex-president is a terrorist." - WHY?  If the shoe fits.

        "Donald Trump as a terrorist does no good to the American image all over the world " - It shows the world that we are realists and are willing to clean our own house.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Kind of the point; the shoe only fits if the definition of terrorism is changed.  In other words, if the word is nothing but a label without connection to the real world.

          Much like the label "assault rifle" that is used to indicate an ordinary rifle that has been painted black.  Useful in stirring emotions but not in producing facts.

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 12 months agoin reply to this

            How was the definition of terrorism changed might I asked?  I quoted the legal definition and the shoe fits.

            Same with a weapon of war, and it doesn't make any difference what color it was painted.  The ONLY purpose of the assault rifle of choice is to kill as many people as possible in as short a period of time as possible.  And as we keep seeing so many times each year, it does just that.

    57. MG Singh profile image73
      MG Singhposted 12 months ago

      One thing good about American democracy is that if a maverick goes around shouting that Trump is a terrorist, the world doesn't listen.  The Americans are lucky that real terrorism practiced by the extremist Islamists in Europe and Pakistan has not reached America. Terrorism is like in the Rawalpindi school building when over 200 children were massacred. Calling trump a terrorist is a travesty of the word when the total number of persons killed in the Capitol Hill incident was just I think three. However, nobody can stop a man from stating what he feels is right but right-thinking people have to listen and just shrug their shoulders and forget about such comments. Repeat Trump was never a terrorist and nobody can call him one and just by stating in a paragraph doesn't mean he's a terrorist.

      1. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

        Very well put. In my view, n America, we have a segment of our society that fully has tendencies to become very hyper and add labels that are not appropriate to those they disagree with. They jump before knowing facts, and in most cases, facts don't matter anyway.  This kind of hyperbolic thought process is IMO, non-sensical, and causes division.  This is obviously a problem we are suffering from in  America.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 12 months agoin reply to this

          Sensationalism is alive and well here.  Headlines are all that matters, and they must be over the top to grab attention.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 12 months agoin reply to this

            Headlines that support TDS that is. Otherwise, anything about Biden's great blunders is ignored. And boy oh boy is Biden on a roll... 

            Biden is absolutely ignoring any and all problems that are building up and just causing many unnecessary problems.

    58. emge profile image80
      emgeposted 11 months ago

      Firstly, I have studied law and secondly, legal jargon is open to interpretation. There have been cases when dissenting judgments have been given when the evidence is the same. Coming to what you are stating that Donald Trump can try as a  terrorist is simply preposterous. Such statements emanating from America are making it a laughingstock in the world. Terrorism is not just a definition it also leads to an end result. In the 21st-century the only terrorist movements which have been recognized by the United Nations are mainly the Islamic movements. Thus we have the adage that all Muslims are definitely not Terrorists but  98% of terrorists arrested are Muslim adherents. One can go through the figures on the Internet. To classify Donald Trump as a terrorist means equating him with the vast number of terrorists who are killing school children, carrying out beheadings, and setting up suicide bombers. The law demands that one should be rational and not make accusations for the sake of making accusations. Honestly, I have a feeling that many people who are accusing Donald Trump is a terrorist is just passing the time, It is a good discussion to laugh off.

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Similarly to "assault rifle" and "racist", "terrorist" has come to mean no more than "I don't like him".  A method of denigrating someone with no more meaning than that the speaker doesn't like the person.  Certainly it has zero to do with the actual historical meaning, legal or otherwise, of the word.

      2. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        And I have studied law as well and prosecuted 67 cases for the Army (you don't have to be a lawyer to do that for most Courts Martials.

        By definition a terrorist is a person who uses violence or the threat of violence for political purposes.  Now you may have made up a different definition to fit your personal perception, but I use the legal definition.  More formally, it is

        "Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)."

        Let me ask you this.  Do you consider Putin a terrorist ?  Do you consider Un a terrorist?  How about Xi? Do you consider Maduro a terrorist?  I do in all those cases. 

        The fact they personally don't behead anybody or send out suicide bombers doesn't make them any less a terrorist if they use violence to gain a political end. 

        Putin has political opponents poisoned.  Un shoots his political opponents with bazookas, or something like that.  Xi imprisons, tortures, and murders Muslims.  Trump sends rabid followers to take over the Capitol where many people died and were injured.

        The only difference I see is the level of violence.  So, I am being rational and I am not making accusations for the sake of making accusations.

        BTW, why didn't you mention American domestic terrorists such as the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, the 3 percenters, as being recognized as such.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Doesn't your definition make the US a terrorist nation during WWII, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan and every other war we've ever fought, right from the War of Independence?  Not a single one of those opponents had laws that gave the US the right to do what we did, and our purpose was always to change the politics of our enemies.

