-
Posts
3454 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Posts posted by hpslugga
-
-
18 minutes ago, Red Five said:
Oh I think the vast majority of the true Dotardians most definitely don't see through it.
His voters? No, they don't. His supporters in DC? Yeah they see it and they support it. They're not interested in governing; they're interested in ruling.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:
Which goes back to why he really does believe it's rigged--because he rigged the system and still lost. Remember when he said that if Hillary won, she rigged the system?
If you really think about it, what he actually said is even more narcissistic. What he said was “I would like to promise and pledge to all of my voters and supporters and to all of the people of the United States that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election...if I win."
-
27 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:
A mob boss.
Either that or someone who's very insecure as to the quality of their phone calls.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:
Well, it will be the Fulton County District Attorney, which is, despite the name, an arm of the state government, not Fulton County. And the case will be styled State of Georgia v. Donald J. Trump et al.
It's essentially the same thing as the criminal case he's dealing with in Florida. Yeah the description of the court says "Southern District of Florida," but it's still a federal case.
16 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:The key word in the title is District not County. District Attorneys represent the state in districts that often but not always correspond to counties. This is the difference between district amd county attorneys.
Yep. Pure local misdemeanor crap is tried, at least in Georgia, by the Solicitor General. County Attorneys really only exist for civil matters concerning the government. In fact, the Camden County Attorney's website specifically says "The county attorney manages all county leases and county litigation issues, but does not handle any criminal matters."
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, The Dog said:
Reuters dude fucked up:
Keep in mind that it is not the State of Georgia that is going to indict him but rather Fulton County.
The State is going to indict him in Fulton County.
https://pacga.org/about-pacga/
"The District Attorney is the chief prosecuting officer for the State of Georgia within each of the State’s 50 judicial circuits. Judicial circuits consist of one to eight counties and are generally named for a geographical feature within the Circuit."
-
3
-
-
-
8 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:
I’m not seeing this anywhere. Plus Didn’t other news outlets confirm some witnesses will testify tomorrow? Other than Trump complaining of course.
Im guessing Wednesday or Thursday might be more realistic
This is probably what the Reuters thing is:
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, The Dog said:
"There's a totally perfect african american in my ass right now. The very best african american. But I have to say, the food has gone to hell. When I was president, a Prisoner would get the very best food Anywhere. Totally "the" best. They thought Bobby Flay was working in There. They would tell Me that. But now thanks to the Biden Crime Family and the do-Nothing socialist Pinko communist "anarchist" fascist Leftist democrats, it doesn't "even" compare to a breakfast buffet from some fleabag Hotel in a Shithole country."
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:
Stupid Flanders
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:
the correlation of conservatives' self-reported levels of happiness
The most honest self-reporters. The best self-reporters
3:10-3:13
-
1
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, C-Man said:
LOL, Trump now adds ‘my opinion’ and ‘what I think’ to stolen-election claims: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-adds-my-opinion-and-what-i-think-to-stolen-election-claims/ar-AA1f6oE0
I mean…it’s just as dishonest as when he was flatly asserting his baseless nonsense as if it were a matter of fact
-
47 minutes ago, The Dog said:
(SIAP wanted to be sure the free NYT link was provided)
I mean sure but you have to understand that most of the dialogue concerning his eligibility is limited to things that range from “unavoidable” to “realistic.”
That’s why you never see anyone mention the fact that, for example, the GQP is a private party that is well within their right to preemptively disqualify him from running as a Republican. That’s not gonna happen, but it theoretically could.
-
1
-
-
-
1 hour ago, The Dog said:
Let me guess, someone slipped her a bunch of Joker cards.
-
2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:
wait, the Unselects?
edit: ohhh, that's what he calls the jan 6 select subcommittee. the unselects.
jesus fucking christos
You have to think like aggy in order to understand what he’s saying. It’s essentially a foreign language
-
3
-
-
2 hours ago, C-Man said:
So the absolute best-case scenario is that Cannon is woefully under-qualified for a case of this magnitude?
You tell me
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Rimbo said:Quote
“Our Founders lay this case out,” says Eastman. “There’s actually a provision in the Declaration of Independence that a people will suffer abuses while they remain sufferable, tolerable while they remain tolerable. At some point abuses become so intolerable that it becomes not only their right but their duty to alter or abolish the existing government.”
As the article already points out, I love how this degenerate says "provision in the Declaration of Independence" as if it were a legal instrument.
-
3
-
1
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Rimbo said:
Legal Eagle dives in:
Beat me to it.
I was very happy to see that he pointed out paragraph 83 (7:30 mark), which to me puts to rest any and all debate about "what did he really know?" He fucking knew that he lost and he admitted it...just not in public. Of course he further demolishes that nonsense beginning around 15:30 with the "state of mind" stuff. I also liked the bit at the end re: Elias. That's a perfect illustration of how absurd the MAGA argument is.
Trump's case here is like an onion that's rotting from the inside: keep peeling them damned layers and it just keeps looking worse.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Foosters said:
By his own admission, every single person Donald Trump hired to work in his administration has turned out to be a crook, a liar, and a bad guy. Sure can pick em
I mean you really only fit one other description if you’ve worked for Trump and aren’t any of those things: fired.
