Did Trump Really Try To Implement a Coup?
Wow, another woman wants a convicted rapist (albeit Civil) and probable multiple felon to be her leader. Unfathomable!!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 … -for-2024/The kind of violent, hateful Trump rhetoric that caused the Jan 6 insurrection is on full display again. Trump wants to be dictator and the people who have been thoroughly brain-washed don't care.
Trump is a highly skilled demagogue whose facility for injecting falsehoods and conspiracies into the country’s political bloodstream creates a swirl of chaos and acrimony in which he alone seems to prosper. And his words shape public opinion. In a recent CNN poll, for example, only 28% of Republicans thought Biden legitimately won sufficient votes to win the 2020 election. - That shows you how much Republicans are disconnected from reality.
Jail can't come soon enough for this vermin.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/11/politics … index.htmlRemember - Trump Doesn't Joke.
Trump threatens to indict his political opponents if reelected
Trump’s promise of payback for prosecution follows years of attacking democratic traditions
Trump claimed he is being targeted by the special prosecutor, who is nonpartisan, for political reasons and vowed to retaliate against President Joe Biden if he is elected president in 2024 - (Everybody but the brainwashed know he isn't being targeted for political reasons.)
"“There was an unwritten rule” to not prosecute former presidents and political rivals, Trump told supporters in a speech at his golf club in New Jersey. “I will appoint a real special prosecutor to go after the most corrupt president in the history of America, Joe Biden, and go after the Biden crime family.” - SAYS the ultimate American Authoritarian.
(and yet people in this forum STILL want this rapist elected president, very puzzling!)
https://www.politico.com/video/2023/09/ … ed-1046312
https://apnews.com/article/trump-retrib … 6139d79f51It appears Trump was not found to be guilty of rape in a court of law. However, I must consider Ms. Carroll's accusations, as I do in regard o all the women that came forward to complain of Biden's unwanted inappropriate overtures and Reide's Rape accusation.
"NEW YORK (AP) — A jury found Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $5 million in a judgment that could haunt the former president as he campaigns to regain the White House.
The verdict was split: Jurors rejected Carroll’s claim that she was raped, finding Trump responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse. The judgment adds to Trump’s legal woes and offers vindication to Carroll, whose allegations had been mocked and dismissed by Trump for years."Maybe some jurors didn't consider finger penetration rape? It is rape in my book, maybe not yours.
From a PBS interview:
The jury deciding that she was sexually abused by him, but not raped, how should we look at that distinction here?
Laura Beth Nielsen, Northwestern University:
Well, the distinction in law is about penetration.
So what we know that he has been found liable for is touching, grabbing, groping for his own sexual pleasure against her will. And, in a way, it's a distinction without a difference. Somebody who's willing to do one over the objection of a victim is probably willing to do the other.
But from a legal standpoint, it is a different charge.
Had Trump done that to you, would you claim you were not raped?
Yet you still want him to be president. Puzzling.it would appear that some of the jury did not believe her. If that was done to me, I would have with great speed reported the rape. I would not have entered a dressing room with a man and tried on clothes in front of him. If I did, I would be fully aware of what might occur.
I have made it very clear, I will be voting for whoever the Republican candidate is. If it is Trump, he will get my vote. I want a president who has the ability to govern, I have witnessed Trump govern. I was very pleased with his job performance. This is the bottom line with me --- I don't care about much else at this point. I have one hope, and that is to have Republicans back in the White House out, and hopefully then soon the Congress.I searched several stories to see if your claim Carroll changed clothes in front of Trump - I couldn't find any mention of it. So I need a a source for that puzzling claim.
Even if you had been aware, but you ended up saying NO, but he assaulted you anyway. Does being "aware" give him the excuse to attack you without your permission? Somehow I don't think so.
So, you are saying you have enough courage to take one of the most powerful men to the police after he was done sexually assaulting you. You have more courage the two or three dozen women he actually did assault. Do you think you have more courage and would be willing to have your life totally destroyed?
America has witnessed how Trump has governed and they didn't like it one bit - that is why they turned him out of office in 2020.
So long as a person can govern, you "don't care about much else at this point". Am I to read into that statement that they could be a murderer, but that is alright. Is that what you are claiming. Or how about being responsible for thousands of deaths even though they didn't pull the trigger. You are certainly claiming they can be a rapist, and you are OK with that. Or they could be a convicted felon, that presents no problem? I am very puzzled about that." I would not have entered a dressing room with a man and tried on clothes in front of him. If I did, I would be fully aware of what might occur."
Context --- this was something I shared I WOULD NOT DO. I did not say she undressed or tried cloths on... Her testimony indicated she willingly accompanied him to a dressing room.
He had no right to assault her in any respect.
I certainly would report any person if they assaulted me. I could care less about who they were.
At this point, I find it very much crustal to remove what I look at as a form of cancer from our Government. Your comment in regard to whether would I vote for a murderer is hyperbolic and somewhat silly.
In my view, both men raped a woman. So who will you be voting for? LOL
As I have shared many times --- I believe women when they come forward with rape charges as well as women that step up with a man putting their hands on them in an inappropriate manner.
You need not ask me again if I will be voting for Trump. I will be voting for whoever is the Republican on the ballot.
I see Biden as a flawed human being, that did a very poor job as president, and the ideologies he supports are offensive to me.
I don't think I could be clearer."I don't think I could be clearer."
You are a staunch Republican and ever if their candidate sported horns on his head you would support him or her.
And I am a staunch Democrat, but I would sit it out if I thought that the Democrats deviated from the ideology that allow me to support them or offered a candidate who was Indicted with myriads of criminal charges. I would never vote for a Republican based on the GOP platform, but I will sit out a "bad actor" under the Democratic banner.When you wouldn't vote for any bad dog put forward by the Dem, nor vote for a Rep candidate, you loss or hoard your franchise. This type of mindset is not good at all. In Nigeria, where I live and registered to vote, I opt for any candidate that can do better, parties aside. Candidates can cross party lines to another few months before voting day. My candidate(s) loss and appeal. Today a Court in Chiacago, will decide if a university in Chiacago certified the current Nigerian president. This will help clarified whether the current Nigerian president submit a minimum qualification. D' you get me? Thanks.
I could not vote with confidence for neither a Republican nor a soiled Democrat candidate.
In my opinion neither could do better.In my opinion nearly ALL of either party are soiled. It has been years and years since I didn't vote for "the lesser of two evils".
True, it ultimately comes down to a matter of degree and extent depending upon your point of view.
Of course I disagree, don't I always. I didn't think Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama, or Biden were the lesser of two evils. Nor did I think Ford, Reagan in the first term, Bush I, or Bush II were evil, just pushed the wrong ideology from my point of view.
Trump, on the other hand, is pure evil, as is DeSantis and Ramaswamy.We don't disagree, I had a clear choice under those circumstances that you present It is only in those rare electoral sessions when the choice is less clear. But, when it comes to Republicans verses Democrats the choice is usually clear. It may be that my Democratic candidate is not far enough left for my preferences, but do I really believe that a Republican would be better?
Or found guilty of rape. Can you imagine Trump sitting down with a female head of state with that on his record. YUCK.
Personally, I wouldn't sit it out, but I would write in someone worthy. Also, if it were a Republican like Will Hurd vs some Democratic Trump look-alike, I would vote for Hurd. He has shown enough backbone to warrant it. Not sure I could vote for Cheney, but maybe a Kitzenger.You keep falling back to photoshopped photos where the participants said what you see is not what someone made it look like.
I would offer a write in candidate, maybe. Fortunately, I haven't had to make choices like this, thus far.
You said " I would not have entered a dressing room with a man and tried on clothes in front of him. " - there is only ONE way to interpret that statement and that is you think Carroll did just that. If you didn't want people to think that, why did you write such an inflammatory statement??
You are clearly braver than 99% of the women out there.
You said "So long as a person can govern, you "don't care about much else at this point"" - Are you taking that back now that the subject is murder? Why?
In one case there is a lot of evidence that Trump raped Carroll and ZERO evidence that Biden did (beyond that of a proven liar and fabricator). But, I understand your need to put the two on the same level.
Doing a poor job is certainly your right to think and say. It is just unfortunate there is little evidence to back that view up.The polls back up my view. You can choose to ignore the polls --- I don't. The majority of Americans feel Biden is doing a poor job. You sit in a minority.
"You are clearly braver than 99% of the women out there."
Psychic are you?
The rest of your comment is redundant.Nope, just observant.
Once again, polls are subjective and based on emotions. They are rarely based on objective data.
That said, if people still feel the way the polls show come late 2024, Biden will be in deep trouble - unless Trump is the nominee. But, I really doubt that is what the polls will show then.
After 100 years, progressives were finally able to start taking politics out of the federal workforce. Prior to this, a president could effectively staff the federal bureaucracy with acolytes at ALL levels. In 1883, the first Civil Service Reform Act was passed to try to take the politics out of our federal workforce.
By the time I began working for the federal gov't, the reforms were largely successful
The Pendleton Act, as it was called: "provided that federal government jobs be awarded on the basis of merit and that government employees be selected through competitive exams. The act also made it unlawful to fire or demote for political reasons employees who were covered by the law."
It worked very well - UNTIL TRUMP CAME ALONG!!! A non-partisan federal workforce is still in existence, but hanging on by a thread.
There are several levels to the executive agencies. First, you have the very political agency heads and their assistance and deputies. Most of those are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. When a president changes, so do most of these positions.
The next level down are your Senior Executive Service personnel. This level was established in a 1978 Civil Service Reform Act, about five years after I started my career (I actually applied for and SES position a couple of times before I retired, but let's say I am not the best networker alive and wasn't selected.) For the most part, these positions are the executive link between the political appointees and the rest of the federal civil servants. They are not politically appointed and they do not rotate when presidents change. They become the "memory" of the Executive Branch.
Below that are the General Service (GS) personnel, non-blue collar workers, and Wage Grade (WG/WS) for blue collar workers. These are the worker bees of any federal agency and have many protections built in to keep politicians from screwing up their lives and putting pressure on them to act certain ways. I was a GS worker.
It was the SES and senior GS that Trump took aim at with Executive Orders near the end of his term in his effort to politicize the government. He created a new Schedule (F) that effectively put us back to the 1800s in terms of having a non-professional, spoils system bureaucracy at the policy formulation level and would have rescinded the bolded part of the Pendleton Act of 1883.
Fortunately for America, he lost in 2020, and Biden, in one of his first acts saved the federal workforce and reversed Trump's executive order. He is about to pass a rule that will make it much harder for politicians so inclined to fill the federal workforce with the lackeys.
Now the Republican candidates are calling for the federal workforce to be politicized and weaponized again.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/16/politics … index.htmlI consider this more Republican rubbish, public sector jobs have been one of the few dependable sources of equal opportunity employment and advancement for minorities. When Trump puts in his cronies reintroducing the spoils system, he will seek a workforce that is pledged to serve HIM and not so much the American people. This, I consider, is part of his "retribution" against Blacks and its generally anti-Trump electorate.
He must be stopped and stopped hard....I have no problem with reducing the number of govt. employees. And while we're at it, cancel the Davis Bacon act, which requires federal contractors to pay employees the highest wage in the area.
Neither has anything to do with "retribution" against dark skinned people - that's just imagination. As far as "equal opportunity", that has been nonexistent for years as the playing field was tilted sharply in favor of blacks and other minorities with affirmative action. We're still seeing lawsuits over the inherent, legally prescribed systemic racism of that one!Talk about living in an unreal world! Your Pollyanna view of America simply doesn't exist.
I must wonder if you wouldn't have exhibited the same sentiments in 1864 about the 13th Amendment, proclaiming Blacks get all the breaks. Why isn't there an amendment freeing the oppressed Whites. It is unfair that only Blacks receive preferential treatment."Why isn't there an amendment freeing the oppressed Whites. It is unfair that only Blacks receive preferential treatment."
And indeed the question is before the courts right now, freeing the oppressed Asians, Indians, Whites and every other race from the preferential treatment from ivy league schools.
There is no doubt in my mind this could happen again today in some parts of the South - the kidnapping of six young Black girls by the police.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/17/us/leesb … index.html
Remember, this was not that long ago - 1963 when I was in high school.
"“Leesburg was known as Lynchburg … They lynched Black people on the trees,” she said.
For almost 60 days, the girls were unable to bathe, forced to remain in the clothes they were wearing when they were arrested. Reese said they were fed hamburgers that were delivered by a stranger daily. They used the hamburger wrapping for toilet paper, she said.
That is America in the South and not a whole lot has changed in the minds of many there. The ONLY reason conditions like these aren't repeated today are the laws that Conservatives say unjustly favor the Blacks.The lust for control and power never really changes with these folks, it, unfortunately, is just covered over and camouflaged. Why would you do something like that to young girls, be it 60 years ago or today? Have we really expunged all of the nastiness associated with that era? I have to wonder.
"That is America in the South and not a whole lot has changed in the minds of many there."
Like Credence often does, you have confused times long ago with today. It is NOT America in the South, although it WAS. I do have a hard time understanding how affirmative action would prevent such a thing today. Perhaps you can explain that connection in more depth?There is no confusion. Sure, the lynchings have stopped, but those modern racists just find new ways to oppress minorities (including Asians and Indians and Latinos).
I'll let Credence do the explaining on that since he lives it.
Maybe this will help you understand -
https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/05/2 … kg-vpx.cnn
With the way MAGA is taking America, it could happen again.I strongly object to the insinuation that Americans could be involved in such a heinous act. Such an accusation is entirely unwarranted, and regrettably, there is a segment of our society that holds such a negative view of our American community. We have made significant progress in our nation's race relations, and witnessing this kind of sentiment is deeply disheartening to me. Hopefully, your sentiment does not exist widely.
There was no insinuation, it is FACT. If you read the article, that was in Americus (how ironic), and Leesburg, GA.
Credence, does that sentiment exist widely with people who have their eyes and ears open? What comes to mind is how Trump treated those seeking asylum in America.
Willowarbor, how about from your experience?
How about anybody else reading this that aren't MAGA." With the way MAGA is taking America, it could happen again".
These are your words... This is insinuating such an atrocity could happen again. To point the finger at any group is uncalled for, and in my view, hateful. Your mindset is shocking.
I do hope others join in this conversation. It would be enlightening to know other's views on your sentiments.Can these things still happen? Absolutely. There is a growing atmosphere in America that has certainly made it easier for fringe hate groups to come out of the shadows and for racism to be reignited.
Just look at the Nazi groups assembling in Florida and the shooter who killed three black folks in Jacksonville simply because they were black. And those are just two of many, many examples. It feels as if we are backsliding on progress made. Also, we have a troubling trend of near silence from key political figures when these events happen. We should be vilifying these people and these acts. We should be chasing them back into the shadows. It's scary that we're not.
Off topic but I've always felt that Trump was able to connect with those who we're upset about a black man being elected to the highest job in the land.And yet it is only a few years since the skinheads in Northern Idaho were driven out by the people there. Not by the FBI, not by the CIA, not by the cops but by the people living there. A proud moment in my states history.
Good for Idaho, now they just need to follow through and start voting for Democrats.
Unlikely. We know who is destroying the country and who is building it.
Yes, MAGA Is destroying it right before our eyes (didn't you watch the interview or read the transcript like I did?) while Democrats and Independents are desperately trying to save it.
"We have made significant progress in our nation's race relations, and witnessing this kind of sentiment is deeply disheartening to me. Hopefully, your sentiment does not exist widely."
But symbolic and substantive progress are two different things.Yes, they are. However, in my view, his comment was uncalled for altogether. It insults the progress we have made. How could anyone think that this kind of action could be taken against black citizens today?
