The Never-President Trump

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

On 06/01/2024 at 23:55, Iwans Big Toe said:

This is a very well thought out post and I appreciate it. Many parts of it I agree with and there is also a lot that I think is wide of the mark.

The main mistake is equating the US with the UK, as Churchill said we are two nations divided by a common language. The UK is a constitutional monarchy, the US a democratic republic. Although we speak the same language, our political systems are very different. The American public is responsible for the election of their leader, and while we hold general elections, it is the king who is ultimately responsible for appointing the leader of the UK government (although no king would dare challenge the populace as they might find themselves in another Charles I situation).

America is becoming more and more divided though, as I think the UK also is, this is why the Tories were able to win so many seats in the north, a traditional left stronghold. There are many on both sides of the Atlantic that spout the rhetoric that they want to be inclusive, however if your views do not align with theirs's they demand that you be shut down. That is not inclusivism it is totalitarianism.

I agree with you that capitalism is not sustainable. It is based on a system of usury. However, communism has been proven over and over again to end with a despot ruling. Now the naive will say "well Marxism has never been applied correctly" and the truth is that they are right and that it never will, because there will always be a Stalin, Pol Pot or Kim that will abuse the system for their own gain. This is human nature.

Is Trump the answer? I do not believe so, but to disenfranchise roughly half of the US population who do support him by preventing him from running is a dangerous precedent. What if 10 or 20 years from now the people in power decide that your preferred candidate needs to be prevented from running for parliament (or office) because they detest them, would you be happy to accept their decision?

 

 

 

It looks like I was wrong.

It's not taken 10-20 years. There are Republican's that are already moving to have Biden taken off the ballot.

Aaron Bernstine (Pennsylvania), Cory McGarr (Arizona)  Charlice Byrd (Georgia) and Bill Eigel (Misouri).

This is what happens when you sow chaos, you reap chaos.

Although to be fair, Biden is so unelectable that they are probably (un)democrats in disguise.

 

Edited January 10 by Iwans Big Toe

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

9 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

It looks like I was wrong.

It's not taken 10-20 years. There are Republican's that are already moving to have Biden taken off the ballot.

Aaron Bernstine (Pennsylvania), Cory McGarr (Arizona)  Charlice Byrd (Georgia) and Bill Eigel (Misouri).

This is what happens when you sow chaos, you reap chaos.

Although to be fair, Biden is so unelectable that they are probably (un)democrats in disguise.

 

You should've just stopped when you realised you were 'wrong', it's a common theme with you.

There's a world of difference between a judge and a Supreme Court in a state ruling that Trump should be removed from the ballot due to his involvement in an insurrection and a Republican official trying to remove Biden with no evidence.

https://newrepublic.com/post/177928/missouri-gop-secretary-state-panics-reason-remove-biden-ballot

“There have been allegations that he’s engaged in insurrection,” Ashcroft said of Biden.

When Sanchez pressed him to give more details, Ashcroft said he had “seen allegations from the lieutenant governor of Texas,” but then suddenly seemed incapable of stringing a sentence together.

Edited January 11 by A Load of Squit

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

You should've just stopped when you realised you were 'wrong', it's a common theme with you.

There's a world of difference between a judge and a Supreme Court in a state ruling that Trump should be removed from the ballot due to his involvement in an insurrection and a Republican official trying to remove Biden with no evidence.

https://newrepublic.com/post/177928/missouri-gop-secretary-state-panics-reason-remove-biden-ballot

“There have been allegations that he’s engaged in insurrection,” Ashcroft said of Biden.

When Sanchez pressed him to give more details, Ashcroft said he had “seen allegations from the lieutenant governor of Texas,” but then suddenly seemed incapable of stringing a sentence together.

I only mean I was wrong in as much as I underestimated the time scale.

Where as you are wrong for thinking going after political opponents through the courts is acceptable. 

And for the record, I think the Republicans wanting to remove Biden from the ballot is as equally underhanded as what Democrats have been doing. It just divides people further, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

 

 

 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

5 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

I only mean I was wrong in as much as I underestimated the time scale.

Where as you are wrong for thinking going after political opponents through the courts is acceptable. 

And for the record, I think the Republicans wanting to remove Biden from the ballot is as equally underhanded as what Democrats have been doing. It just divides people further, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

 

 

 

 

It is if they break the law, it doesn't matter if they are political opponents, no-one is above the law.

Trump is being prosecuted because he broke the law not because he's in politics.

[horsefly 4,317]

6 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

I only mean I was wrong in as much as I underestimated the time scale.

Where as you are wrong for thinking going after political opponents through the courts is acceptable. 

And for the record, I think the Republicans wanting to remove Biden from the ballot is as equally underhanded as what Democrats have been doing. It just divides people further, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

 

 

 

 

Oh dear! The US Constitution does not permit insurrectionists to stand for president. Try reading the actual  judgements of those state legislatures that have debarred Trump from the ballot.

Trump himself has foolishly admitted on social media that he is incapable of being president without breaking the law 

[Yellow Fever 3,838]

1 minute ago, A Load of Squit said:

It is if they break the law, it doesn't matter if they are political opponents, no-one is above the law.

Trump is being prosecuted because he broke the law not because he's in politics.

I had to laugh at one of his current defenses that as President he was immune from (criminal) prosecution. Yes absurd but such is the depravity now in the GOP and Trump. Did cross my mind that should such defense stand up just think what Biden (could) do if was as unprincipled as Trump.

As somebody else said - Facism lurks.

[TheGunnShow 6,010]

The whole crux of politicians is that they should be equal in front of the law, not above it. 