-
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:
One hundred percent. The crimes alleged occurred in DC.
Even if there was a change of venue to Maryland or Virgitina, the DC Circuit retains appellate jurisdiction.
And with that said, I wouldn’t advise Trump on filing for COV. He’s not going to get more friendly juries in either of those states. Of course he probably has it in his tiny little mind that he can shift the venues of all his cases to Aileen Cannon.
-
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:
Neat. None of this is any reason to not push every single sane person we know to the polls in 2024.
Which is exactly what I do and what I encourage everyone else to do, but that’s independent of two things:
1. My whole point was that I expect that to happen (high turnout against Trump) and have no reason not to expect it.
2. For Trump to use his expectation of the exact opposite of that as any part of his criminal defense strategy is absolutely crazy.
1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:I will not be satisfied until he and others like him are dead and buried. Literally.
Well hopefully they won’t be buried. Hopefully we will be able to cremate them and urinate upon the ashes a la Shooter McGavin.
-
5
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
18 hours ago, Brisketexan said:1) If everything was normal, I agree.
2) Everything is not normal. GQP states are already well underway with their frantic efforts to disenfranchise any voters/voter groups/entire geographic areas that might vote against Cheeto Benito. They don't have to get more votes for Trump. They just have to exclude enough Biden votes.
They started doing that immediately after Trump uttered the words "this is a fraud on the American public" and we got a good look into how effective those efforts really were in 2022. Remember that "red wave" that was supposed to happen last year? How'd that go?
And that axiom I mentioned? It was established before said efforts and survived them. That's how toxic Trump is, and it's why other GQP candidates are currently talking about raising the voting age to 21. That will never fly because it requires a consitutional amendment, and that shit ain't happening between now and next November.
But that's not even the point. The point is that all this chatter about "raise the voting age" is an acknowledgement that at the state level, they didn't do near enough to suppress D votes and that they need to do more to accomplish that. They don't know how to do that in a way that would survive court challenges.
Regarding the age issue, it can only get worse for the R's as we must consider that 1) there were a bunch of people ages 14-17 in 2020 who could not vote then and will be able to in 2024 and 2) the Gen Z demographic was as lopsided as could be against the GQP before Dobbs, and after Dobbs, they swung away from them even harder. In 2016, they accounted for 2% of the election. In 2020 it was 7.5% and next year, they look to figure in for about 13%. Combine them with the millennials, that looks to be more than one-third (37%) of the electorate. Trump does very poorly with that demo in the swing states.
18 hours ago, Brisketexan said:You are still thinking like a person who plays by the rules and the Rule of Law. The GQP doesn't think that way.
The GQP certainly doesn't think that way, but their problem is that they're stupid criminals. Where as you might see them as Lex Luthor and Skeletor, what they really are amount to Harry and Marv from Home Alone. This is going to remain true as long as that "party" remains a collection of social media personalities who think clicks/views/subscriptions translate to electoral victories. The MAGA faction has been believing in that belief since 2018, and they've been knocked on their asses over and over for it.
18 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:He lost Wisconsin and Georgia by like a combined 50k votes. All it takes is a slight bit of apathy among D voters to swing those back. Arizona feels pretty safe with Maricopa county basically controlling it.
We already got a preview of both states in the last two years. The GQP in Georgia couldn't even propel a Heisman Trophy-winning football hero into the Senate. Now you might say that the GQP voters in GA are racist, and I'm not gonna fight you on that...but still, Walker was running against a black dude that hates Trump. Their choice was "black dude that loves Trump vs. uppity negro that hates Trump," and the latter still won. And again, this was all pre-indictments.
As to Wisconsin, we got a good look at where they are with the Protasiewicz win against that MAGA loser Daniel Kelly just 4 months ago. That was nothing to sneeze at, and it was literally done on the same day Trump was indicted in NY (aka the first of the three), so it's safe to say the indictment played no role in this particular election.
If anything, Trump's legal entanglements plus the gaggle of absolutely loathsome Supreme Court decisions, due entirely to Trump's packing of the court, likely expand that margin. This apathy you speak of would be most pronounced in mid-term election years. It would also be most pronounced under the flurry of the aforementioned legislations at the state level. All that was supposed to happen at once last year, and yet here we sit with a slightly blue senate, only a nominally red house, Trump is indicted in multiple states, and his competitors in his own party are already yelling about raising the voting age with the deliberate intent to disenfranchise a very large demographic precisely because they know they'll go overwhelmingly against that stupid party the first chance they get. Seriously I don't think some of you quite appreciate how transparently pathetic that whole "raise the voting age" thing makes them look even to independents. It looks like...well, this.