I have nothing more to say on the subject. I shared my view, and you know what, I have zero in common with any American who even thinks this way. What a load of BS. This kind of hate is palpable and sickening. The more this kind of subversive language is used the more I see how very evil this faction of our society is. Just imagine pointing the finger at any political faction and claiming that they could commit such an atrocity. This should not be encouraged or excused. Again how dare ECO make such a statement.
I rarely lose my temper, but this sickens me.
ECO post --- " Maybe this will help you understand -
https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/05/2 … kg-vpx.cnn
With the way MAGA is taking America, it could happen again."
Sure it could. In your dreams, anyway - modern laws, rather than those in 1921, are just a wee bit different than they were then.
Yes, I said that, which is why, until recently anyway, outright expressions of racism and bigotry have faded somewhat. But that doesn't mean these types of people have changed their attitudes. They are just more circumspect on how they show it and more inventive to get around the laws (until they manage to get them repealed.)
Yes, the more blatant expressions have not been seen by me. Our neighbors keep to themselves and when we do meet over the proverbial cup of sugar, we are very careful to avoid the topic of politics as I see Trump banners in their yards. As they are almost irritatingly ingratiating in avoiding conversation on any controversial topic as they assume I would probably disagree with them and they would be correct.
I can see this conversation happening at some factory or corporation in America today as well (not in the Army of course since, against great Conservative opposition, it was integrated in 1948 by Democrat Harry S. Truman).
"As Black women rose through the ranks, civilians and military personnel continued to challenge their credentials. When [Charity Edna] Adams was promoted to major, a white colonel called her into his office and said bluntly, "Don't let being an officer go to your head; you are still colored, and I want you to remember that. Your people have to stay in your place. Why, your folks might have been slaves to my folks in South Carolina." That tirade lasted for three-quarters of an hour." - Smithsonian, March 2023.
As I suspect Credence will tell you those kinds of attitudes have not changed a whole lot. Because of protective laws (again, over the objection of Conservatives), they aren't said out loud as much any more. But with the advent of MAGA, even that prohibition is fading.Really we voted a black man in office not once but twice. A man who won by a good majority of votes.
Your sentiment is very sad and disheartening.Barak Obama is one such man in the 21st century. Who's the other black guy? I'm very curious.
Those majority of votes that pushed Obama over the came from non-whites. If whites only were allowed to vote, both McCain and Romney would have won.
please check the stats, I think you may feel differently when you see the entire picture. https://www.politico.com/story/2008/11/ … won-015297
But, you have a right to believe what you choose.No, i won't believe what I choose but what stats clearly tell me. I will check out your link and get back with you.
https://ropercenter.cornell.edu/how-groups-voted-2012
Data for the 2012 election
Data from the 2008 election
"Still, four years ago, Obama did manage to get a very respectable 43 percent of white voters to choose him over Goldwater's Senate successor from Arizona, Sen. John McCain.
"https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2012/10/26/163730734/obama-may-not-need-to-repeat-2008-support-from-white-voters-to-win"Fully 96 percent of black voters supported Obama and constituted 13 percent of the electorate, a 2-percentage-point rise in their national turnout. As in past years, black women turned out at a higher rate than black men.
A stunning 54 percent of young white voters supported Obama, compared with 44 percent who went for McCain, the senator from Arizona. In the past three decades, no Democratic presidential nominee has won more than 45 percent of young whites."
Many of us Republicans crossed over and voted for Obama also not caring doe McCain's agenda.
"What percentage of Republicans voted for Obama?
Barack Obama captured the White House on the strength of a substantial electoral shift toward the Democratic Party and by winning a number of key groups in the middle of the electorate. Overall, 39% of voters were Democrats while 32% WERE Republicans — a dramatic shift from 2004 when the electorate was evenly divided."I don't debate that subsections of the white electorate gave Obama a majority of its support, I am talking about the composite white electorate as a whole. It did not...
Oh -- so ignore those who did decide to step away from the GOP and vote for a man they felt would be a good president. I get it. This says a lot and tells me something. Although the Obama elections should have shown great progress in race relations --- it was not noted by some.
The composite showed he gleaned Overall, 39% of voters were Democrats while 32% were Republicans.I don't want to detract from your point that whites voted in record numbers for a Black candidate, which points to some progress. I get that, just trying to provide some statistical accuracy.
Electing a Black president also lit the fuse that allowed racism and bigotry to explode under Trump when he gave it permission to go mainstream.
Yes , I will say what changes we have saw within the last 2-3 generations, it was all done with bang of the gavel and at the point of a bayonet.
When we get past symbolism and ask questions about how wealth and power are actually distributed within this society, we would have touched a nerve. As the "work arounds" up to now, patches leaks but do not constitute lasting solutions. For the "man" to ultimately retain control, will he revert back to old ways?Credence WILL say that. But 70+ years of experience tells a much different story. Next thing you'll be claiming is that most men drag women by the hair into their cave to enslave them...because it happened just a few thousand years ago.
Much of this stuff occurred within my lifetime, Wilderness, hardly the Middle Ages.
There is this residue of a violent unjust and destructive past that still remains inspite of the Conservative's "happy talk" that it no longer exists.In my opinion it is much more than a "residue". It is endemic in areas where slavery once existed.
I don't know about cancelling any federal provision as a condition of receiving a contract, but I do know that equal opportunity employment was one of them. With Trump and his cronies out to reintroduce spoils, grift and graft into the process, we are going back before 1883.
The idea that blacks gained any economic advantage over whites with affirmative action is just another one of those tiresome bits of folklore from the resentful Right.Trump is guilty of swindling, right? Without a trial and without a convict - just your statement.
Individual blacks certainly DID gain advantage over individual whites with affirmative action. That was the entire point of the program, remember?No, it seems to me the point of the program was to force employers from their Whites Only hiring practices.
Yep, from first hand experience, that is the way that I remembered the program.
The program did not force employers to hire equal numbers of blacks and whites (according to the local population), but instead forced employers to hire MORE blacks than whites. It's called discrimination, legal, forced discrimination.
And it's still going on, or we would not see lawsuits being brought to put a stop to such despicable actions. Surely you DO agree that discrimination is wrong, whether leveled against blacks, asians, whites or any other racial group?You white conservatives have this zero sum attitude, that when one gains it automatically means you lose.
The program was designed to ensure that blacks were to be included and fairly evaluated in the hiring process. I was not born yesterday and I know that that has not always been the case.
Discrimination is wrong as an ideal but has that always been the practice on the ground, in reality?" but instead forced employers to hire MORE blacks than whites." - That is just right-wing mythology without a shred of proof to back up the claim.
I agree. And now the complaint is about accepting blacks only - we have come full circle, but that's OK, right? It's fine if the playing field is tilted in favor of those with dark skin, leaving other races outside and unable to compete. Because, you know, you cannot discriminate against those with light skin, by definition if not by reality.
Who is doing that - accepting Blacks only? Nobody is doing that that I have heard of?
The affirmative action and equal opportunity programs applied to a lot of races, not just Blacks, didn't you know that?
Are you putting words in my mouth, Wilderness?
My opinion is not the fact, it is just my opinion and if it is proven incorrect, then OK.
You have opinions about virtually everything, so you are allowed to have them and I cannot?
I am speaking about de Jure discrimination enshrined in the law, Jim Crow, government sanctioned discrimination against blacks and minorities in housing just as an example. The Japanese were incarcerated during WWII from an official government order, do you really think that whites incarcerated during the same time is the equivalent? Those Japanese citizens deserved apology and reparations. What remedy should apply for Blacks officially discriminated against via government policy and through no fault of their own, could Affirmative Action be part of that?"Are you putting words in my mouth, Wilderness?"
You are the one that used the term "grift", not I. And you did not express it as an opinion, but as a known fact.
grift
[ɡrift]
VERB
engage in petty or small-scale swindling:
"how long have you been grifting?"
NOUN
a petty or small-scale swindle:Tell me, how do you "reintroduce a petty or small scale swindle" when you are talking about the spoils system.
I would hope you figure out the meaning from the context, I guess not.
https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-decis … 22967.html
So, Trump finally "comes clean" at last.....What is new in regard to what Trump has been saying? I read the article carefully and noted each of Trump's quotes. He claimed he was advised by several people around him, decided to listen to what they were saying, and believed and still claims the election was rigged".
Trump says it was ‘my decision to try to overturn 2020 election results
Kate Sullivan, CNN
HE DID NOT MAKE THIS CLAIM. This is a pure example of CNN propaganda. A byline that is not true.
"Former President Donald Trump said that he received counsel from numerous people shortly after the 2020 election but that it was his decision to push the false claim he won the presidency and try to overturn the results. (AGAIN HE DID NOT SAY THIS) Please note no quotes.
TRUMP QUOTE -- “It was my decision, but I listened to some people,” Trump told NBC’s “Meet the Press” in an interview that aired Sunday.
Trump has been indicted over his efforts to subvert the 2020 election results. He has pleaded not guilty in all cases and denied any wrongdoing.
A central premise of special counsel Jack Smith’s case, according to his indictment of the former president, is that Trump knew the election claims he was making were false after being told by close aides that he had lost but disseminated them anyway to make them appear legitimate – all in service of an alleged criminal conspiracy.
TRUMP QUOTE -- “I was listening to different people, and when I added it all up, the election was rigged,” Trump told Kristen Welker in the interview, again pushing the false claim as he seeks the 2024 Republican nomination for president.
TRUMP QUOTE --- “You know who I listen to? Myself. I saw what happened,” Trump said.
The former president said he didn’t listen to his attorneys who told him he lost the election because he didn’t respect them.
TRUMP QUOTE -- “You hire them, you’ve never met these people, you get a recommendation, they turn out to be RINOs (Republicans in name only), or they turn out to be not so good. In many cases, I didn’t respect them,” Trump said. “But I did respect others. I respected many others that said the election was rigged.”
I listened to the interview on YouTube. I think it fair to watch it before just buying into a CNN byline. It is a very interesting interview.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kcsn_6Wln60
Nothing new --- he has made claims the election was rigged for literally years now."Kate Sullivan" - I don't like the headline, but the content is just fine. I have gotten used to not looking at headlines because they almost always overstate the contents. That is true of CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS and PARTICULARLY true of lying Fox News, Brietbatt, Newmax, ect.
Bottom line, your attempt to smear CNN fails.
Now where Trump will fail if he relies on this "I listened to people" nonsense, is that the law requires that his conclusions be reasonable giving the totality of the information available to him. For starter, he will have to over come the fact that his own handpicked attorney general told him he lost. Is he going to claim he didn't know Bill Barr? LOL.I did watch it.
Comical, how he kept on inferring that Democrats want to about children after they were born. He is a good talker that answers questions directly.
I know that he has made the claim for rigged elections, it is just that prosecutors want to know why he made the claim in the face of overwhelming evidence indicating otherwise. Who are the "others" that said that the election was rigged and what were their qualifications?Listening to yourself or saying that you can pardon yourself is not an answer. In my opinion, he believed what he wanted to believe, evidence not withstanding.
Why is he so rude as to keep referring to Govr DeSantis as Desanctimonious?"I know that he has made the claim for rigged elections, it is just that prosecutors want to know why he made the claim in the face of overwhelming evidence indicating otherwise."
Indeed, they do. Trump now faces the choice of substantiating his claims or refraining from making them, as failing to provide supporting evidence won't favor his case in front of a jury. It's likely that others who provided him with information about alleged election fraud will also find themselves in court. During the interview, it seems he might use the excuse that he heeded advice he shouldn't have.
Furthermore, before he left office, there were discussions about preemptive pardons for himself and his family before he left office, but the legality of such pardons remains uncertain.
As for the matter of referring to Governor DeSantis as "Desanctimonious," it's undoubtedly a result of political maneuvering. Criticisms like these remind us of instances when Biden referred to MAGA supporters in a derogatory manner. This kind of politicking is something I personally dislike, as it appears to underestimate the intelligence of the citizens. It's an old, divisive tactic that should ideally be left behind in the realm of politics.
Thanks for taking the time to watch the Trump interview.What was that Biden said that wasn't true?
You seem to have a strong affinity for controversy. And then you high-tail it...
He often goes on impassioned rants, veering off course while employing the term "MAGA" in a disparaging manner. His assertions are often so outlandish that they come across as offensive to those who support the "Make America Great Again" movement. It appears he invests considerable effort into creating divisions among American citizens. Personally, I perceive much of his rhetoric as stemming from a state of confusion. He uses the term MAGA frequently when sharing mistruths.
"MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards," Biden said, "backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love." Joe Biden
"He said they "embrace anger, they thrive on chaos, they live not in light of truth, but in the shadow of lies," Joe Biden
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol … 962661001/
"MAGA Republicans are calling for defunding the police department and defunding the FBI now," Joe Biden "
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/11/1162685060/biden-crime
And in my view --- he is undeniably responsible for these alleged regressions. Nevertheless, I maintained, and reiterated, my belief that ultimately, the American populace would discern the intentions of this man, and as recent polls indicate, they indeed have.""MAGA forces are determined to take this country backwards," Biden said, "backwards to an America where there is no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry who you love." Joe Biden
" - How is any of that not true? I am sorry if the truth hurts, but he has a right to speak the truth. It can easily be shown through their own actions and words that each of those examples are true.
""MAGA Republicans are calling for defunding the police department and defunding the FBI now," Joe Biden "" - As some of them have in the House and other places. - https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/393 … p-at-odds/
""He said they "embrace anger, they thrive on chaos, they live not in light of truth, but in the shadow of lies," Joe Biden" - Again, what is not true about that, especially living in the shadow of lies. The head of MAGA does nothing but lie! - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl … 90285.html AND IT HAS GOTTEN WORSE since he left office.I made my point. Your reply is once again, not offering complete context, but bits and pieces put together by propaganda media. good slop for liberals, but not so much for us who read between the lines.
I find it very difficult to converse with those who just do not look for the full context of quotes. This form of scattered views leads to frustration when conversing about a quote. Just wise to search for the many words that accompany that quote.
Because he is a very rude and vile old man.
You wrote "Trump says it was ‘my decision to try to overturn 2020 election results Kate Sullivan, CNN"
You misquoted her, leaving out some important context. The actual quote was "but that it was his decision to push the false claim he won the presidency and try to overturn the results."
Why did you change it?
Wasn't it his decision to push the false election claims?
Wasn't it his decision to try to overturn the election as the indictments in D.C. and Georgia claim?
Though it may not matter at this point in the dialogue next are links to the Meet the Press interview with Trump - video and transcript.
Full Trump Interview: ‘I don’t consider us to have much of a democracy right now’ (Sept 17, 2023) Video on YouTube 1 hour & 18 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOCRo97NoJ8
Full transcript: Read Kristen Welker's interview with Trump (Sept 17, 2023)
https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/ … rcna104778
I found observing the video enhanced the perspective of the messaging with the body language, facial expressions, and emotions of the dialogue. The transcript offered clarity to what I may have 'read into the words' as they were spoken while observing/listening to the video.Lying Trump lets loose on Meet the Press with really BIG lies (as compared to the embellished stories Biden telss)
* Trump claimed, “You have some states that are allowed to kill the child after birth.” - LIE, no state allows such things.
* Trump responded " “I didn’t say that. No. People said I said that.” He repeated, “I didn’t say that.” to an assertion that he would "use Special Forces to attack Mexican drug cartels in Mexico. - This is from Trump's website that I just copy and pasted: Order the Department of Defense to make appropriate use of special forces, cyber warfare, and other covert and overt actions to inflict maximum damage on cartel leadership, infrastructure, and operations - https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/p … on-cartels
* Trump falsely claimed "Trump claimed, “I will say this: something’s going on, and it’s not good for Ukraine. Because the news is no longer reporting about the war. The fake news. They don’t report about the war anymore. You don’t find much reporting. That means that Ukraine’s losing. Okay? I see very little reporting from NBC, your network. I see very little reporting from NBC, ABC, from CBS, from anyone about the war.” - That is a lie. I listen to reports from CNN every morning and afternoon about Ukraine while driving to and from work. Often they are showing video simultaneously on their news cast.