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            Actually, No.  All those are wars conducted, for the most part, against armed combatants.

            Now I am sure you will point out American atrocities like Mai Lai and I will respond that that was an individual act of terrorism not authorized by the Army. In fact the Army prosecuted them even though conservatives loudly came to the lieutenants defense.

            Then you might mention the drone attacks that happen to unfortunately kill civilians.  I will respond we did our best NOT to kill civilians AND that THEY were not the TARGETS - therefore not terrorism.

            I am surprised you missed your chance of being correct by not bringing up conservative slavery in America or our genocide against Native Americans.  To me, those clearly meet the standards of national terrorism, let alone individual terrorist acts.

    59. emge profile image80
      emgeposted 11 months ago

      That is the way great empires function. What did the Ottoman Empire and Mughal empire do? for that matter the British and now the Chinese. 100,000 Uighur Muslims in concentration camps. The US did better.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Was "the US did better" sarcasm?  If so, then you would be right as I pointed out to Wilderness.

    60. emge profile image80
      emgeposted 11 months ago

      Another thing I have observed is that all the so-called terrorists you have mentioned are non-Muslims. You are really selective. Even in Pakistan all the terrorists being tried and tens on death row are Muslims. Why not go through the statistics and see the percentage of Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist terrorists vs others? Figures don't lie. In any case, I m withdrawing from this discussion. best of luck

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        No, it seems to me you are the one being selective by limiting terrorism to only Muslims.  All I was doing is pointing out they don't have a monopoly on it.

    61. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 11 months ago

      How about you check out a speech that is more relevant to today. The ridiculous race-baiting speech Biden offered up yesterday. referring to Republicans as civil war confederates. And comparing Texas's new proposed voting laws as big a threat as the Civil war. He should be kept inside under lock and key at this point. I realize what a hard time you are having moving on from Trump. But it's time to wake up to the fact we have a very confused man in the White House that is an embracement to the Country. It is becoming more and more evident that he needs to be removed from office due to his worsening mental state.

      Fox News is pretty much the only network that is reporting on Biden's failing mental status. hard not to be concerned when he continually appears very unhinged and confused always searching for words...

      Such a very confused man...  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCy4eUmlmFA

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEucxkTUG2c

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
        Kathryn L Hillposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Tucker explained: "Aging improves him!"
        He will be 86 the next election ... and even more empty headed.

        I guess an "easily controlled' leader is what the people wanted this time around ...

        judging by the very fair election results.

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
          Kathryn L Hillposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Tucker explained: "Aging improves him!"
          He will be 86 the next election ... and even more empty headed.

          I guess an easily controlled leader is what the people wanted this time around ...

          judging by the very fair election results.



          Q. What promotes elections which reveal the TRUE will of the CITIZENRY?

        2. crankalicious profile image93
          crankaliciousposted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Cuckoo.

          1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
            Kathryn L Hillposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            Q. What promotes elections which reveal the TRUE will of the CITIZENRY?

      2. crankalicious profile image93
        crankaliciousposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        I'm sure there's exaggeration about the laws. However, what is not in dispute is that the Republican measures being passed around the country are anti-democratic. They unfairly disenfranchise Democratic voters. They put elections in the hands of partisan officials.

        And Trump's speech is quite relevant. You're talking about the likely Republican nominee for President in 2024. He's the most anti-American, anti-Democratic president we've ever had. But apparently, a great swath of Americans want an authoritarian leader. We're not going to be a Democracy for too much longer at this rate.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

          "They unfairly disenfranchise Democratic voters. They put elections in the hands of partisan officials."

          I can't converse on all the different newly proposed state voting laws. I have only read the Georgia bill. I can honestly say I found nothing discriminatory in the new laws, I found the opposite. They seemed to make things much easier for all voters. They never had drop boxes, and now will, and the food and water thing seem good, one can have food and water 150 feet from the polling machines. They have longer hours and better weekend hours. yes, they will be requiring IDs but offer all free IDS.

          The voting laws have always been in the hands of the legislators of each state. I believe this has worked very well up until this last election. It was clear many states needed to change some of the voting laws that are not as fair as could be. Some of the very worst voting laws are in Delaware, New York, and a few other blue states. I would think more citizens in those states would be upset some have no dropboxes, no early voting, or very little early voting.

          Georgia needed to change their laws, they were in some ways unfair, and they have. And look what it has turned into.

          Maybe we all should cool down a bit,  and really have a look at voting laws in our own states, and compare them to the new laws that are being talked about. I think most of us would be surprised at our own laws in how they compare to the new laws of Georgia. Now, this is just my opinion, but I truly think this is all political and the media is stirring up a big old mess, that has no real truth to it.