In closing, what this shit really comes down to is two categories of people: independent voters and unlikely voters. It's not about making the base so mad that they press the button harder next time. That's just feelings and emotions. Trump is just playing to his base, not branching out to reconnect himself with the independent voters that he did win in 2016. I won't say much about unlikely voters because I think most of you know that those have been overwhelmingly in rejection of the President-reject. That said, if you want to get a good idea of where independent voters are heading, just check out this excerpt from a New Yorker article:
"Among self-identified independents who don’t lean toward either party, the survey yielded more ambiguous results. Fewer than half of these respondents—between thirty-seven per cent and forty-six per cent, depending on the specific cases—said they believed that Trump had committed a crime. And about half of these respondents said that the charges were politically motivated. But, although these findings seem encouraging for Trump and his supporters, the survey also found that the number of independents who believe that Trump has done something criminal is growing, especially in relation to the classified-documents case. In a Bright Line Watch survey carried out last October, thirty-four per cent of independents said that a crime had been committed in that case. In the latest poll, that number had grown to forty-six per cent."
And it's not just independent voters:
"This suggests that, as prosecutors release more details of the charges and evidence against Trump, opinion is slowly shifting against him among less partisan voters. The survey even showed evidence of movement among Republicans. Since last October, the percentage of Republicans who said they believed that Trump had committed a crime in handling classified documents rose from nine to twenty-five. “We have to keep two things in mind at the same time,” Brendan Nyhan, a political scientist at Dartmouth who co-founded Bright Line Watch, told me on Monday. “On the one hand, the public is incredibly polarized on these cases. On the other hand, the new evidence does seem to be moving the needle.”
So in 2018, he started to lose support in electoral form and lost the House
In 2020, he lost more support in electoral form, lost the Senate, and was voted out
In 2022, he lost even more support in electoral form, the GQP barely gained the House because of gerrymandering fuckery, and the D's gained a Senate seat
In 2023 he is losing even more support due to the indictments
So he's gonna...what...gain all that support back and win the general?-
7
-
3
-
1
-
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:
Everyone read this. Then read it again. This is it. The bolded is our "4th and 5, with the national championship on the line" moment. It all comes down to that.
Trump is the 2024 GQP nominee. That's happening, there's no room for debate, nothing will stop it. He could be charged, tried, and convicted of the most horrific crimes imaginable, as he gleefully admits "fuck yeah I raped and murdered a baby!", and he still waltzes to the nomination.
Trump's entire defense strategy is this: win the White House. All of his convictions would at most be up on appeal, so he won't be in a prison anywhere. Pardon himself (or at the very least, argue that no criminal proceeding against him can advance while he is POTUS -- impeachment is the only remedy, and we know the GQP senators will never vote to convict). Pardon everyone else implicated. THEN, do exactly what he accuses the DOJ of doing: he'll absolutely weaponize it, and use it to go after every political enemy, real or imagined.
Trump's defense plan is to win the White House.
The Republic's plan for survival is to never let him back into the White House.
4th and 5 coming up.....it's up to all of us to play the role of VY.
Trump isn’t winning in 2024, so that’s not a viable defense plan.
I know it’s posh and trendy in these parts to consider people like Nate Silver to be some sort of EC wunderkinds and national polls in August the year before the election to be any sort of relevant, but the reality is that Trump didn’t even win in 2016. The D’s lost that one by nominating the one candidate that Trump conceivably could have beaten.
Trump started losing independent voters in the 2018 mid-terms and they’ve yet to go back. He’s the President-reject as of 2020, a status that was confirmed last year in the mid-terms.
Add to that, within the very narrow framework of mainstream political discourse, Biden has a solid record to run on in the 6 battleground states. Contrast that to Trump, who himself is a victim of the same axiom he created shortly after taking the oath: republicans cannot win contested primaries without Trump’s endorsement, and they can’t win general elections with it. I once again have to pose this question because I’ve yet to see a sensible answer to it:
Of Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, exactly which ones is Trump flipping back to himself next year?
His criminal defense can go in multiple directions. He can plead straight not guilty and argue the elements, he can cut a plea, or he can try to delay these trials until after the election. Option 3 is the craziest one because it’s the most likely to fail; even more likely than option 1. His only sensible move in terms of criminal defense strategy is option 2. But he’s not going to do that. Why? Because it’s not about keeping him away from legal accountability. It’s about the grift, and option 2 represents the quickest ending to the grift.
Think about it:
Option 1: he gets to keep hee-hawing about how innocent he is and grifts people out of their money to contribute to his defense right til the very end of all trials.
Option 2: Trials are over and he loses respect from a chunk of his base; at least the smarter half who recognize that he’s admitting to criminal culpability, one of such cases establishing that he knew all along that he lost in 2020 and those poor suckers got duped.
Option 3: See option 1.
Thats why plea bargaining never enters the discussion. No grift, no consideration.
-
9
-
-
41 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:
The mouth breathers will admit that they haven’t read the indictment but that their sources tell them that it is an indictment against free speech. And if you tell them otherwise, they will not accept your facts.
The exact verbiage of such an exchange reads as follows:
”I believe what I believe because that’s what I believe. I believe that, and I’m not gonna believe what you believe because it’s not what I believe.”
-
1
-
2
-
Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty
in Cloak Room
Posted
I expected this as well. It’s a trademark of rightist politics in general to pounce on the vaguest appearance of oppositional impropriety, run with it and scream about it until the end of fucking time. Clockwork.