* Regarding the strategic oil reserve Trump said "“I had a lot to do with filling up for the first time ever.” Trump added later in the interview, “He wanted to have low gas prices for an election. And now, we have nothing left.” - FALSE. In fact there were LESS barrels of oil in the Reserve when he left office than when he started. Currently there are 350.6 million barrels in the reserve, larger than any other in the world. I have seen such lies repeated on this forum.
* Trump said “We have to save our country. We have $35 trillion in debt.” - Guess the exaggerated $34 trillion he said at a campaign rally earlier wasn't big enough. so he added another trillion. (Finally, we have something on the scale of Biden's exaggerations and not these whoppers he has been saying.)
* Trump said, “Things are not going, right now, very well for the consumer. Bacon is up five times.” - Yes, prices are higher, but bacon is up only 11.5% since Jan 2021; not 400% as he claims.
* Trump said, "We gave $85 billion worth of equipment to the Taliban,” - NOPE, the figure is closer to $7.1 billion, much of it rendered inoperable by the U.S.
* One of the most insipid of Trump's lies “Listen: Nancy Pelosi was in charge of security. She turned down 10,000 soldiers. If she didn’t turn down the soldiers, you wouldn’t have had January 6.” He said explicitly, “She’s responsible for January 6.” - It is Trump who has been indicted for causing the insurrection, not Pelosi.
* Trump ” claiming Biden directed the Justice Department to charge the former president in the cases brought by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington, DC." - That would have been Trump's MO, but not Biden's. Biden went back to the hands off approach to DOJ.
There are many more that you can read in this article in addition to his standard set of lies about the election. And MAGA wants this convicted rapist as president. Amazing.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/17/politics … index.htmlFallout from the MAGA uprising is more and more books being banned. The follows the standard practice of all dictatorships from Germany of old to the Soviet Union, to China, North Korea, and Iraq.
Birds of a feather, I always say.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/21/us/book- … index.htmlOMG another CNN article -- You should really push away from CNN... Maybe you should have a bit of a read on a few of the books that some parents wanted removed from the public school library. Educate yourself on the complete issue.
Maybe you should embrace it, since its news section is a fair and and mostly unbiased outlet. I have posted many polls that agree with that. They also say, and it has been proven in court that lying Fox News is untrustworthy.
I do educate myself, you should try it as well, while we are trading insults.
You also nailed it. "SOME" parents. And those FEW parents get to tell all the other parents who disagree with them what to do.Have you a list perhaps of what books are being banned, and what grades the parents hope to not have access to the books?
There are 8 books here in Michigan that parents want to be banned from schools. I have only looked into three of the books. I found the book very disturbing, and in one case out and out pornographic. The author of the book has stated she never felt it would be in school libraries.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … novel.html
I think we need to walk a careful line when providing reading for schools.Let's be realistic, this book is not on elementary school shelves. It would be well above the reading abilities and comprehension levels of children even if they did get their hands on it.
The fight to ban this particular book or not has gone on at the high school level which I think is absolutely ridiculous.
Also, Media sort of finds the most salacious few sentences in the book that they can but disregard everything else about it. Actually, it's a rather poignant story about a young person's struggle with gender identity issues and not nearly as salacious as it's made out to be. I don't think it's appropriate for kids younger than about 14 or 15, but that said I don't think it should be banned. It's sort of Puritan to think that these issues, thoughts and a whole range of others don't already exist for this nation's high schoolers. The characters in this book actually model strong honest and healthy communication.
I implore anyone and everyone to delve beyond the one-liners politicians are pulling out of books they want to throw in the bonfire.
It’s incredibly disheartening to hear parents at board meetings disparage a group in regards to this book and others, as if this book produces such (lgbtq) people. Let's be real, If a book had such power, there wouldn’t be horror stories, there wouldn't be fiction."I implore anyone and everyone to delve beyond the one-liners politicians are pulling out of books they want to throw in the bonfire."
I agree with this sentiment. I think it wise to look into this issue and get past one-liners. Really opens a conversation between educators and parents. Perhaps there will be some books that need to be moved to a part of the library that is not available to younger children. I think any book should be read before it is relegated to be banned. In Michigan, the school librarians, administration, and parents meet behind closed doors and come to solutions. This is being encouraged by the Michigan Board of Education.Moving the book didn't do any good in Florida, they banned it anyway from any part of the school. I imagine state colleges are next on the hit list.
Here is a partial list in part of Florida
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/ … 73768.htmlI don't feel State colleges will ban the book, it is age-appropriate for a college student.
I wasn't talking about any particular book, I suspect DeSantis doesn't want college "kids" reading the wrong kind of material and becoming "woke".
I knew what gays were when I was 10. I also knew they were evil and banned by God because that is what society was telling me 65 years ago. If only I had a teacher explain to me how wrong my thoughts were. I would have come around to understanding, much sooner, that gay people (they didn't have all those other letters back then) are just like you and me; children of God and are what God intended them to be.
Instead, I spent my formative years spreading around hate.
The list is way too long to list. But here are the number of books that have been banned in:
Texas - 438
Florida - 357
Missouri - 315
Utah - 150
South Carolina - 109
Do you see a trend there, only in states or places where MAGA is very strong.It's not good to provide ponograph books in kids, or adults libraries.
The think is, they aren't. That is in the imagination of those MAGA parents.
Please tell me which school(s) were trying to put that in front of their kids? If the answer is none, then why was it banned?
in my vie this is not a question of one book or any book --- the point is that parents need to be heard, as well do the librarians, it is their job to scrutinize what is on the selves. It should not be such a problem for parents and schools to work together.
Gender Queer the book that the author never meant for it to be in schools --- is definitely in schools. It has naturally now become a point of attention due to Senator Kennedy reading a page from the book at a Congressional hearing.
JCPS board votes unanimously to keep 'Gender Queer' book in school libraries https://www.wlky.com/article/gender-que … s/41393659
School board votes to keep 'Gender Queer: A Memoir' in Leavitt High School library
https://wgme.com/news/local/turner-comm … r-a-memoir
https://nhjournal.com/sexually-explicit … e-schools/
Sexually Explicit Books Are Available in NH Middle Schools
There are many states that banned the book, but many have not. With all the turmoil in regard to Gender queer, I would not be surprised if more schools have pulled it.But you were the one that offered the example of what the issue is. What was the point of your link?
I googled "is Gender Queer in any schools?" The first thing I got was this - the NEA recommended it for educators, not students.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2 … y-schools/
This is how lying Fox News propagated the lie -"“Gender Queer on NEA Summer Reading List for Kids,” read a Fox News chyron during a July 5 segment of “The Faulkner Focus.” - an obvious lie.
The next thing I saw was the answer to my question - Maine schools have it on their shelves - and apparently proudly so. It faced 8 challenges and so far, despite millions of dollars that were poured in by outsiders, seven of them failed, one succeeded.
Here is what one parent/principal said after reading the "comic" book - "“Parents like Scott White, principal of Union Elementary School, admitted that some pictures and content in the book made them uncomfortable, but said they understood more of and felt more empathetic to the challenges faced by LGBTQ+ youth after reading. White and other speakers urged the board to consider the images in context.” - Apparently, something Senator Kennedy failed to do.
https://bookriot.com/gender-queer-in-maine/
I feel sorry for the eighth school district who voted to ban the comic book - their students loss.
Thanks!
Key Findings
Book bans in public K–12 schools continue to intensify. In the 2022–23 school year, PEN America recorded 3,362 instances of books banned, an increase of 33 percent from the 2021–22 school year.
Over 40 percent of all book bans occurred in school districts in Florida. Across 33 school districts, PEN America recorded 1,406 book ban cases in Florida, followed by 625 bans in Texas, 333 bans in Missouri, 281 bans in Utah, and 186 bans in Pennsylvania.
https://pen.org/report/book-bans-pressure-to-censor/Seems to me those few parents who don't like the books should take their kids out of the public school and place them in a private school that can teach them the Pollyanna form of American history.
I bet those banned in PA are from rural PAYour comment -- "Seems to me those few parents who don't like the books should take their kids out of the public school and place them in a private school that can teach them the Pollyanna form of American history.
I bet those banned in PA are from rural PA"
Your comment in my view, questions and disregards the concerns of parents, and certainly oversimplifies the issue. It fails to promote respect for some parents altogether... Perhaps opening a constructive dialogue and compromise within the public education system could work better to solve the problem some are concerned about. A more balanced approach that respects diverse viewpoints and encourages productive discussions would be a more constructive way to address such concerns.
Firstly, your comment dismisses the concerns of parents who are worried about explicit sexual content in books. Dismissing these concerns without addressing them can lead to a breakdown in communication between parents and educators, and lead to more discord. You need to understand we have reached a point where we have a great, I mean a great split in our social views and values. Your solution more or less says --- if you don't like our way, take your kid and leave the school. Sorry, the other side is clearly not going to just take their children out of the schools their tax dollars are paying for.
In the same vein as your thought process - I could say you take your child out of the public schools, we did not need porn before the past couple of years, and are fine with keeping it that way. However, it is true we did not allow porn in school libraries some years ago. This is a new phenomenon that liberals feel is necessary. Many of us are not in any fashion against banning inappropriate books from school libraries. Not public libraries, not bookstores, or Amazon --- just school libraries.
Again a very biased comment ---- More or less you show the attitude, that if you don't like OUR WAY" get out ... Then "I bet those banned in PA are from rural PA"
In my view, your concept is antisocial. Promotes division, and discrimination, an attitude that promotes today's discord.And, of course, I would argue the opposite. That the concerns of those few banning books, often for religeous reasons, disregard the views of most other parents. Also, banning books is about as un-American as you can get.
I wish those banning the books Would "open[ing] a constructive dialogue and compromise within the public education system could work better to solve the problem some are concerned about. A more balanced approach that respects diverse viewpoints and encourages productive discussions would be a more constructive way to address such concerns." But they don't. They get a few of their like-mind friends, take over the local school board and ban away. They are the furthest thing from what you rightly suggest be done.
As to the sexual content in the books - I think most, but not quite all, of it is overblown. Those mems's they put out in support of their position are just that, meme's. Most of their "evidence" has been doctored or taken out of content. If fact, many of the books banned in Florida are because they mention gay kids. I haven't seen one piece of verified evidence of sexually explicit books being authorized in any school. If you have such real, credible evidence, please share.
This is what it is about - discrimination. The announcement, sent in an electronic message to parents in some Cobb County schools on Monday, comes days after the Republican-majority school board voted 4-3 along party lines to fire a teacher for reading a book about gender identity to fifth-grade students. Fifth graders are certainly old enough to know an understand people are built differently by God.Pointing the finger at any side does nothing to solve the problem. It only deepens it. It's up to the parents, as well as the school's administration, and librarian to look closely at any books the parents feel need to be considered to be removed or perhaps just moved to the sections of the library that high school students have access to.
A closed meeting with the right people could help solve problems.
It's unfair to ignore the parents, as well as the librarian's input.Probably, but getting the MAGA in that meeting will be problematic. It is hard to reason with zealots. And nobody is saying to ignore the parents. But all must realize, they are not professional educators who understand what is needed to make a well-rounded graduate.
I am returning to this comment because you hit on something that should be considered as part of the book-banning issue. I will quote you twice --- "And, of course, I would argue the opposite. That the concerns of those few banning books, often for religious reasons, disregard the views of most other parents. "
" Fifth graders are certainly old enough to know an understand people are built differently by God."
Do you recall after 9/11 we needed to respect the Muslim religion? Did you? I did... Would it be possible to respect some Christians who feel they do not want their children exposed to sexual matters in school? Yes, we all could come up with many arguments to oppose their thoughts. But, do we have the right to? Can we oppose religious beliefs,
just because it may not be our beliefs?
In regard to being "built differently by God" --- You realize many religions do not abide by that sentiment. ( I look at all being creations of God, this is one reason I do not care for abortion, yet respect other's views in regard to abortion. )
So should parents have the right to bring religion into what type of books they want their children exposed to? I don't find it fair not to hear their voices.
The only solution is to look for solutions that will work for all.Is this an actual problem in reality? I think sometimes we believe that because a few uninformed parents or politicians raise an issue that we believe it is so.
Our large northeastern library allows parents to choose between a regular card and a restricted card. The restricted card only allows them to check out materials that are in the children's catalog. "Problem" solved and without politics. I'm willing to bet that many people don't understand what their local library's policies are. I didn't until today.
And the book Gender Queer does not reside on the shelves of my local elementary school or middle school , yet it is in the high school. I'm perfectly fine with that.I know many religions have a more liberal view, but those aren't the ones banning books, it is your evangelical, fundamentalist religions that are doing that, You know, the zealots.
No, I do not respect anybody who would purposefully hurt others like these holier-than-thou types do. In my view, they aren't really Christians because they and Christ have absolutely nothing in common with each other.
Define "sexual matters". Is that discussing the difference between boys and girls? I am sorry, religions don't get a free pass simply because they are a religion. Many religions are outright harmful to their kids and their kids need a different source of information.
These book bans are American issues, and their America. It couldn't worry or affect kids beyond the American shore.
Really interesting article. The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg’s profile of General Milley was published on Thursday, and touched on how the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff formulated his opinion on Trump and how he dealt with the “cognitive unfitness and moral derangement” he saw from Trump.
The profile offered several examples of Milley’s exasperation with Trump’s behavior, one of which occurred during Milley’s welcome ceremony, where he got a “disturbing insight” into Trump’s callous attitude toward soldiers.
Milley had chosen a severely wounded Army captain, Luis Avila, to sing “God Bless America.” Avila, who had completed five combat tours, had lost a leg in an IED attack in Afghanistan, and had suffered two heart attacks, two strokes, and brain damage as a result of his injuries.
After Avila’s performance, Trump walked over to congratulate him, but then said to Milley, within earshot of several witnesses, “Why do you bring people like that here? No one wants to see that, the wounded.” Never let Avila appear in public again, Trump told Milley.
Milley also “found himself in a disconcerting situation: trying, and failing, to teach President Trump the difference between appropriate battlefield aggressiveness on the one hand, and war crimes on the other … In the most infamous case, the Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher had been found guilty of posing with the corpse of an Islamic State prisoner.”
Trump called Gallagher a hero and said he didn’t understand why he was being punished. “Because he slit the throat of a wounded prisoner,” Milley said. “The guy was going to die anyway,” Trump said. Milley answered, “Mr. President, we have military ethics and laws about what happens in battle. We can’t do that kind of thing. It’s a war crime.” Trump answered that he didn’t understand “the big deal.” He went on, “You guys” — meaning combat soldiers — “are all just killers. What’s the difference?”
I am mortified by this.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar … up/675375/'Imagination'? It's a powerful tool that destroy or make the day. But why employ it in such a destructive manner? America as a country, was a light of positiveness to the world.
Yep, until Trump destroyed it all, don't you agree?
Trump again? He left office two years ago. Is he dictating to old joe biden? I'm curious.
Miebakagh --- Between me and you, I am not sure there is anything left that Biden has not destroyed.
Besides Afghanistan, name me just ONE thing Biden has destroyed by providing hard evidence. No evidence, then we can presuming your example is wrong.
Yes, Trump again - he is a danger to America and the world and must be stopped.
You're speaking as if Trump, was Adolf Hitler. Well, he's not.
All he hasn't done is murder millions of Jews. Aside from that, and the mustache, they are very similar indeed. (He is responsible, however, for a few hundred thousand American lives lost due to his mishandling of Covid.)
Doesn't covid-19 strike death in the 'hundred-thousands' in other countries? And the leaders can be counted dangerous to the world? This is indeed odd and absurd.