          I hope the Supreme Court will have a long look at the AG Garlands case, and I trust them to rule if they see discrimination in the Georgia laws.

          I know we feel very differently about Trump, so it would seem anti-productive to go there.

          1. crankalicious profile image93
            crankaliciousposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            The changes in the laws in Georgia are specifically targeted at Atlanta, which is overwhelmingly Democrats.

            That said, please remember that I support voter ID. So I'm not opposed to making certain changes that will encourage confidence in voting.

            The places where the supposed fraud occurred where all controlled by Republicans and Republican officials made the calls about the validity of the elections. Then they recounted and audited all the votes two or three times. Still, apparently not good enough.

            Look at the recent case in Michigan brought by Trump's lawyers. The judge asked them if they had done any due diligence on the so-called fraud claims they used to bring the cases. None of them had.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

              I am not aware of the Michigan case, but I will take your word. I did follow some of Trump's lawsuits just after the elections, and I did note Judges that said the same and tossed the case out for being poorly prepared or in some cases filed in the wrong court.

              Yes, It seems the Republicans in Georgia did hold their own and claimed after each recount no little fraud was found.

              In my view, Georgia should have not changed their voting laws, their officials did not use good sense. It only worked to make a big old mess.

              1. My Esoteric profile image86
                My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                Bravo - we agree.

          2. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            So let's look at just GA, granted it is nowhere near as bad as Texas.

            You said "They never had drop boxes," - I guess it depends on your time frame.  Did GA have drop boxes in 2018? No.  Did they have them in 2020?  Yes. Where they used in 2020?  Yes, a lot by Democratic voters.  Did GA restrict their use in 2022? YES - thereby making it harder for Democrats to vote.

            The state’s new voting law, passed by the Republican majority of the General Assembly, limits the availability of the boxes in future elections, especially in Democratic areas where voters relied on drop boxes.  So, I guess you are wrong, it is NOT EASIER.

            In fact, they made drop boxes mute because of the restrictions on where they can be placed and the hours of access.  If somebody wants to use a drop box now, they might as well just hand it to the election official who is present, why bother with the box?   That is much Harder than Easier.

            You say "Georgia needed to change their laws, they were in some ways unfair," - WHY did they NEED to change their laws, the election was essentially [fraud free[/u].  You CLAIM it was in some ways unfair.  HOW?  Because they made it easier to vote in 2020?  How is that unfair?

            Other restrictions that make it Harder to Vote.

            1. The law shorten's the timeline on when you can request an absentee ballot from 180 days to 79 days.  WHY?  It makes it harder on everybody including election officials.

            2. State officials are now prohibited from sending out ballot request forms unsolicited.  WHY?  What purpose is served? This will make it Harder to vote.

            3.  It puts partisan Republicans in charge of the State Election Board and the Board can get rid of local election officials they don't like (which I think they have already done in Atlanta.)

        2. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

          I would ask you kindly to have a look at Delaware's current voting laws. The actual fact is that they never used drop boxes prior to the COVID crisis, and so far will not be using them again unless they change the law. They require ID to vote and do not mail out mail-in ballots unless one fills out an absentee voting request. The hours to vote are very poor and inconvenient to anyone that works. By law one can be arrested for being caught handing out any form of free anything... I could go on and on.

          If one was to compare Georgia's new laws one might just reverse all of the above...  I ask you to have an open mind and just check out the true facts, many states have the same laws as Delaware, and no one is brought lawsuits against these states. Should you not at least question why?  I feel this entire mess is a political stunt.  https://elections.delaware.gov/information/law.shtml

          Gosh, facts are out there, we need to really have a look at some of these other state laws before claiming Georgia's laws are definitory.

          In my view, none of the states set out to discriminate. Just my opinion

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            "I would ask you kindly to have a look at Delaware's current voting laws." - AND I would ask you to review the laws Delaware is passing.

            https://www.delawareonline.com/story/ne … 818801001/

      3. crankalicious profile image93
        crankaliciousposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        Mental faculties diminish in everyone over about 70, so probably best not to take anyone over 70 seriously. In fact, we have a voting age - 18. Perhaps once somebody reaches the age of 71, they should no longer be able to vote since we know their mental acuity declines.

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Well, in some cases you are correct, just think how many would need to vacate Washington.  I am not for discriminating due to age, but I certainly would be for the cognitive tests for some jobs. Job's that give the worker authority for the safety of others or the well beings of others.  Actually, cognitive skills start declining in ones 40's. Some studies show it began as early as in one's 20's.

          I also can say as a nurse, it's very easy to spot a decline in cognitive skills. Just my opinion.

          How they communicate is number one. If one becomes angry due to not being able to come up with a proper word or just rambles off subject or needs notes to read to answer questions, it may be time for a cognitive test.

