OT: Current Affairs and Politics

[Old tiger 79]

I don't remember the details to that. It sounds m


Someone refresh my memory. This story sounds like bullshit.

I’d like to here this story as well, Mik sounds like an intriguing character

 

[Gary Gutful]

Its posted in Parrallel Dimension.

 

[Twizzle]

 

[Gronk]

Imagine if Seth Rich is not dead.

I mean, no body cam footage from the cops, actually no footage released whatsoever (from, say, hospital or street security cameras), no autopsy report or death certificate...

Imagine if Seth Rich was part of the gang Hillary was using the steal data from the NGP-VAN software system the Democrats were using. Imagine if Seth needed to be dead so no one could track him down.

Not 100% on that, but just imagine...

Or imagine that the GOP used the Seth Rich thing as a "look over there" diversion in a Keystone Cops attempt to make merkins think that wikileaks stuff came from within the Democrats and not the Russians.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/17/business/media/fox-news-seth-rich-settlement.html


Fox Settled a Lawsuit Over Its Lies. But It Insisted on One Unusual Condition.
Why did the network insist an agreement with the family of a murdered young man remain undisclosed until after the election?

On Oct. 12, 2020, Fox News agreed to pay millions of dollars to the family of a murdered Democratic National Committee staff member, implicitly acknowledging what saner minds knew long ago: that the network had repeatedly hyped a false claim that the young staff member, Seth Rich, was involved in leaking D.N.C. emails during the 2016 presidential campaign. (Russian intelligence officers, in fact, had hacked and leaked the emails.)

Fox’s decision to settle with the Rich family came just before its marquee hosts, Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity, were set to be questioned under oath in the case, a potentially embarrassing moment. And Fox paid so much that the network didn’t have to apologize for the May 2017 story on FoxNews.com.

But there was one curious provision that Fox insisted on: The settlement had to be kept secret for a month — until after the Nov. 3 election. The exhausted plaintiffs agreed.

 

[Twizzle]

gee what a shock

 

[Gary Gutful]

Slow news day.

 

[strider]

I understand this is a completely biased video to make a point one way, but i think it has a point.

Pelosi - saying there needs to be an uprising earlier this year.

Trump - specifically asks for a peaceful protest on the storm the capitol day.


I dont think this forum does brighteon, so you will have to follow the link.

https://www.brighteon.com/5a324ad5-569d-45b5-a122-debb9d2727a6


I mentioned to someone the other day that there is literally no way in hell Trump would be found guilty in a court over inciting what happened. He simply did not publicly ask for people to dobit.
But an impeachment is just a witch hunt where people pick a side and needs no logic other than you dont like the person or perhaps someone/something could be coercing you to vote a certain way.
And i get the cinsequences of impeachment are less than some court trial, but they are still significant.

Dont get me wrong, i dont like Trump, and i think he makes people hate him. But this impeachment over that is a farce.

 

[Gary Gutful]

I understand this is a completely biased video to make a point one way, but i think it has a point.

Pelosi - saying there needs to be an uprising earlier this year.

Trump - specifically asks for a peaceful protest on the storm the capitol day.


I dont think this forum does brighteon, so you will have to follow the link.

https://www.brighteon.com/5a324ad5-569d-45b5-a122-debb9d2727a6


I mentioned to someone the other day that there is literally no way in hell Trump would be found guilty in a court over inciting what happened. He simply did not publicly ask for people to dobit.
But an impeachment is just a witch hunt where people pick a side and needs no logic other than you dont like the person or perhaps someone/something could be coercing you to vote a certain way.
And i get the cinsequences of impeachment are less than some court trial, but they are still significant.

Dont get me wrong, i dont like Trump, and i think he makes people hate him. But this impeachment over that is a farce.

I agree. It probably won’t get up but I think plenty (including some republicans) are hoping it will damage him permanently in the process.

 

[Old tiger 79]

I agree. It probably won’t get up but I think plenty (including some republicans) are hoping it will damage him permanently in the process.

Yeah I agree as well bruv, hopefully it damages him long term

 

[Gronk]

I understand this is a completely biased video to make a point one way, but i think it has a point.

Pelosi - saying there needs to be an uprising earlier this year.

Trump - specifically asks for a peaceful protest on the storm the capitol day.


I dont think this forum does brighteon, so you will have to follow the link.

https://www.brighteon.com/5a324ad5-569d-45b5-a122-debb9d2727a6


I mentioned to someone the other day that there is literally no way in hell Trump would be found guilty in a court over inciting what happened. He simply did not publicly ask for people to dobit.
But an impeachment is just a witch hunt where people pick a side and needs no logic other than you dont like the person or perhaps someone/something could be coercing you to vote a certain way.
And i get the cinsequences of impeachment are less than some court trial, but they are still significant.

Dont get me wrong, i dont like Trump, and i think he makes people hate him. But this impeachment over that is a farce.

There are two trains of thought here. Impeach him for sedition so he can never run for parliament again. Or don’t impeach him but charge him under the 25th amendment and that way he can never run again.