By the way, I asked for hard evidence that Biden has broken anything but Afghanistan (with Trump's help, btw) but didn't get any. Consequently, I am guessing the accusation was a total and complete fabrication.
"As for 2024, Hutchinson said she wouldn’t vote for Donald Trump. “He is dangerous for the country,” she told CBS."
Hutchinson was forced in to hiding because she feared for her life from retaliation by MAGA.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/24/politics … index.htmlIt's a shame she got involved. Her second-hand information can't be backed as truth. I did not read anything that indicates "Hutchinson was forced into hiding because she feared for her life from retaliation by MAGA." This hyperbolic statement you made could be viewed as misinformation --- you are reading into something that she did not say. Perhaps this is what she did in regard to the testimony she offered to the Jan 6th committee. I see she was brave enough to come out and try to push her book.
"The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm, said, 'Sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel.' Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel. And when Mr. Ornato had recounted this story to me, he had motioned towards his clavicle."
Trump tried to grab steering wheel, lunged at head of security after he was told he couldn't go to the Capitol on Jan. 6, former Meadows aide says
Smith asked, "Both of these men say they don't remember this conversation happening. How can you explain that?"
"I know what I recall," Hutchinson replied. "And in this particular instance, I can't climb inside the minds of Tony Ornato and Bobby Engel. Maybe they truly don't recall this happen."It is very fortunate Hutchinson finally had enough and decided to do the right thing, especially after her Trump lawyer got her to perjure herself in front of Congress.
I could leave my response at "why are you so concerned with a MAGA deflection over all of her other damning testimony?" But I won't.
It is a amazing how a credible second-person account becomes the ONLY thing about her heroic testimony that MAGA seems fit to remember, very sad indeed, especially considering the fact that her account was proven to be TRUE. Ignored, of course, is all the OTHER damning testimony that was first-hand and corroborated.
Can you tell me why MAGA ignores that, please?
Nothing "hyperbolic" about it. She fled in fear of her life from Trump supporters. Tell me, why was she afraid to go back to her apartment? "“I could not go back to my apartment,” Hutchinson told reporter Tracy Smith in an interview set to air Sunday on “CBS New Sunday Morning.” "
"Hutchinson, the former assistant to Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, said her safety was threatened. Her legal team recommended she leave town. “I ended up moving down to Atlanta for several months,” she said. Hutchinson was the first White House member to testify before the committee."
Why don't you tell everyone that Hutchinson SAID it was second-hand information? That the actual source was Tony Ornato as TOLD to Hutchinson and Engel (BTW, that is not hearsay because if fits the exception to the hearsay rule when what is being reported is from a principal that was there). "The pair of [Secret Service) sources, who spoke under the condition of anonymity, backed up much of former Trump aide Cassidy Hutchinson's explosive testimony on the altercation in the motorcade vehicle known as "the Beast" after Trump found out he wouldn't be driven to join his supporters at the Capitol."
"Maybe they truly don't recall this happen." (Just like she "didn't recall" things because she was told to by Trump's attorney until her new attorney told her she must tell the truth. I have to wonder if Trump's attorney's didn't get them them as well.) In any case, it is mute and this whole feigned hearsay outrage is nothing more than a distraction from the real issue, Trump instigating the Jan 6th insurrection for which he now stands indicted.I have reason or right to judge this woman. I have no reason to believe her or not. Her information was insignificant, who cares what Trump did in that car? Was it a crime --- Even if true, what in the world of it matter in regard to the Capitol protest? She was kike a kid in the playground --- "Hey ya know what I heard" My God
The output from the January 6th committee did not yield any concrete evidence that could be deemed suitable for a court of law. It largely consisted of hearsay and conjecture, lacking the substance necessary to establish criminal wrongdoing.
This pattern of rhetoric reminds me of what I observed during the two impeachments of President Trump. In both cases, it appeared that Democrats were making impassioned statements but lacked substantial grounds for impeachment.
While some may find this narrative appealing, it may not resonate as strongly with individuals who prioritize clear, evidence-based thinking over partisan politics.
I will walk away from those conversations it is getting rediculous."Her information was insignificant," - Actually, the panel thought her testimony was crucial.
Jack Smith is using a lot of what the Jan 6 committee developed. If fact, without the work of the Committee and its findings, I doubt there would have even been a special council appointed.
Even Garland says so. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w … rland-says
Minimizing the hugely important work of the bipartisan Committee is just a deflection technique.
tt was ALL evidence-based (by Republicans, no less), that is why it was so devastating and DOJ just couldn't ignore it.
If the Democrats lack "substantial grounds" for impeachment, why did so many Republicans vote to impeach Trump
Walk away from the TRUTH if you want, but it will nevertheless follow you everywhere outside your echo chamber.
BTW, I see Trump is intimidating another witness against him, Gen. Mark Milley.
"Donald Trump made a series of aggressive comments on social media about outgoing head of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley, suggesting the top military leader’s conduct was worthy of execution.
“Mark Milley, who led perhaps the most embarrassing moment in American history with his grossly incompetent implementation of the withdrawal from Afghanistan, costing many lives, leaving behind hundreds of American citizens, and handing over BILLIONS of dollars of the finest military equipment ever made, will be leaving the military next week,” Mr Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday.
“This will be a time for all citizens of the USA to celebrate!” he continued. “This guy turned out to be a Woke train wreck who, if the Fake News reporting is correct, was actually dealing with China to give them a heads up on the thinking of the President of the United States. This is an act so egregious that, in times gone by, the punishment would have been DEATH!”
Well, at least Trump changed his mind and now says Milley is responsible for the deaths in the Afghan pull-out rather than Biden. I thought you said Biden didn't listen to his military. Guess you were wrong, according to Trump.
I suspect Jack Smith will be turning this over to Judge Tanya Chutkan for witness intimidation.
Trump's super powers will save him and us.
Of course, they are trying to bring him down.
They want to bring us and the nation down.
Why, I just don't get.
Trump just keeps going to defeat the nonsense. He calmly and kindly keeps up his speaking and connecting to the people.
He has nothing to loose and everything to gain:
America.He is trying to bring himself down. If he hadn't committed so many crimes, nobody would want to punish him for them.
America has EVERYTHING to lose from another Trump presidency. Fortunately, it is not going to happen. I suspect he will see the inside of a jail cell.... and who IS the super person we need to save the country?
Do you agree it needs to be saved?
Do you have a pick for the next Commander in Chief?
Executive branch leader of the country?
Balanced by the House and Senate?Are you hoping for
Biden or Harris
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG4bmtrvYk8
Newsom,
https://www.axios.com/2023/09/22/biden- … -president
Michelle Obama
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/ad … elle-obama
Someone else?I wouldn't mind Michelle, I am impressed by her.
Of the Republican candidates, she, Will Hurd, and Asa Hutchinson are the only ones who won't take America back to the 1700s.
In my personal view, Mrs. Rice has true qualifications that would make her a good leader. She is the entire package, However, I think her to intelligent to become mixed up in Washington the way it is today. She is intelligent, strong, and well-educated in government.
However, she would be a very big threat to the powers that be in the American swamp.You mean she's a threat to the Democrate?
Sharlee, Ms Rice certainly has the qualifications but she is far from being a MAGA hard nosed right wing Trump worshipping type. She would be considered too moderate for today's Republican Party.
I am not politically conservative generally, I would lean toward younger Democratic possibilities. But, I would accept Rice over the present roster of GOP candidates today.I would be so pleased if Rice would run. I think she would run away with it.
I would rather have Biden, but could accept Rice to see how she does. Why, because she is everything Trump isn't. But if she tried, MAGA would steamroll her.
I agree, MAGA wants one candidate. And it seems like they will have that guy.
I would prefer Biden, I have a distrust of Republicans even if they are "moderate".
You are going to be very surprised when everything hits the the fan.
That day might be about a month after voting day.
And for that reason, I like her as well, probably more than any of the current candidates running. But you are correct, MAGA will shun her for being a reasonable person.
While Condoleeza Rice, is good. Four years ago, I post a thread advocating her as a presidential candidate. Some here in the forum don't want her name to mess up with the dirty politics of the present day.
She is simply head and shoulders above today's GOP as it stands. I think that she wants to remain unsoiled as part of her legacy.
Good for her. But...I couldn't for the sake of billion currency tanish a person's image. It's very ungently-manly, and for God's sake, ungodly. If a woman attack Condo, the attacker, lacks sense, and loss self respect.
There is no such super person and the country doesn't need to be saved. It needs to be protected from evil forces like Trump and MAGA and other demagogues our liberal founders were so afraid of.
My pick for the next president (not commander/authoritarian) is Biden. He has the experience, the competence, and the smarts to do that job that is needed to keep the nation out of the clutches of MAGA.
Trump continues to prove he has gone bonkers and is dangerously mentally ill as so many mental health professionals have proved.
In a post on Sunday, Trump added an additional false claim on top of the usual false claim – this time declaring that Senate Democrats perpetrated the (nonexistent) election theft. - What SANE mind would come up with such a thing? What SANE mind would believe it?
Then are "stable" ex-president goes on to declare - Trump asked why the FBI doesn’t raid the homes of “Senate Democrat’s” like it searched his Florida home last year for classified documents he had retained after his presidency – baselessly calling that court-approved search illegal. Then he added that “Menendez is a ‘piker’ compared to some of those Election Stealing THUGS.” - This also shows how ignorant he is; Menendez's home was searched by the FBI. where do you think all those gold bars came from? What a dummy Trump is.
FURTHER, he goes off the rails saying - Trump called for an investigation into Comcast, the company that owns NBC and MSNBC – writing that “Comcast, with its one-side and vicious coverage by NBC NEWS, and in particular MSNBC, often and correctly referred to as MSDNC (Democrat National Committee!), should be investigated for its ‘Country Threatening Treason.’” He vowed that, if he wins the presidency again, “they and others of the LameStream Media will be thoroughly scrutinized” over their coverage. - As I said, this darling of MAGA is nutso, and this proves it.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/25/politics … index.htmlI am just glad more are willing to support Trump over Biden. Can't be bothered with CNC propaganda.
And where did Trump pick up the 8 million votes he lost by in 2020. Best I can tell, he keeps losing more and more votes the crazier he gets.
Regarding Menendez, this is an OPINION piece I can agree with. Included is"
The reaction from some of Menendez’s fellow Democrats to the new indictment might surprise those accustomed to how some Republicans have responded to criminal charges against former President Donald Trump.
Some GOP officeholders accused the Justice Department of the “weaponization” of the government, engaged in dangerous and violent rhetoric and even used the apparatus of government in blind defense of Trump.
But some Democrats like New Jersey’s leading Democratic officials have called on the senior senator from their state to resign, given the detailed and damning allegations in the indictment. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy set the tone within hours of the charges being announced with a statement that “the alleged facts are so serious that they compromise the ability of Senator Menendez to effectively represent the people of our state.” - Why aren't some MAGA calling for Trump to resign?
Doesn't this whole Menendez blow a HUGE hole in the Republican lie about Biden weaponizing the government? No, the TRUTH is that Biden has "unweaponized" the government that Trump left him.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/24/opinions … index.htmlOh My Biden had the same job as Menendez also on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Is this a coincidence or was he taking over where Quid pro quo Joe left off?
Biden was a longtime member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He became its ranking minority member in 1997 and chaired it from June 2001 to 2003 and 2007 to 2009.
Biden has clearly weaponized the DOJ and FBI, and most likely the CIA -- in my view.It may be your view, but it is clearly wrong. Why? No supporting evidence.
He, no problem or need to prove anything -- the American public is on their toes, have really woken up.
Seems like the honesty is identified by how the Democrats handle their "bad actors".
Trump's accountability for his various criminal enterprises is starting to mount up.
Last month he was found guilty (liable) for his sick sexual assault on E. Gene Carroll and the subsequent defamation of her. Then a judge found he defamed her again shortly after this guilty verdict.
Today, the evidence was so overwhelming that a N.Y. judge gave a summary judgement to the N.Y. Attorney General in her fraud case against Trump, his sons, and his organization. Next will be the trial to see what the financial pain will be.
There is justice after all, I was beginning to wonder.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/politics … index.htmlYep, the buzzards are circling. Here is some info from "The Hill" publication.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-ba … hats-next/civil case --- His attorney will appeal, however, it could be looked at at best as one case he can put a check to. Put it behind him.
He is a twice convicted fraudster and defamer and sexual assaulter (some say rapist), but apparently MAGA loves that in their leaders, lol.
Thought I would summarize you Hill article for the edification of the readers who want to know the TRUTH.
Georgia election interference case
Trump, along with 18 other defendants, are charged with attempting to overturn his 2020 election loss in the state. Each defendant is charged under Georgia’s racketeering law and faces additional charges, including an array of conspiracy allegations. - Very Strong Evidence!
Federal 2020 election interference case
Trump is accused of engaging in multiple criminal conspiracies to stay in power after losing the 2020 presidential election. - Very Strong Evidence
Federal classified documents case
Trump faces 40 charges that he mishandled classified records and attempted to obstruct the government’s retrieval of those records after he left the White House at the end of his first term in 2021. - Very, Very, Strong Evidence!
New York hush money case
Trump made his first court appearance this year in a case involving 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with payments he made during the 2016 campaign he sent to his then-fixer, Michael Cohen. - Strong Evidence and now we have a guilty conviction on similar charges on 9/26/2023.
Sexual Assault and Defamation of E. Gene Carroll - FOUND GUILTY!!
E. Gene Carroll defamation case #2 - Resulting from Trump speaking about the Sexual Assault and Defamation case he lost. Trial for damages to start in 2024.
E. Gen Carroll defamation case #3 - A federal civil case resulting from Trump commenting on Carroll's book where she first claimed rape. Pending.
Mary Trump Fraud Litigation Case - Dismissed by a judge, but is on appeal.
Doe v. The Trump Corporation Class Action Suit
A group of anonymous plaintiffs have filed a class action against the Trump family and their business, alleging that the Trumps used their brand to scam investors into paying for worthless business opportunities. The district court denied the Trumps’ bid to force the case into arbitration, and the Trumps are now appealing.
DC Civil Suit over Misuse of 2017 Inauguration Funds (CASE CLOSED) - Trump settled this case by paying $750,000.
Reps. Karen Bass et al. Incitement Suit for Jan. 6 Capitol Attack -
Ten members of the House of Representatives, represented by the NAACP, are suing Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and two right wing militia groups for conspiring to forcibly prevent Congress from counting the Electoral College votes on Jan. 6.
NY Attorney General Fraud Case - Accused of manipulating business records to defraud the government and creditors. Judges issued a summary judgement against Trump, his sons, and his business on 9/26/2023!!!
Eric Swalwell Incitement Suit for Jan. 6 Riots
On Mar. 5, 2021, Representative Eric Swalwell sued Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, Donald Trump Jr., and Congressman Mo Brooks in federal court over the Jan. 6 riots. Swalwell alleges that the defendants violated federal civil rights laws–including the Ku Klux Klan Act–when they conspired to interfere with the Electoral College Count on Jan 6. - Pending.
Capitol Police Suit for Jan. 6 Riots
Two Capitol Police officers–both on duty during the Jan. 6 insurrection–sued Donald Trump for injuries they sustained while protecting the Capitol. Both allege that the rioters physically attacked them with fists, chemical spray, and other weapons. They allege that the former president, by his incendiary words and conduct, directed the physical attack and emotional distress. - Pending.
Second Capitol Police Suit for Jan. 6 Riots
A second group of Capitol Police officers filed suit against Trump, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, and other affiliates involved in allegedly planning and executing the Jan. 6 riots. The seven officers claim that they were physically and emotionally injured by attackers that Trump instigated, and that Trump and his co-defendants conspired to disrupt congressional business in the certification of electoral votes. - Pending.
Third Capitol Police Suit over the Jan. 6 Riots
A third suit was filed by a Capitol Police officer alleging that physical and emotional injuries he suffered were caused by Trump’s inciting the Jan. 6 riot. The complaint alleges that Trump directed, aided and abetted, and conspired to incite the riot. - Pending.