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            A mental stability test is something Trump should have been given prior to assuming the job.  If they had, we wouldn't be in such a poor state of afffairs today.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

              Thought you would be interested in this --- I know how you like to keep up on investigations and feel Congress has full right to investigate. We now have this ---

              GOP seeking White House documents on Biden family members trying to 'profit off the presidency'

              House Republicans probe Hunter Biden's art deal and other Biden family business ventures...   It would appear the GOP is hunting for pay-for-play scams. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/gop … 06635.html

              And yikes then there is today's polls ---- The latest figures include 28% who Strongly Approve of the job Biden is doing and 40% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -12. (see trends)

              1. My Esoteric profile image86
                My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

                "GOP seeking White House documents on Biden family members trying to 'profit off the presidency'" - They can do anything they want, but until they have something akin to the Trump nepotism, I am not going to get to excited.

                Does Hunter's art sale have a "potential" for taint?  Maybe.  The former White House ethics official raises some interesting points.  But then he can raise the same points about ANYTHING Hunter does to make money. 

                If they pursue it, they will need go to court with real evidence of wrong doing, which of course they do not have.  Their evidence will be as real as the fake fraud evidence they claimed to have but really didn't.

                So, Republicans, have at it and you will end up with more egg on your face for being totally petty.

                That said, if they actually find some "pay-to-play" then the people doing it ought to be held accountable.   But I suspect, this will end up like Trump's Big Lie

                Your poll must be that Republican Rasmussen poll.  I looked at the averages and Biden is still at a steady 52%

                1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

                  Thursday, July 15, 2021

                  The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll,  for Thursday shows that 48% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Biden’s job performance. Fifty percent (50%) disapprove.

                  The latest figures include 29% who Strongly Approve of the job Biden is doing and 41% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -12. (see trends)
                  https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public … ack_july15

      4. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        "How about you check out a speech that is more relevant to today." - AND HOW is his speech a month or so ago not relevant to today?  It just keeps proving how delusional he and his supporters are.

        And this is still true about him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 11 months agoin reply to this

          Too much going on currently to be talking about a past president. I realize you don't seem to be able to digest all the current messes Biden has the country in. But I have a great interest in keeping my eye on the very confused man sitting in the White House. I think anyone that voted for this poor soul should be ashamed.

          1. My Esoteric profile image86
            My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

            I haven't noticed very many "messes".  As to voting, remember you voted for and support whatever this is - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI

    62. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 11 months ago

      The book does not quote Milley -- "Rucker and Leonnig interviewed more than 140 sources for the book, though most were given anonymity to speak candidly to reconstruct events and dialogue. "

      Milley was not interviewed for this book. at all. And he has not commented on its contents. Again the CNN report has provided a sentence here and there with no context to the actual deminer of these hyperbolic unsubstantiated sentences.

      We have no proof that Milley made or was even considering any form of plans to oppose Trump.

      The book is not out yet, I am sure when it comes out the context of the anonymous statement will become more clear.

      Trump offered a statement on the book --- 
      "I never threatened, or spoke about, to anyone, a coup of our Government," Trump wrote in his statement, adding, "So ridiculous!"

      One could assume if Milley had information that the president was planning a coup Milley had the responsibility to report this to Congress.  So, it would appear if he truly had these feelings as this book reports, he was negligent in his duty. 

      I think he needs to clarify the accusations in the book. Perhaps he will when it comes out next week. He certainly is walking a fine line.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        "The book does not quote Milley " -- It took awhile, but I finally found this from The Guardian - "“The gospel of the Führer,” the authors quote Milley as saying."

        "Milley was not interviewed for this book. at all. " - What is your source for that claim?

        "We have no proof that Milley made or was even considering any form of plans to oppose Trump." - IT IS all on tape.

        "The book is not out yet, I am sure when it comes out the context of the anonymous statement will become more clear." - I am sure it will and then how will you spin what it reports?

        "One could assume if Milley had information that the president was planning a coup Milley had the responsibility to report this to Congress. " - WHERE did you come up with the idea that Milley had such information?  Not from what has been reported so far.  Without your twist, what WAS reported is that Gen Milley was "very worried" that Trump might do something and made plans to obstruct it.

    63. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 11 months ago

      Do you even keep up with current events? Seems odd how you dwell on Trump. Almost like you have an obsession.

      1. My Esoteric profile image86
        My Esotericposted 11 months agoin reply to this

        It is clear you don't since Trump's anti-democratic bad actions are major news everyday, including his recent CPAC speech which I am quoting from..  But then you don't listen or read anything that would dare criticize Trump.

        It is very noticeable that you don't criticize Trump's lies - How come?

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)