Alternatively, do nothing and the Trump Show slows down to a dribble. Or will it ? Remember when we could not get rid of Fitzy and Spags ?

 

[Gary Gutful]

There are two trains of thought here. Impeach him for sedition so he can never run for parliament again. Or don’t impeach him but charge him under the 25th amendment and that way he can never run again.

Alternatively, do nothing and the Trump Show slows down to a dribble. Or will it ? Remember when we could not get rid of Fitzy and Spags ?

*Sitzy and Fpags

 

[strider]

Sedition? .... for saying, go and do a peaceful protest?

I guess the point is it doesn't matter, so long as you can convince enough politicians to agree - which shouldnt be too hard

 

[Gary Gutful]

Sedition? .... for saying, go and do a peaceful protest?

I guess the point is it doesn't matter, so long as you can convince enough politicians to agree - which shouldnt be too hard

Trump has made a career out of bullshitting people. Its probably Karma if he gets arsef**ked in the same way.

 

[Gronk]

Sedition? .... for saying, go and do a peaceful protest?

I guess the point is it doesn't matter, so long as you can convince enough politicians to agree - which shouldnt be too hard

I think your recollection of the events of a few weeks ago is different to others. So you reckon he did nothing wrong and if there are consequences, they are politically motivated only and it will be witch hunt 2.0 or 3.0. Cool.

 

[Bandwagon]

Sedition? .... for saying, go and do a peaceful protest?

I guess the point is it doesn't matter, so long as you can convince enough politicians to agree - which shouldnt be too hard

I think there's much more to it than that. It's a cumulative effect of a prolonged campaign.

Ask yourself, if not for his continual ranting over the stolen election, would the events of the sixth had occurred?

If you then come to the conclusion that no, it probably wouldn't have, then the next question is would it be reasonable to expect that Trump might have known the potential consequences of his actions and words?

It then becomes a question that if that is the case, was his behaviour knowingly inciteful, and if so as the POTUS, should he be brought to account for that.




I

 

[strider]

I think your recollection of the events of a few weeks ago is different to others. So you reckon he did nothing wrong and if there are consequences, they are politically motivated only and it will be witch hunt 2.0 or 3.0. Cool.

Like i said, good luck getting anything to stick in a real court situation .... But this isnt what that is.

 

[strider]

I think there's much more to it than that. It's a cumulative effect of a prolonged campaign.

Ask yourself, if not for his continual ranting over the stolen election, would the events of the sixth had occurred?

If you then come to the conclusion that no, it probably wouldn't have, then the next question is would it be reasonable to expect that Trump might have known the potential consequences of his actions and words?

It then becomes a question that if that is the case, was his behaviour knowingly inciteful, and if so as the POTUS, should he be brought to account for that.




I

I think he believes he was screwed over. So i dont know if you can say weeks of saying that was just to make people storm the capitol.

I can happily accept garys statement that karma is a bitch, he has been content to score alot of enemies over the years .... And it means they will more likely decide his fate on that than the last few weeks and specifically that day.

 

[Bandwagon]

I think he believes he was screwed over. So i dont know if you can say weeks of saying that was just to make people storm the capitol.

I can happily accept garys statement that karma is a bitch, he has been content to score alot of enemies over the years .... And it means they will more likely decide his fate on that than the last few weeks and specifically that day.

Oh look, I'm not for a minute suggesting his intent over weeks was make people "storm the capitol", what I'm saying is that is a very knowable outcome of what he's been pushing. And for that he must bear responsibility.

That he is emotionally incapable of accepting defeat is beside the point. This is the POTUS, it's not like the advice isn't there available if he chooses to listen. His available resources are virtually limited only by his choice to use them

It's also worth remembering that impeachment is not by necessity a criminal proceedings, and there are no criminal consequences to impeachment. There is only disqualification from office, and it does not require an actual crime to have been committed.

It is at it's heart the method to remove a person of office who is shown to be incapable or unwilling to serve in that position in a manner that is fit for that position, in the case of the POTUS, it's my understanding that it's the only means of removal.

In this instance, this is very clearly about attempting to ensure the Donald can not hold public office again, no more , no less.

 

[Gronk]

I think he believes he was screwed over. So i dont know if you can say weeks of saying that was just to make people storm the capitol.

I can happily accept garys statement that karma is a bitch, he has been content to score alot of enemies over the years .... And it means they will more likely decide his fate on that than the last few weeks and specifically that day.

There are a lot of people that are tired of Trump getting a leave pass from consequences simply because, he didn't intend for X or he really believed Y. He's not a politician, he's a New York businessman, is not a defence when you have dozens of legal advisors and he ignores advice.

The tolerance for his disregard to the law is gobsmacking. Why should he be treated differently and what precedent does this set moving forward ?

 

[Gronk]

Like i said, good luck getting anything to stick in a real court situation .... But this isnt what that is.

You're in good company. Miranda Devine thinks that whole thing is a beat-up too.