Metropolitan Police Suit over the Jan. 6 Riots
Two Metropolitan Police Officers filed suit alleging that physical and emotional injuries they suffered were caused by Trump’s inciting the Jan. 6 riot. The complaint alleges that Trump directed, aided and abetted, and conspired to incite the riot. The officers seek compensatory and punitive damages. - Pending
NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund Voting Rights Case for Post-Election Actions
The LDF is suing Trump, the Trump Campaign, and the RNC for their efforts to overturn the 2020 election in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the Ku Klux Klan Act. While the litigation is still at its early stages, Trump faces damages and a declaratory judgment that he did indeed violate these provisions of the law. - Pending
Scotland Unexplained Wealth Orders
In February 2021, the Scottish Parliament voted to reject an investigation into unexplained cash transactions executed by the Trump Organization’s Scottish golf courses. A non-profit group is now challenging that decision in Scottish court.
Trump Tower Assault Suit (CLOSED)
A group of six protesters are suing Trump over allegations that Trump’s security guards assaulted them outside Trump Tower in 2015. Nov. 2, 2022, the parties reached a settlement in the case, details of the settlement agreement have not been disclosed.
Criminal Investigations into Trump’s Finances
On Dec. 6, 2022, a jury convicted the Trump Organization of tax fraud and other crimes related to the company’s practice of giving out off-the-books perks to executives that were never taxed. Allen Weisselberg testified as the prosecution’s star witness against the company. Prosecutors never charged Trump himself over the scheme, though the prosecutors implicated him as being personally involved in the scheme.
Westchester, New York Criminal Investigation of Trump Organization Golf Course
Westchester District Attorney’s Office of Mimi E. Rocah has reportedly launched a criminal investigation, led by Elliott B. Jacobson, examining, at least in part, whether the Trump Organization misled local officials about the property value of its golf course to reduce its taxes. - On Going
I had no idea Trump was in so much trouble.
https://www.justsecurity.org/75032/liti … ald-trump/
And MAGA as well as many on this forum want a criminal and rapist for president. What does that say about them?Hey Credence, have you noticed it is All Quiet on the MAGA Front regarding Trump's legal woes?
Yeah, ESO, I have been tuning in. It will be gratifying to see Trump holding a sign on 5th Ave. "I will work for food"
Maybe their silence is the despair that Trump is in too much trouble for any of them or their media squawk boxes to spin him out of this time.
Former GOP Party Chairman Steele speaks of getting the Frankenstein unleashed by the Republicans back into the lab and hooked up to its electrodes where it belongs.
Steele speaks of a dire situation where most Republicans no longer believe that democracy is the solution, but instead the authoritarian and strongman characteristic of any despotic regime is to be preferred. This must be why many people are in the allure of the MAGA cult and its leader.
Now I have "Uncle Tim" Scott, who many of us would refer to as a House N......., but I forget, he is in the Senate. He is the most deplorable of tokens, just more of his apologist standards on display last night. Is it no wonder that he can't get a date?
Christie framed it right "Donald Duck", the lovable Disney character has always been an annoying loud mouth quacker.
And just like the Duck, Donald Unintelligently just spouts off to anyone within earshot. But the other candidates seemed like squabbling ants and made themselves appear just that more weak in the face of the Trump juggernaut.
I will stay tuned...I like Steele's analogy. But this statement you wrote "Steele speaks of a dire situation where most Republicans no longer believe that democracy is the solution" is most critical! You see that on this forum where they will vote for Trump no matter how deep he buries himself in the pig stye. For some unfathomable reason they seem to like being their with him.
I was listen to reports about the fallout from the NY judge's decision of granting a summary judgement regarding Trump's business fraud case with the N.Y. AG. I didn't realize how much danger the Trump organization is of being dissolved by the State of New York and having its assets seized and sold to pay a likely $250 million fine.
I can't image anybody, especially banks, wanting to do business with a convicted crook.I have to ask the MAGA Trumpbots, why would you want to vote for a convicted crook or one basically swarming in indictments?
In New York, for Trump, business will have taken a turn for the worse.....
The fact that So many Americans are willing to dispose of the Democratic process in favor of an authoritarian strongman escapes me. This is unprecedented and cause for my grave concern for the future of this country. I would have thought that Americans if no one else would know better than to drink the swill of tyrants and recognize it when they see it. But, they go into it with both eyes open. I believe it is to maintain the illusion of Donna Reed and the world as they imagine it to be. They are prepared to do it at any cost.
Another interesting and well written article
https://www.salon.com/2023/09/28/donald … et-him-go/Yes, interesting article.
It is hard for me to recognize that there are so many people in the world, not just America, who are predisposed to want to live under an authoritarian. It is not that they are dumb, most aren't, but something genetic about them makes it easy to forgo critical thinking skills when triggered by images that fit in with their view of the world.
This has been true from the beginning of time, but we only started to understand this phenomenon after WW II in trying to explain why so many otherwise intelligent Germans chose to follow an autocrat like Hitler, even when the mask was torn off and everybody saw what a monster he was. Those that were caught up in his cult twisted and turned and found everyway possible to justify what they knew deep down inside was wrong with the very strong habit of following and believing in their chosen leader.
It is obvious this is true when you look at the adoration the following murderers and tyrants have in their respective nations: Putin, Maduro, Homeni, Xi, Un, Assad, Oban (he is not a murderer), and Trump (who is not a murderer either, but nevertheless is responsible for hundreds of thousand of needless deaths. When their histrionics fail them, they often turn to violence - which we see as well today.
It is a very scary thought to realize there are at least 80 million of those brain-altered individuals living amongst us today, actively working toward ending our democracy.
Since some on here want to take Biden's small gaffes and turn them into mountains and use it to show how feeble-minded he is, then I must take this one by Trump and blow it up just a large and claim it is PROOF Trump has dementia.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … ip-vpx.cnnIt takes shocks like those experienced by Cassidy Hutchinson to leave the mind-altering Donald Trump cult. She was lucky she got out before she drank the Jim Jones' version of Kook-Aid.
Maybe Trump getting convicted by a jury of his peers (to which he would object being compared to) and sent to a Georgia jail will be the catalyst for others to finally come into the light and get out of Trump's oppressive darkness.
Hutchinson now knows Trump for what he really is - "the most grave threat to American democracy".
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/politics … index.htmlTrump, as usual, will be lying to the autoworkers today. I hope they realize he and MAGA HATES unionized labor and that they bought into empty promises back in 2015.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/27/politics … index.htmlTrump screws up the facts again - it must be dementia setting in.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … ip-vpx.cnnWOW!! The Trump Organization is now out of business in New York State and apparently will be placed in receivership.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/26/politics … index.htmlWhile I will miss the gratification of Biden beating Trump worse than last time, it will be equally gratifying to see Trump drop out of the race in an attempt to save his fraudulent business empire.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/27/politics … index.html"Calderón [Univision] queried the Republicans through the night on weighty issues related to immigration, hate crimes, health care, and more.
But unlike what is typical on Fox News, Calderón declined to frame her questions in a manner favorable for the Republican candidates. Instead of setting them up with softball-style prompts to tee off, Calderón pressed the would-be presidents for substantive answers on an array of important subjects. The candidates struggled to respond directly, and in some cases tried to duck the questions entirely." - The Right-Wing Media is in full attack mode.
Is anyone surprised the candidates didn't want to answer?? ROFL. Great job Llia Calderon!!!
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/28/media/un … index.htmlAnother MAGA type with his neural networks scrambled wants convicted rapist and bank fraudster, anti-democratic Trump as his leader. I feel so sorry for him being lost in Trump's fantasy world.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/29/politics … index.html"convicted rapist"
Trump was convicted of rape? What was the jury decision again? This is just more nonsense from you that has no basis in reality.Then you should go find and read the judges comment instead of playing word games. Or ask any women if somebody sticks there finger(s) in her if she doesn't consider that rape.
Do you support Ms. Tara Reide's accusations that Biden put his fingers inside of her? It is my hope that she will bring a lawsuit against Biden as Jean Carolle did against Trump. This matter needs to be presented in a court of law. Tara needs to be heard.
"Tara Reade, 56, worked as a staff assistant to Mr Biden from 1992-93 when he was a senator for the US state of Delaware.
In recent interviews, she has said that in 1993 her former boss forced her against a wall and put his hands under her shirt and skirt after she delivered him his gym bag.
"There was no exchange, really, he just had me up against the wall," she said to podcast host Katie Halper in March 2020.
"I remember it happened all at once... his hands were on me and underneath my clothes. He then penetrated me with his fingers" she said.
"I remember him saying, first, as he was doing it 'Do you want to go somewhere else?' and then him saying to me, when I pulled away... he said 'Come on man, I heard you liked me,'" she said.
"That phrase stayed with me."
Ms Reade filed a criminal complaint on 9 April 2020 with police, saying she was a victim of sexual assault but did not name Mr Biden."
She said in a tweet that she filed the complaint "for safety reasons only", as the statute of limitations for her claim had expired and she had begun to receive online threats.I think you have been snookered by Tara Reade. First, she has been shown to fabricate things that aren't true about other people. Second, unlike Trump who even brags about being able to grab women by their youknowwhats, that kind of thing is TOTALLY out of character for Biden.
‘Manipulative, deceitful, user’: Tara Reade left a trail of aggrieved acquaintances - https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/1 … ces-260771
“The one thing about Joe Biden is, he is a man of the highest character and that’s why these accusations are so surreal and just can’t comport with the man I worked with,” said Marcia Lee Taylor, a senior policy advisor on the Judiciary Committee, where women held leading roles when Biden served as chairman.
But he had blindspots, which Biden himself has publicly acknowledged, when it came to how his interactions with women in public could make them uncomfortable. - THIS is from interviews with some 200 staffers who worked for Biden.
Where Trump's accusers tell the same story of sexual abuse/harassment about him, Biden's accusers limit their criticisms to Biden invading their personal space and making them feel uncomfortable. If Reade had complained about Biden touching her hair and such like some other women have, I would have believed her.
If there had been several other women complaining that Biden did the same thing to them (which is what Trump is facing), I would believe her. But she is a one-off and that simply doesn't make any sense. Consequently, I do not believe that Biden assaulted her in the way she describes.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w … llegationsI said what I had to say. How dare you slander a woman that claims to have been raped. Despicable.
So it is your position that women who claim rape NEVER lie? Interesting.
For me, I like to consider all available evidence before drawing a conclusion.
Why did Eleanor Williams (2020), Jennifer Ann Gries (2023), Renee Skoglund (2023) are just three recent examples. How about those women who falsely accused three members of the LaCross team in North Carolina in 2006, Nikki Yovino,(2018)
See, women do lie and I find THAT despicable, since you are throwing around insults; look how many men's lives they destroyed. I will agree that it doesn't happen very often, but IT DOES HAPPEN
So, based on what I have read to date, I don't believe Reade. which is my right that you call despicable.As always your thoughts make no sense and are in my view hypocritical. Why would I not believe Tara, yet beleive Jean Carroll? If honest, I don't believe Jean, I don't feel her story rings even logical, I think her to be someone Trump would not give the time of day, and I have been in the very wonderful Bergdorf Goodmans. I can assure you the moment you enter the door you have a representative helping you with your every need, and dressing rooms are locked... I would surmise if Trump came in he would have had a flock of associates cozy up to him for the sale... They worked on commission. It was a store most only window shopped in.
So, I find Jean's story not as plausible as Tara's. But give her the benefit of the doubt.If you look at each case in isolation, there is no reason not to believe either. But when you look at the WHOLE picture, there are lot's of reasons not to believe Reade.
* Reade has a history of manipulation, Carroll does not.
* Reade has a history of making things up. Carroll does not.
* There is no evidence whatsoever that Biden would do such a thing as what Reade claims he did. Trump has a history of doing similar things and even bragging about it.
- Hardly anyone that knows Biden thinks he is capable of what Reade described happened to her. There are dozens of women who totally see Trump doing such a thing.
* NOT ONE of the women, that I know of, has said Biden's touch- feeling side was sexual in nature. It certainly made them uncomfortable and didn't want him getting that close but it didn't amount to sexual harassment.
So, ask yourself, why, just this one time, did he break his pattern and do something so out of character?
Bottom line, she gives me plenty of reasons not to believe her.
As to Bergdorf Goodman, apparently the jury didn't see it your way. Why didn't Trump put on those arguments you raised? Is it possible it wasn't true?
Let me ask you this. Assuming all the assumptions you just made are true and Carroll lured Trump into that dressing room. But once he started putting things where they ought not to be and she said STOP, but he didn't. Do you consider that rape or sexual assault? Or do you know because it was the victim's fault?
And that is just part of the whole picture that at least I take into account.I consider even touching or smelling a person sexual misconduct. You are asking the wrong person. I am revolted at the thought of any unwanted sexual gesture, makes my skin crawl.
It's clear Biden does this frequently, without care that it's even
being filmed. So, I can believe he would attack a woman, he appears to be a predator openly. Not sure how someone can defend his openly smelling children. But, some do, and I do not.You may consider those things as sexual misconduct, that is your right. I am just pointing out that the women he made feel uncomfortable do not. I choose to believe them.
I see mountains being built here.
You seem to be taking conduct the women DIDN"T SEE has sexual and turning Biden into a "predator". I doubt those women agree with you.
"Sniffing babies?" - I seems you have fallen for a doctored video. In other words, you are perpetuating false information in the most disgraceful way.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-b … 7683316630"You may consider those things as sexual misconduct, that is your right. I am just pointing out that the women he made feel uncomfortable do not. I choose to believe them."
Again I offer quotes from women who accused Biden of being inappropriate. All were made very uncomfortable, not sure where you got the idea they were not uncomfortable. You seem to just believe what suits you. Videos were not doctored, I watched him smell children's hair live as it happened. Actually one can find most videos on YouTube. Hopefully this time you will read the complaints of these women. I have, and I totally beleive each one of them.
I will no longer be replying to ANY of your comments or if you choose to address me... I am uncomfortable with your form of mindset.
"Lucy Flores
On March 29, in the aforementioned essay published on the Cut, former Nevada lieutenant governor nominee Lucy Flores alleged that Biden smelled her hair and gave her “a big slow kiss” on the back of her head at an event for her 2014 campaign. In that moment, she wrote, she felt “embarrassed” and “shocked.”
“ I WANTED NOTHING MORE THAN TO GET BIDEN AWAY FROM ME" she continued. In response to the essay, Biden claimed that he had no memory of having “acted inappropriately,” but added that if he was in the wrong, he would “listen respectfully.”
Amy Lappos
When Amy Lappos was a congressional aide for U.S. representative Jim Himes in 2009, she claims that Biden touched and rubbed his nose against hers during a political fund-raiser. “It wasn’t sexual, but he did grab me by the head,” she told Hartford Courant on April 1. "HE PUT HIS HAND AROUND MY NECK AND PULLED ME IN TO RUB NOSES WITH ME. WHEN HE WAS PULLING ME IN, I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO KISS ME ON THE MOUTH."
After the incident, Lappos didn’t file a formal complaint. “He was the vice president,” she told the Courant. “I was a nobody.”
D.J. Hill
D.J. Hill was one of two women to come forward with allegations in the New York Times, which referred to Biden’s conduct as “tactile politics” in a report published on April 2. At a 2012 at a fundraising event in Minneapolis, Hill alleges that Biden rested his hand on her shoulder, and then started to move it down her back, which left her feeling “very uncomfortable.”
“Only he knows his intent,” she told the Times, adding, “If something makes you feel uncomfortable, you have to feel able to say it.”
Caitlyn Caruso
In the same Times report, a woman named Caitlyn Caruso claimed that after sharing the story of her sexual assault at a University of Nevada event in 2016, Biden hugged her “just a little bit too long” and laid his hand on her thigh.
“It doesn’t even really cross your mind that such a person would dare perpetuate harm like that,” she told the Times. “These are supposed to be people you can trust.”
Ally Coll
On April 3, Ally Coll told the Washington Post that at a 2008 reception, Biden squeezed her shoulders, complimented her smile, and held her “for a beat too long.” A young Democratic staffer at the time, Coll said her initial reaction was to shrug it off. But she told the Post she now feels the alleged incident was inappropriate, adding, “There’s been a lack of understanding about the way that power can turn something that might seem innocuous into something that can make somebody feel uncomfortable.”
Sofie Karasek
In 2016, Sofie Karasek was photographed holding hands and touching foreheads with Biden at the Oscars, where she stood alongside 50 other sexual-assault survivors during Lady Gaga’s performance. It was a moment that soon went viral, and was described then by the Post as “powerful.” But in the Post’s report published this week, Karasek says she believes that Biden violated her personal space. She also told the Post that she wasn’t impressed with Biden’s two-minute-long video response to the growing unwanted-touching allegations against him — in which he never says he’s sorry — as he “didn’t take ownership in the way that he needs to.”
“He emphasized that he wants to connect with people and, of course, that’s important,” she told the publication. “But again, all of our interactions and friendships are a two-way street … Too often it doesn’t matter how the woman feels about it or they just assume that they’re fine with it.”
Vail Kohnert-Yount
In the same Post report, Vail Kohnert-Yount alleged that when she was a White House intern in the spring of 2013, Biden “put his hand on the back of [her] head and pressed his forehead to [her] forehead” when he introduced himself, and that he called her a “pretty girl.” She was “so shocked,” she said, “that it was hard to focus on what he was saying.” Though she told the Post that she doesn’t believe Biden’s conduct constituted sexual misconduct, she described it as “the kind of inappropriate behavior that makes many women feel uncomfortable and unequal in the workplace.”
Alexandra Tara Reade
Alexandra Tara Reade told the Union that Biden touched her several times when she worked in his U.S. Senate office in 1993. The incidents, in which she said Biden would “put his hand on my shoulder and run his finger up my neck,” allegedly occurred when she was in her mid-20s. Reade told the Union that her responsibilities at work were reduced after she refused to serve drinks at an event — a task she believes she was assigned because Biden liked her legs.
Reade reportedly spoke to U.S. Senate personnel about what was going on, and Biden’s office allegedly found out. She left his office two months later, after only nine months on the job. Reade told the Union that she didn’t feel sexualized by the way she’d been treated, instead saying she felt ornamental, like a lamp: “It’s pretty. Set it over there. Then when it’s too bright, you throw it away.”
In March 2020, Reade expanded on her account, telling the podcaster Katie Halper that Biden sexually assaulted her in the spring of 1993. Reade reiterated her story in interviews with the New York Times the following month, telling the paper that — when she dropped off a gym bag with him one day — he pushed her up against a wall and started kissing her neck, before sliding his hand up her shirt and ultimately up her skirt. “It happened at once. He’s talking to me and his hands are everywhere and everything is happening very quickly,” she recalled. “He was kissing me and he said, very low, ‘Do you want to go somewhere else?’” Reade said Biden penetrated her with his fingers before she was able to pull away. When she did, she says he appeared confused. “He looked at me kind of almost puzzled or shocked,” she told the Times. “He said, ‘Come on, man, I heard you liked me.’” Through a spokesperson, Biden strongly denied this account.
Reade also said Biden reprimanded her. “He pointed his finger at me and he just goes: ‘You’re nothing to me. Nothing,’” she said. “Then, he took my shoulders and said, ‘You’re OK, you’re fine.’”
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04 … tions.htmlYou have posted all of those before and I respond where each one said they DID NOT consider the action by Biden sexual in nature. Nowhere in your examples did any of the say anything about sex in any regard, save Reade, whom I do not believe.
You must have forgotten reading this earlier - "Kohnert-Yount said she believed Biden’s intentions were good and that she did not feel it was an instance of sexual harassment or assault. " Do you not believe her? How much clearer can it get??
I did. I'll take the actual verdict, which was NOT for rape. Neither will I take your exaggerated, completely biased, word that the jury DID convict of rape.
Did I say they convicted Trump of rape? No, I didn't. But that doesn't change the fact that that is what he did and almost any woman would tell you that.
I call Putin a murderer because he is. You don't need a conviction to know that to be true. I call Xi a mass murderer because of what he has done to the Uyghars, I don't need a trial to call him that. You can keep on calling these two men angels, but I prefer to live in the real world.Once more, I quote your own words: "Another MAGA type with his neural networks scrambled wants convicted rapist and bank fraudster, anti-democratic Trump as his leader. I feel so sorry for him being lost in Trump's fantasy world.
You forget quickly when it is convenient. Which it frequently is with your exaggerations and opinions.Word games. Everyone knows the truth including the judge overseeing Carroll's trial.
Judge says E Jean Carroll allegation Trump raped her is ‘substantially true’ in court dismissal
Judge goes on to say "Ex-president claimed that writer defamed him when saying he raped her, but judge said term is commonly ‘used and understood’ in context
You want more detail?
"Donald Trump suffered another legal reversal on Monday, losing his counterclaim for defamation against E Jean Carroll, the writer against whom he was found liable for sexual abuse and defamation and fined $5m, and who continues to pursue a separate defamation case against him.
Dismissing the counterclaim, a judge in New York, Lewis A Kaplan, said that when Carroll repeated her allegation that Trump raped her, her words were “substantially true”. Kaplan also set out in detail why it may be said that Trump raped Carroll."
Do you see where the judge is going with this?
* Carroll says Trump raped her
* Trump sues for defamation
* Judge rules Carroll DID NOT defame him because her claim is substantially true
So I will take the judge's cue and say that Trump is a "convicted rapist".
So admit it, my statements ARE NOT "Which it frequently is with your exaggerations and opinions.". Instead, they are well founded on the presiding judges opinion.LOL Don't like being called out when you say things that aren't true? Claim it is just "word games" and doesn't count?
Hint: don't exaggerate or post false statements and you won't be called on them.Do you go blind when words that contradict you appear? Just wondering. Why did you ignore everything the judge said. I know, because it doesn't fit your narrative and you deflect by playing word games.
I told you I read the judges comments. Did you read that and conveniently forget it? Did you also forget that I said I would go with the jury verdict, the recorded result of the trial?
You choose to accept the words of a judge playing word games (your phrase) over the recorded jury verdict - that is certainly your choice, but your word games do not impress me.I choose to accept the words of a judge who knows much more about it than either you are I do.
So, if he thinks it is sufficiently close to rape to call it rape, I will as well.
You can choose to believe the kind of forced entry Carroll experienced isn't rape, that is your choice.
More bad news for Trump. One of his co-defendants in the Georgia racketeering trial just pled guilty and will testify against the others. Some of the people he spoke with regarding his crime worked directly for Trump.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/29/politics … index.htmlJoseph Biden? All these small moves he took in relation to the women folks, are sexual in bents. It wouldn't be said to be the same thing as when a man for lack of voice initially, part a woman on the shoulder, and then said, 'execuse. How do I get to the Capitol, please?' Critically, it shows old joe, has no control over his sex impulse. Critically again, if JB took all these moves upon his wife, she's likely to feel embarrased. Its all sexual on his part. Or its a release of his sexual tension.
I must keep pushing back on mis/disinformation and false claims.
Once again, your hatred for Biden is showing through as you make mountains out of, well, nothing. Did you not read my responses to Sharlee where I showed that NONE of those women you are using as examples thought that Biden did anything sexual. It would help if you stick to the facts rather than imply something that isn't there.My exotoric, I heard you loud and clear, per what you said to Shae. Why are you implying I'm building up hate for Biden? Honestly, I don't know if that's also mis- or dis- information? Honestly again, those ladies who are speaking with four parts of their mouth, by reserving 1/4 to the effect that biden's impuse was not sexual are playing word games. If such women were attack sexually, they would said it means nothing, or rather keep mut.
In my view, he has no control over his impulses to smell hair and touch women inappropriately. He has proven time and time again by openly doing so. Here is a long quote from one of the women he inappropriately touched, and was very upset about his actions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1V_AhwVahUEven Trevor Noah made a stance about it back in 2019. On The Daily Show "Noah pointed out that if these acts were as harmless and platonic as Biden’s defenders claim, then how come he hasn’t done any nose rubbing with men?" Furthermore, Noah declared that no one should smell anyone’s hair. Even people in committed relationships have the right to fear their partner is a serial killer if they suddenly feel a nose in their tresses. Just bask in the general aroma of your beloved! There is no need to go in deep.
From my view as a woman, it's important to recognize that each woman is an individual with her own unique boundaries and reactions when it comes to personal space. The way a woman perceives a man entering her personal space can vary widely, whether it's a quick peck on the cheek, a kiss on both cheeks, or more invasive actions like smelling her hair, rubbing her shoulders with a finger then traveling down her back, or kissing her head. All of which Biden has been accused of.
Regarding those allegations against Biden, eight women have come forward with claims that his actions made them feel uncomfortable and crossed into inappropriate territory. It's not difficult to imagine that if the roles were reversed, and a woman engaged in similar behaviors with a man, he might interpret them as sexual advances, potentially would be taken as flirting, and could lead to him hoping for a romantic or intimate outcome.
In my opinion, such actions can indeed be seen as suggestive and could lead some men to believe there's a possibility of romantic or physical involvement. If any of these behaviors were directed at me, I would promptly address the situation and share my discomfort, with hopes others nearby could hear them.
Unfortunately, some men may misinterpret women's reactions or feel emboldened to engage in inappropriate conduct, especially when they believe the women involved are unlikely to speak out. From my perspective, Biden's repeated actions of invading personal space and making women uncomfortable indicate a pattern that raises concerns about his behavior. In my view, he can't stop himself.Yeah, I get what you mean and you are justified for saying it. Yet, consider it happens both ways. By that I mean when I worked at my last position I was the only male in an office with nine females.
One particular co-worker was incessant about making advances toward me in sly ways. Uncomfortable enough I distanced myself from her as much as I could. I spoke to my manager also a vice-president of the corporation. I think she did speak to her as the behavior lessened, yet not completely.This dynamic can manifest in both directions, and whether such advances are welcomed or deemed inappropriate largely depends on the individual involved. Ultimately, it falls upon each person to assert their comfort level and communicate if they feel uncomfortable, as you and I have done at various points in our lives.
It's evident that these situations won't disappear entirely, simply because our society is diverse in its attitudes and responses. Some individuals embrace this form of attention, while others do not. This reflects the broader fabric of our society.
There's a segment of our society that tolerates such advances, often because they may feel meek or uncertain about how to address inappropriate behavior. Unfortunately, these individuals are the ones who often suffer in silence.
Is it your view that Biden's non-sexual, somewhat intimate touching is repulsive to ALL women, or just to those who don't like that kind of attention and Biden ought to able to tell the difference?
Now that you mention it, I sometimes see that in movies where the paramour is sniffing his lover's hair.
BTW, who is Trevor Noah?Trevor Noah was the main host of The Daily Show (2015 - 2022) a comedic/satire broadcast with commentary on the politics of the day. It traditionally leans left. He was preceded by Jon Stewart (1999 - 2015). Think Stephen Colbert and the Late Show broadcast by CBS.
Edit: A little bit about The Daily Show at the next link;
The Daily Show with Trevor Noah
The Daily Show is an Emmy- and Peabody Award-winning program that looks at the day’s top headlines through a sharp, reality-based lens.
https://www.cc.com/shows/the-daily-show … revor-noah
And again, if you read what she says, while inappropriate in her view, it was not sexual. I say "inappropriate in her view" because Biden has approached thousands of women in the same manner and they didn't object, probably because they are touchy-feely types as well.
Flores "called the exchange "awkward and disturbing and weird."" in an interview. I suspect it was to her, I know it would be to me if I were a woman; I don't like anyone touching me, even my mother when I was a kid.
I asked my wife how she would take it know it was Biden and knowing his touchy-feely history. She said she probably wouldn't have thought anything of it. I think my massage therapist would have the same answer. On the other hand, my office manager would probably raise a huge stink.
I bet nobody has ever told him what he was doing would upset some people. I bet his wife Jill didn't tell him because there would have been hell to pay if he didn't listen to her.
Many people act like Joe Biden does, many more do not. Many people don't mind Biden being that familiar, I suspect many more do not and he needs to be able to tell the difference.
But to try to turn that into a sexual perversion is nothing more than Biden-hate.
I thought it time to remind people that when they side with Trump, they are also saying the following is just fine and dandy.
The Atlantic reported in an earlier edition that Trump -
turned to Kelly on Memorial Day 2017, as they stood among those killed in Afghanistan and Iraq in Section 60 at Arlington National Cemetery, and saying, “I don’t get it. What was in it for them?”
and
Trump is unable to understand why the American public respects former prisoners of war and those shot down in combat. Remember how he disrespected John McCain saying "he was not a war hero because he got shot down?
and
that attitude caused Trump to repeatedly call McCain a “loser” and to refer to former President George H. W. Bush, who was also shot down as a Navy pilot in World War II, as a “loser.”
and
while visiting France in 2018, Trump said he did not want to visit the graves of American soldiers buried in the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris because, “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.”
and
during the same visit Trump said the 1,800 US Marines killed in the Belleau Wood were “suckers” for getting killed.
and
in the book Divider Trump tells Gen Kelly, his Chief of Staff, that he wants no wounded veterans in a military parade he’s trying to have planned in his honor saying “Look, I don’t want any wounded guys in the parade.” and after Kelly explains that "these are heroes" Trump responds “I don’t want them,” Trump said. “It doesn’t look good for me.”
and finally
Trump does not react well to seeing severely wounded Army Captain Luis Avila singing “God Bless America” at a welcome event for the new chairman (Gen. Milley). “Why do you bring people like that here? No one wants to see that, the wounded.”
Why would anyone want such a sick and demented man such as this to be commander in chief. It is inexplicable, but 80 million so-called Americans want him elected again.Simple, Trump is a first class jerk and a coward. How anyone can visualize such a man as "Commander and Chief" remains beyond me.
I take those things very personally because I am a veteran who served our country honorably (unlike Trump) in CONUS and Vietnam. I spent most of my life serving my country first as an officer (ret) in the Army and then as a civilian (ret) in the Air Force and OSD.
I have to believe after that, most of the military will turn on Trump, save for the small contingent of brainwashed MAGA types that wormed their way into our ranks.Congratulations!
Being in the Armed Force, or any branch of the Force, is interesting.
I miss the Army when I finished secondary school, to join, because of age limit placed on entry.
myexotoric, that was all Trump's opinion, like any American citizen.
But it sounds all bullshit to me.
I liked the Army, veterans, heroes, and all.
Thank you.
Trump keeps sinking into the legal morass of his own making.
His sons testified in the NY Fraud trial and made total fools of themselves and bring Trump Org one step closer to its demise.
Co-defendants in Georgia in his criminal election fraud case keep flipping left and right, getting closer and closer to sealing his RICO conviction with its MANDATORY MINIMUM sentence.
He won't stop intimidating people so judges keep issuing gag orders to protect the safety of those associated with his many trials.
Yet his MAGA cult sees nothing wrong with him, exactly like Jim Jones' followers saw nothing wrong with him or Hitler's followers thought he was a great guy and loved his policies.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/03/politics … index.htmlTrump Gaffes (he has a lot of them) showing he clearly does not have the mental acuity to be president.
* Trump took the stage in Sioux City, Iowa, and mistakenly thanked supporters for coming out to Sioux Falls, South Dakota, before an Iowa state senator tried to discreetly correct him — a moment that was caught on a hot mic.
* During a summit in Washington, DC, Trump claimed that Biden could “plunge the world into World War II” – which ended nearly 80 years ago
* Trump also couldn't remember who the President was because he "appeared to confuse Biden and former President Barack Obama, saying he was leading Obama in election polls."
* Trump incorrectly said Viktor Orbán, the prime minister of Hungary, was the prime minister of Turkey
* During a rally in South Carolina in September, Trump confused former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, one of Trump’s 2016 GOP rivals, with his brother, former President George W. Bush
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/02/politics … index.htmlIt happens.
... this was surely said with meaning:
"I am leading Obama in election polls."
"Biden could “plunge the world into World War II”
( you know the war)
"Trump incorrectly said Viktor Orbán, the prime minister of Hungary, was the prime minister of Turkey." Names are sometimes hard to keep straight even for younger people.
Trump confused former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, one of Trump’s 2016 GOP rivals, with his brother, former President George W. Bush. (a Bush is a Bush is a Bush.)
Trump took the stage in Sioux City, Iowa, and mistakenly thanked supporters for coming out to Sioux Falls, South Dakota, before an Iowa state senator tried to discreetly correct him — a moment that was caught on a hot mic."
He gets on planes and talks to crowds to save the country ...
and if he forgets what state he is in currently, you want to criticize him? Really?
R E A L L Y?Yes, it does happen, but because your side won't give Biden the same curiosity of recognizing that, I won't for Trump .
Besides MANY mental health professionals, based on his words and actions, say that Trump is dangerously mentally ill and is not fit to be president. NONE say the same of Biden.
And Biden gets on Air Force One and talks to crowds about saving America and our democracy from MAGA.
Will Fake Fox News ever learn. Now they can be called Hateful Fox News.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/03/media/fo … index.htmlJust to keep everybody informed, especially MAGA, of the real Truth.
* NY Civil Fraud Trial: Gag order extended to Trump's legal team. Trump son's testified and effectively perjured themselves on the stand
* "A judge in Colorado heard testimony this past week from January 6, 2021, rally organizers as she considers whether Trump engaged in an insurrection against the US and thus should be disqualified from the presidential ballot in 2024."
* "A federal appeals court (made up of Obama and Biden appointees) in Washington, DC, temporarily froze a limited gag order placed on the former president by the judge overseeing his forthcoming federal election subversion trial."
* "A federal judge (a Trump appointee) in Florida signaled she may postpone the federal criminal trial against Trump that she’s overseeing – the one regarding his treatment of classified material that was, among other places, kept in a bathroom at his Mar-a-Lago resort – because how could his lawyers keep up with all of this?"
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/04/politics … index.htmlI bet this came as a surprise to Californians. But it shouldn't, TRUMP CAN'T STOP LYING.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/04/politics … index.htmlHere is another, they say that Biden is demented. Yet, Trump is not only demented but mentally ill, and that is a far more dangerous combination. And that does not speak well of the type of people who support him.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-05/ … /103067228Is he a raging lunatic or does he really believe his supporters are that stupid?
https://x.com/cturnbull1968/status/1720 … 20357?s=20Yes, he does or he would not have had the temerity to utter such obvious falsehoods.
Who can be really tasked to think independently instead of being a part of a group or tribe, when for the price of admission they are willing to accommodate every bold face lie from a ruthless political contender? Critical thinking by individual voters is lacking on both sides, but the problem in far more pervasive on the Right.I watched Willows; post - so now Trump claims to have won ALL 50 states in 2020.
And 70% of Republicans are gong to say that is absolutely true because they are so far under his spell.
I don't think he is a "raging lunatic", although he does Rage a lot, doesn't he, lol.
He is clearly mentally ill, and dangerously so according a whole bunch of mental health experts.
Christy and Hutchison get loudly booed by the MAGA cult at a Republican summit in Florida - no surprise there.
Christie fought back the boos with the truth - “anger against the truth is reprehensible.” and “The problem is you fear the truth. The problem is you want to shout down any voice that says anything different than what you want to hear,” he said, later adding, “What a shock, you’re for Trump. I’m going to fall over dead.”
And Hutchinson truthfully told the crowd something else they can't stand hearing regarding the 91 felon charges Trump faces - There is a “significant likelihood” that Trump “will be found guilty by a jury on a felony offense next year.”
“That may or may not happen before you vote in March. And it might not make any difference to you. But it will make a difference for our chances to attract independent voters in November,” he said.I don't find it odd they were booed they have no real message that Americans want to hear... Many Americans want to hear about righting all the huge crisis Biden has caused, and they want the HOW YA Going To DO IT... They toss out lots of words. They both have old-school politician tattooed across their foreheads. Many (most likely the majority) of Republicans want a strong about-America agenda, an end to all the fluff-woke BS, and someone who is very much transparent.
So many Americans have WOKE (lol) up to the fact we need to fix America, and now before she sinks.
Trump leads Biden in 5 key battleground states: poll
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 … ates-poll/
https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/05/politics … index.html
NYT -- Joe Biden Is in Trouble
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/06/opin … lling.html
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/05/us/p … trump.html
Behind the Curtain: Biden's race problem with Blacks and Hispanics
https://www.axios.com/2023/11/06/biden- … sing-polls
OH MY !!!! His approval rate will soon become historic
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/
"David Axelrod questions whether it is 'wise' for Biden to stay in 2024 race: 'Stakes...too dramatic to ignore" So many jumping ship.
Are you sure you are backed the right guy? I realize my comment is very cynical, but I can't find a bit of respect for those who continue to support such a flawed president, he has ruined our country before our eyes, in my view.Not Americans - MAGA cult members want to hear..
And yes, Biden does have a lot of work to do to up his poll numbers and let facts overtake opinions.
One opinion driving his low numbers is that old people are useless and can't function. The fact that people ignore is that he is old now and performing robustly and with a lot of acumen.
You can see what the right-wing propaganda is having. They have managed to focus on Biden's advanced age yet totally ignore Trump's. It is the typical extremist double standard.."The fact that people ignore is that he is old now and performing robustly and with a lot of acumen."
This is very funny.
I hope you read my sources -- NYT . Not sure anyone on the planet could mistake them for being Right-wing propagandists. Oh and David Axelrod... Oh yeah, he is a real right-winger! LOL The Dems are dumping Biden, and bad-mouthing him openly. Hey, he has one fan. Rah RahThey were only reporting the finding of the polls. It is the right-wing propaganda machine that is driving the narrative.
Boy, what a sickening, embarrassing yet typical performance Trump is putting on at his fraud trial.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ … index.htmlThe ABC/Ipsos Poll says:
"Only 23% of Americans think the country is headed in the right direction."
Oh No!, Oh No! What to do, What to do?
"Among the two candidates most likely to face off again in 2024, one in three (33%) Americans view President Joe Biden favorably, while former President Donald Trump is viewed favorably by only 29%, according to the poll."
Seems they are neck and neck in the unfavorable category. What does that say? One thing, perhaps, is people don't feel one or the other can right the ship to get the country headed in the right direction, right?
"A year out from the 2024 elections, the economy and inflation are top issues for Americans, according to the ABC News/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos' KnowledgePanel. Seventy-four percent say the economy is very important to them, while 69% say inflation is very important."
How long now has that been on the top of the general populace's minds? Are they all ignorant?
Those are just three revelations. More at, Heading into 2024, most Americans believe country headed in the wrong direction: POLL by ABC News (11/05/23)
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/america … =104633234
One year from Election Day, Republicans perceived as better at handling the economy by Ipsos (11/05/23)
https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/one-year-el … ng-economy"Oh No!, Oh No! What to do, What to do?
"Among the two candidates most likely to face off again in 2024, one in three (33%) Americans view President Joe Biden favorably, while former President Donald Trump is viewed favorably by only 29%, according to the poll."
It seems they are neck and neck in the unfavorable category. What does that say? One thing, perhaps, is people don't feel one or the other can right the ship to get the country headed in the right direction, right?"
Lots to unwrap there... So, what it means... It would seem to indicate we as a society have a big problem. In my view, it concerns society's mindset, not the candidates. I mean we have witnessed very clearly what both candidates are all about, and, we got to witness and live through their one-term reign, and experience their job performance.
So after these past 7 years should we not be acquainted with both?
I have many times claimed that we need two brand new candidates to have a better chance at saving the country. However ----
As of now it well appears we will have Trump and Biden to choose from. I mean in what world are we living in? --- I can say one the slogan "we the people" has become a laughable term. in my view, it seems we get what they serve up. And we deserve what we have settled for.It explains why they give so much coverage to Trump, even while taking his name off ballots and tying him up in politically driven court cases.
Trump is probably the only person Biden can defeat, and America may buy it without too much doubt.
If Nikki Haley or someone else qualified and coherent is running against Biden, they know he is doomed. Most sane Americans want nothing to do with another 4 years of this disastrous Administration.I think anyone could beat Biden at this point. And I think we might agree Biden is not done plenty more to come --- the guys' karma is so bad.
I am in hopes to see two new candidates. I know it's very very long shot.
But I also feel if Trump makes it, he will win hands down. My God, after all he has been through and is still standing. I say he would win.You wish they are politically motivated. He committed real crimes and he is being tried for them.
Yes, if you are a threat to the Party, to the establishment, they are a crime.
Those who control the DOJ, NSA, etc. control who is a criminal, who gets prosecuted and who is not.
Americans have had plenty of examples of this the past decade, with the likes of Hillary Clinton and Joe and Hunter Biden being protected from any type of prosecution, even going so far as to go out of their way to lie about Hunter's laptop being Russian conspiracy.
Sadly I believe they think they are fooling far more people than they actually are. Biden is barely clinging on to 30% who support him, almost all of whom make up the diehard branch of the Democrat wing.
Everyone else is hoping for an alternative.
"One year from Election Day, Republicans perceived as better at handling the economy by Ipsos (11/05/23)" - that shows you the disconnect between opinion and reality.
The reality is that when taking American history has a whole, Liberal governments have done significantly better than conservatives ones in almost all, if not all relevant economic measures.However, the poll that was offered was all about the here and now.
The here and now is that far too many adult Americans are illiterate. Sadly we have far too many Americans that are under educated and I'm not talking about this country's children. We have become a country where far too many rely on the simplistic narratives offered up by their chosen media bubble. And that media bubble knows full well who they're talking to. There are just way too many in our society today that don't have a grasp on history or government and don't know how to do research and don't understand anything written above a 7th grade level. I literally feel like I lose brain cells every time Trump opens his mouth.
I remember seeing a quote somewhere a long time ago about Republicans thinking the public is stupid and therefore should be taken advantage of while Democrats think Americans are stupid and therefore need to be protected.
The fact remains that politicians understand the intellectual limitations of their electorate.
They can offer up black and white, binary scenarios all day long and many in the public eat it up because they just don't know any better.
And the fact is that Democrats statistically have done better than Republicans in terms of the economy. To keep it within the realm of recent history, Since 1933, the economy has grown at an annual average rate of 4.6 percent under Democratic presidents and 2.4 percent under Republicans...
Anyone can do this research, that is if it really matters to them. Most people just want to hang on to their beliefs.True this.
And it goes for the well educated even more than it does the un-educated that you speak of.
The most highly intelligent, well educated individuals can be so dug in to their positions no amount of facts can shake their beliefs.
And they'll typically resent you for trying to inform them otherwise, no matter how well presented or intended.
The drumbeat of the new Trump dictatorship in America continues. - Trump threatens Retribution Against the Press.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/07/media/tr … index.htmlESO, How much of this do you think is true about Trump and MAGA supporters.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/22/poli … index.html
Is it safe for general consumption?
Yet another set of anti-democratic Trump supporters face the bar of Justice. Fake electors in Nevada indicted.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … of-vpx.cnnGreat news, now I want maximum penalties....
Good to see people paying the penalty for Trump's insurrection. This time a former CA police chief.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/08/politics … index.htmlYet more judges say, effectively that Trump is a danger to society.
"“Mr. Trump’s documented pattern of speech and its demonstrated real-time, real-world consequences pose a significant and imminent threat to the functioning of the criminal trial process in this case,” the appeals court wrote."
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/08/politics … index.htmlDoes the Appeal Court mean Trump, is deprieved of his freedom of speech? No. Trump, was only retricted in attack trial witness, and the Courts.
"“The greatest threat Trump poses is to our democracy,” " - Who says that besides President Biden? Bob Woodward who has had extensive talks with Trump;
* Bill Barr, Trump's handpicked AG;
* Gen. John Kelly, Trump's former Chief of Staff;
* Republicans Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and the rest of the Jan 6 committee;
* Steven Livitsky, author of How Democracies Die;
* Donald Ayer, former deputy AG;
* Mark Esper, Trump's handpicked Sec Def;
* Stephanie Grisham, Trump's press secretary;
* Miles Taylor, Trump's DHS Chief of Staff;
* Gen H.R. McMaster, Trump's National Security Advisor;
* John Bolton, Trump's National Security Advisor;
* Gen, James Mattis, Trump's first Sec Def;
* Rex Tillerson, Trump's handpicked Sec State;
* Cassidy Hutchinson, Trump's Chief of Staff's Chief of Staff.
* Reuters/Ipso: 58% of Americans think Trump is a threat to democracy. 25% of Republicans think the same thing.
* Even TRUMP says he is a threat to democracy, at least on Day 1. On that day he was very clear in saying he would be an authoritarian.
* Trump says it again when he proudly declares he will use DOJ to go after his enemies.
When did this start? The day that Trump began using DOJ and other instruments of government to go after his enemies. Then he doubled down in 2019 by telling Americans not to trust the elections. Then, in 2020, he began his campaign of election lies saying the election was rigged. Then, in 2021, when he instigated (according to a least two federal and one state judge) the insurrection at the Capital in order to illegally stay in power. And now by continuing his election lies and suggesting future elections will be rigged against him.
About the only people who don't think he is a threat to American Democracy are his MAGA cult members.When Trump MAGA comes out of their deep hypnosis, they will ask themselves they ever allowed themselves to be mesmerized by this guy.
We have a faction in this country that are actually very comfortable with the idea of installing an authoritarian strongman in the White House. I don't think Trump understood that his last go-around but it's clear that he does now which a second term so dangerous.
Many of our fellow citizens are okay with the book banning, revising history, muzzling free speech, turning the US into a hermit Kingdom, State forced birth, judges and politicians determining the healthcare you should receive, the US military coming in to roll over protests they don't like and chasing lgbtq folks back into the closet. They seem to love the hand of government involved in their "causes" or things they just don't like.Thanks, Willow, you are right in the fact that what it is that Trump represents and poses as a threat is what many of these MAGAs actually want. They work at keeping the unpleasant racist, misogynist, xenophobic reality of their attitudes and objectives carefully hidden under their MAGAT caps. Anything to revert to a more unjust and equal past which guarantees their undeserved hegemony over everyone else. They would not dare admit to it openly, but if it quacks like a duck.......
"Too much government" as their rallying cry has always been hypocritically and selectively applied.I have read a couple of studies that discuss exactly that from a historical perspective. Throughout history, there has always been a significant cohort of people who prefer being told what to do rather than think for themselves, it gives the a sense of security and stability. Today, many of them call themselves MAGA.
Now this is TRULY scary. "What I found is that approximately 18 percent of Americans are highly disposed to authoritarianism (some, I am sure, write on this forum), according to their answers to four simple survey questions used by social scientists to estimate this disposition. A further 23 percent or so are just one step below them on the authoritarian scale. This roughly 40 percent of Americans tend to favor authority, obedience and uniformity over freedom, independence and diversity." To be sure, some are on the far Left, but most are Right-wing. - https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/ … ism-420681
This is what ChatGPT has to say about it.
"People's preference for authoritarian governments can be influenced by various factors, and it's essential to recognize that individual motivations can vary widely. Here are some common reasons why some people might prefer authoritarian governments:
Stability and Order: Authoritarian governments are often associated with strong central control and the ability to maintain stability and order. Some individuals may prioritize stability over other political values, especially if they perceive a lack of order or security in their society.
Fear of Chaos: In situations where there is a perceived threat of chaos, instability, or social unrest, some people may view authoritarianism as a way to restore or maintain order quickly. Authoritarian leaders often promise to bring a sense of control and decisiveness.
Economic Development: Authoritarian governments may implement economic policies that promote rapid development. Some individuals may prioritize economic progress and view authoritarian leaders as effective in achieving economic growth, even if it comes at the expense of political freedoms.
Nationalism and Identity: Authoritarian leaders often emphasize nationalism and a strong sense of identity. People who prioritize these values may be drawn to leaders who promise to protect and promote national interests, culture, and identity.
Perceived Effectiveness: Authoritarian leaders are sometimes seen as efficient and capable decision-makers who can quickly implement policies without the delays associated with democratic processes. Some people may prefer this perceived effectiveness over the slower pace of democratic decision-making.
Cultural and Social Values: Societal and cultural factors can play a significant role. In some cultures, there may be a historical or traditional acceptance of authoritative rule, and people may see it as a natural or acceptable form of governance.
Lack of Trust in Democratic Institutions: Individuals who have experienced or witnessed corruption, inefficiency, or instability in democratic systems may lose trust in democratic institutions. Authoritarian governments, with their centralized control, may be seen as an alternative that can provide a more stable and accountable governance.
Media Control and Propaganda: Authoritarian regimes often control or manipulate the media to shape public perception. This can influence individuals' opinions and lead them to support the government's narrative.
It's important to note that these reasons are not exhaustive, and individual motivations can be complex. Additionally, support for authoritarianism does not necessarily mean that individuals reject democratic values; rather, it may reflect a perceived trade-off between order, stability, and other political priorities."
Hopefully, they won't end up like Jim Jones' cult followers and kill themselves for a lie.
How unpopular is Joe Biden? Today 37% are very displeased with old Joe.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/bi … al-rating/
Then there is always --- What next? We see crises pretty much develop or become worse weekly.
It would appear we now see a smaller minority that feels Biden has done a good job.You were saying? "While both candidates have a commanding lead with their respective partisan voters, 51 percent of voters in this poll have a negative impression of Biden and 56 percent dislike Trump" - PBS
Trumps crazy authoritarian rhetoric gets worse daily.I see it very differently, thank goodness it appears more are seeing problems with Joe.
Regarding Americans who are disposed to authoritarianism.
As I see it --- This current administration paints the very picture of authoritarianism.
What is the political ideology of authoritarianism?
Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by a controlling government and the rejection of democracy, human rights, and political plurality. It involves the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.
In my view, All of the above and more is why so many turned away from the Democratic party. And Biden has taken authoritarianism ballistic. This could be why more are jumping ship.
I have always felt Biden fancies himself a dictator, he has many traits of a dictator.
He attempts to control virtually all aspects of social life, including the economy, the education system, arts, science, and the private lives and morals of citizens through the use of his elaborate left ideology.
Conservatives are well known for demanding less Government and deplore government overreach.
One more thought --- I would think there is one thing worse than a dictator, and that would be a dictator who is confused.Your description is of the last Trump administration and any future one. The only game in town to save face is projection - paint the other guy with the faults of the one doing the painting.
Dictator who is confused - Trump is the poster child don't you think?It is obvious that we have very opposite views regarding Biden. As I said, it does please me that more are waking up to the fact Biden can't handle the job.
Yeah, you may think that, but Biden is still going to win and Trump is going to jail.
All those Democrats that are unhappy with Biden now, hate Trump even more. When push comes to shove, they will vote for BIden to keep a dictator out office.I believe that if you're specifically talking about loyal supporters of the Democratic party in Washington, your argument may have some validity. However, the general public seems to have lost confidence in Joe Biden. His decline started, right from the moment he assumed office in January 2021. His series of poor decisions contributed to sealing his fate. Both his mental acuity and physical endurance failed him. I recall expressing to Cred that Biden might have fared better if he had just maintained the status quo and built upon what Trump had left behind. Slow walked it.
Unfortunately, he entered the scene like a wrecking ball, causing significant damage with his decisions.Whether they think Bidens job performance is poor (which it isn't) or not will probably not matter to them when the fate of American democracy is at stake.
Biden couldn't do that because Trump left behind an absolute mess.No, he DIDN'T. America, for the most part, was fine under Trump.
That's one serious rewrite of history. But typical for Trump's cult that cannot criticize the man or risk being evicted from the cult and called a RINO.
We have covered many times over why America under Trump was a disaster. We can start with him having children taken away from their parents and then move on to his give-away deal with the Taliban that sunk Afghanistan forever. Or how about all those bankrupt farmers from his disaster of a trade policy. Maybe one thinks getting the whole FREE world to hate us and all the dictatorships (save Venezuela) love him. Oh, yes, there was his worse than no response (save for pushing for a vaccine his cult doesn't want to take) to Covid where even his medical response team said caused hundreds of thousands of excess deaths, deaths that needn't had happened. Yep, America was fine alright. (that was sarcasm.)
Oh yes, let's not forget his insurrection that almost brought the Capital down but for the courage a few brave policemen and women standing in their way and being called traitors by the Trump cult for their effort in protecting democracy.
Really???? I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR BIDEN. Trump wasn't a dictator in the least.
If Trump's DC case gets to trial and the evidence gets made public of what he did happens before the election, it's over for him.
Second, when the democratic Party starts running campaign ads that tie Trump to the Roe decision and Americans start considering the results of that like we're seeing in Texas this week where those laws are putting the lives of women in danger, you will see that in the final vote tallies just like you did in recent elections. In 2022, what should have been huge gains for the GOP were a trickle. Democrats across the board have outperformed the polling in every election since Roe was struck down, usually by double digits.The 80 million members of the Trump cult won't be swayed by the truth - it means absolutely nothing to them. Look at what a campaign of lies did to the members of the Jim Jones cult.
Who will be persuaded, I think, are the right-leaning Independents. I think they will either vote for Biden like they did in 2020, vote for someone other than Trump, or not vote at all.
I also think the only Ds that won't vote for Biden is the extreme-left, pro-Hamas faction. The rest will understand America is at stake and will flock to Biden.
For the reason you state, I think even Texas is in play for Biden, especially if that woman dies as a result of the Abbott/Paxton/Republicans (a wrongful death suit should be brought as well). In fact, I just contributed to Allred's campaign against Cruz.
Yes, Trump, was not really a dictator. Nor did he act like one. The checks, specific Pelosi, was always almost on his shoulder and neck day and night. Trump, has not been given a breath at the Presidency right from day one.
You hit the nail on the head, Trump was a wanna-be real dictator (not just one in his head) and tried very hard to become one in America. It was ONLY the checks in our system that saved America from him.
He learned from his failure to become a dictator and now knows how to make America look and act like his hero's country - Russia.Agreeing that Trump, was not a dictator, but he tried to be one, which did not materialized!?
In a democratic country like tha USA, a dictator can never arise.Trump is a freedom loving person. He never desired to be a dictator. I tell you who is the REAL dictator- YES, BIDEN.
Calling the media the enemy of the people is right from the dictator playbook. Refusing to participate in the peaceful transfer of power is from that playbook. Ignoring the results of an election he clearly lost is another move straight from dictators. Openly stating that you plan to use the DOJ against your political enemies is the stuff of dictators.
Only for himself, not for you. And why is he saying out loud he wants to be a dictator, even for one day?
EXACTLY, you have made a succinct synopsis of the situation at hand.
This is a must watch for people who want to understand how truly evil the Democrat party has become, how vile and corrupt the people who control the party are.
Why Are Democrats Funding The Far Right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqgP9Ft_1CY
And this is made by Second Thought, these people openly brag about being communists, socialists, in fact they are so far Left they just got themselves thrown off of a pro-socialist site for being too extreme.Interesting!! It gives cause to wonder many different things about today's world. Thanks for posting, Ken.
I know from my poking about both parties doing their own shenanigans to get their candidate elected, especially by marketing them seeking 'brand recognition'. What gets lost is the brand is so skewed today to the extremes, in my opinion.
Another interesting component is where the money comes from for the election process. I use Open Secret as a source and then research the source of the cash.
Which Industries Are Giving the Most Money to PACs, Parties and Candidates? at the Open Secret website
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-o … industries
And,
Most Partisan Industries at Open Secret website
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-o … industries
I've been exploring the site for a little over a month now. As they say, many elections are won based on how much funding they have.You mean they are so far Left, that they have crossed over into the realm of the far Right?
That pretty much shapes my point of view as a Democrat and I don't live in Washington. If I have to be stuck with a Republican, it would probably be Christie or Haley in that order.
Agreed. Neither are dangerously mentally ill like Trump and Ramaswamy are.
I truly think the Ds will take over the House (maybe even before the election) but I don't have high hopes for the Senate (although the way the Republicans keep acting, I think the Ds odds are improving).
And what actions has Joe Biden taken that fit 'the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting?'
He has left his DOJ alone to act independently, and they responded to the call from a bipartisan committee of Congress to investigate the figureheads of January 6. Biden also has zero connection to state attorney generals who were elected and have pursued the crimes of Trump in their jurisdictions.
Next, what has Biden done to restrict democratic voting? What policies has he put forth, specifically? Plenty of people in individual states have asked the courts to look into Trump's eligibility for the ballot based on his actions, but I don't remember Joe Biden chiming in on any of those cases.
I find that entire claim to be one big projection. Trump literally sued to have people's votes in multiple states thrown out. He asked to stop counting the votes on election night so he could win. Is there anything less democratic than that? He told people in his administration to ignore legal subpoenas from Congress. And he was accused of obstructing justice on multiple occasions when the government was investigating Russian election interference, including dangling pardons to roger Stone and Paul Manafort to prevent them from cooperating with the investigation. So yeah, pretty sure we can all see who actually took actions that fit the descriptions of who the real authoritarian is in this case.I think it is impossible for cult members to recognize the truth when they see it; that is why it is a cult.
Here is a list of logical fallacies in a recent post about Biden.
* Begging the Claim
* Circular Argument
* Ad Hominem
* Ad Populum
* Moral Equivalency
* Projection
It was well written. Unfortunately, not a word of it was true about Biden. People who study these things rank Biden in the top 40% (19/45) of presidents while Trump is ranked in the bottom 5%. That is about as an objective assessment you can get that is devoid of most emotion.Well, Trump did start saying Biden was the dictator late last week, so it's no surprise that we get to hear it by the end of the weekend. That's how his programming works. Everything is taken as gospel and spread to other sites by his following.
The headline is "Reports of antisemitism, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bias continue to surge across the US, new data shows"
Trump's hate campaign is partly responsible for this. Before Trump, it was an extremely long time before there was this much hate in America. This is what seven years of hate filled rhetoric can lead to.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/us/adl-c … index.htmlBiden certainly is. America is SO MUCH WORSE under Biden.
Biden and the Democrats have a problem because they have to own their policies and politics come November 2024.
Unlike any other election in living memory, they have to compete against the conditions that existed during 2016-2019 Trump, they are not running against a new candidate, they are running against what people feel and remember about the pre-pandemic years.
All the people that have bought into Identity Politics, Progressive Ideology, Social Justice & Equity are going to support Biden (or whoever replaces him) and continue to push the messaging and label anyone who doesn't stand with them.
The extremists on the Right will line up with whomever is on the opposite ticket.
Many of those in the Middle will almost by default be rejected by the Left because trying to find a middle ground, trying to return to a more "normal" political or ideological preference gets you labeled and ridiculed by the Progressive Left.
I think this is where a huge shift will occur in the 2024 election... Biden ran on "returning things to normal"... and after five years of MSM's Orange Man Bad routine... many middle-of-the-road people wanted an end to it.
Today almost all of those middle-of-the-road people want an end to the Biden-era as much as they wanted an end to the Orange-Man-Bad era.
It will be interesting to watch it play out and to see what rabbit the Establishment pulls out of its hat to influence the election.America is demonstrably so much better under Biden.
Yeah, cause the Trump cult is so forgiving of those that do not jump into their alternate realities where orange-man is always right, even when the actual facts bore out the exact opposite of what Trump tries to sell to people that understand he's openly lying to their faces. They get labelled RINOs and kicked out of the party.
And yet, we get to hear people in that cult claim it's the left 'will almost by default reject the middle.' Sorry, but if the left wanted to reject the middle, they would have given their nomination to Bernie Sanders in 2020. Instead, we have someone who looks to work across the aisle with reasonable Republicans like Mitch McConnell who understands how to govern. Instead, the vast majority of the right in these forums are more akin to the far-right wing of the House of Representatives and claim that the American people are with them, despite the majority of their policies being vastly unpopular with the American electorate.
And believing moderates are going to ignore Trump's disastrous response to Covid, his attempted coup, or his role in overturning Roe is wishful thinking. When push comes to shove, at the actual election box, the Democrats are currently running about ten points over whatever the polling is saying due to these issues.
Trumpism was rejected in 2020, it was soundly rejected in 2022, and with Trump still running on election denialism now combined with dictator-wannabeism, the trend of Democrats exceeding polling should continue in 2024.
Next, the GOP thinks the best way to woo young voters is to attack Taylor Swift and her following. Let's see how that works out for them.
So many in the GOP are done with Trump, it's just that most of the members of these forums are so far-right that they cannot recognize where the middle is any longer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcTRnkwgMUMAnd his canceling of Roe with its horrific aftermath from Conservatives.
It's comical that Second Thought believes that those ads were 'for' those candidates. If anything, those were damnations. If people think that any candidate wants to be linked to Donald Trump or to abortion bans, well, that's one of those alternate realities. And if highlighting your opposition's affiliations and policy stances makes one 'vile and corrupt,' then all politics is that way.
Related Discussions
- 43
Is THIS One of the Examples of Trump Obstruction of Justice"?
by Scott Belford 2 years ago
There can be know doubt that the Trump Jr. meeting with various Russians connected with Putin was collusion. It is not important that the those on the Russian side ended up only talking about influencing Donald Trump to end a set of 2012 sanctions against Russia. What is important is that...
- 89
Paul Manafort Indictment Not For Collusion
by ga anderson 7 years ago
This should be a hot one. The much anticipated Special Counsel's first indictments have been unsealed - and they aren't about Pres. Trump and Russian election collusion, (yet???)But like a lyric from a song; 'whoo eee, whoo eee babyyy...' It sure paints an ugly picture. And one that seems to be a...
- 16
The Trump Dossier revisited.
by Randy Godwin 7 years ago
Today Sen. Diane Feinstein released the transcripts of the Richard Steele interview against the wishes of Republican committee members. Steel was worried about Trump being possibly blackmailed if he became POTUS and contacted the FBI as he should have. This was before the election and before the...
- 27
FBI launches criminal investigations of John Brennan, James Comey
by Readmikenow 6 days ago
It's about time!"CIA Director John Ratcliffe referred Brennan for criminal investigation to the FBIEXCLUSIVE: Former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey are under criminal investigation for potential wrongdoing related to the Trump–Russia probe, including allegedly...
- 24
Bombshell Durham Report. Hillary paid to spy on Trump Campaign
by Readmikenow 2 years ago
Some journalists, Republican lawmakers, and other notable public figures responded to an explosive report from over the weekend involving Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe by saying that the Trump White House was spied on.Durham said in the court filing...
- 339
15 People!! close to Trump in contact with Russians. No Conspiracy???
by Scott Belford 6 years ago
Over 15, close or very close associates of Donald Trump or his campaign have had contacts with Russia and Russian spies. How can this not be a conspiracy that Trump didn't know about??- Flynn - National Security Advisor (pleaded guilty)- Sessions - Former Attorney General (fired by Trump for...