Trump remains incapable of noting this very basic fact. At the same time, he is entitled to a fair trial, but from the snippets we get to see, it doesn't look great for him.

[TheRock 171]

The trouble is that Trump in the eyes of many has now become too much of a cult of personality to be barred from the ballot. Every time coverage of bad press or fresh lawsuits are launched against him, it seems to galvanise his poll numbers even further.

If he is barred and/or loses in November what crazy skirmishes will he embark on next? He has the clout to fracture the US in more ways than one. We already saw Texas trying to create a sucession bill in 2020 as a result of disputing the legitimacy of the election which were borne from the rhetoric of the Trump Campaign. and some Texan politicians are still trying to get an in/out referendum vote on their place in the union. No doubt this would have the potential for some of the Red States to act as copycat follow-ups.

Edited January 11 by TheRock

[Yellow Fever 3,838]

27 minutes ago, TheRock said:

The trouble is that Trump in the eyes of many has now become too much of a cult of personality to be barred from the ballot. Every time coverage of bad press or fresh lawsuits are launched against him, it seems to galvanise his poll numbers even further.

If he is barred and/or loses in November what crazy skirmishes will he embark on next? He has the clout to fracture the US in more ways than one. We already saw Texas trying to create a sucession bill in 2020 as a result of disputing the legitimacy of the election which were borne from the rhetoric of the Trump Campaign. and some Texan politicians are still trying to get an in/out referendum vote on their place in the union. No doubt this would have the potential for some of the Red States to act as copycat follow-ups.

I saw this yesterday - 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/10/donald-trump-says-never-help-europe-attack

I simply can not see how anybody in the UK or elsewhere apart from China, Russia, N.Korea and probably Iran who would benefit from the chaos compos mentis can possibly see Trump as a good thing. 

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

10 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

It is if they break the law, it doesn't matter if they are political opponents, no-one is above the law.

Trump is being prosecuted because he broke the law not because he's in politics.

 

No he is not being prosecuted because he broke the law. He is being prosecuted to ascertain "IF" he broke the law, that is how the western legal system works. Innocent until proven guilty, have you heard of that or do you prefer summary judgments in the court of popular opinion?

And as he has not been found guilty at this point, Colorado and Maine have no legal standing to bar him from the ballot, because he is an innocent man until proven guilty. The fact that he has been removed from ballots for something he has not been convicted of just lends support to my argument that corrupt officials are using this (the legal system) as a pretext to prevent a political rival from running.

 

 

Edited January 11 by Iwans Big Toe

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

44 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

 

No he is not being prosecuted because he broke the law. He is being prosecuted to ascertain "IF" he broke the law, that is how the western legal system works. Innocent until proven guilty, have you heard of that or do you prefer summary judgments in the court of popular opinion?

And as he has not been found guilty at this point, Colorado and Maine have no legal standing to bar him from the ballot, because he is an innocent man until proven guilty. The fact that he has been removed from ballots for something he has not been convicted of just lends support to my argument that corrupt officials are using this (the legal system) as a pretext to prevent a political rival from running.

 

 

A judge and the Supreme Court of Colorado have found him to be guilty.

Until you understand this very basic point you'll continue to keep looking very stupid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/19/us/politics/trump-colorado-ballot-14th-amendment.html

Colorado’s top court ruled on Tuesday that former President Donald J. Trump is disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in insurrection with his actions leading up to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol,

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

40 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

A judge and the Supreme Court of Colorado have found him to be guilty.

Until you understand this very basic point you'll continue to keep looking very stupid.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/19/us/politics/trump-colorado-ballot-14th-amendment.html

Colorado’s top court ruled on Tuesday that former President Donald J. Trump is disqualified from holding office again because he engaged in insurrection with his actions leading up to the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol,

So not a jury of his peers, but (un)democrat appointed judges? Again, thanks for supporting my argument that this is a politically motivated case.

I do hope that one day you are not accused of something and one man, who is politically opposed to your opinions, is the sole arbiter of your case. Because all I will have to say to you is this was what you fought for. Guilty until proven innocent.

 

 

 

Edited January 11 by Iwans Big Toe

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

@A Load of Squit I would be interested in what you think about Ray Epps getting a year of probation for being convicted of inciting the J6th "insurrection"?

 

 

Edited January 11 by Iwans Big Toe

[If wed kept Howie.. 210]

i have a feeling that the whole situation may end up mute... have a look at the physical state of Trump recently, i wouldn't be surprised if he is found one morning to have passed away in the night..

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

10 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

So not a jury of his peers, but (un)democrat appointed judges? Again, thanks for supporting my argument that this is a politically motivated case.

I do hope that one day you are not accused of something and one man, who is politically opposed to your opinions, is the sole arbiter of your case. Because all I will have to say to you is this was what you fought for. Guilty until proven innocent.

 

 

 

What an absolute load of tosh.

You are clearly bat sh!t mental.

Edited January 12 by A Load of Squit

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

9 hours ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

@A Load of Squit I would be interested in what you think about Ray Epps getting a year of probation for being convicted of inciting the J6th "insurrection"?

 

 

You've clearly demonstrated that you have no idea how the American judicial system works in your previous posts so you not comprehending this case is no surprise.

I expect you'll continue to believe the conspiracy bullsh!t that you've been peddling.

[Herman 9,828]

8 hours ago, If wed kept Howie.. said:

i have a feeling that the whole situation may end up mute... have a look at the physical state of Trump recently, i wouldn't be surprised if he is found one morning to have passed away in the night..

Heaven forbid. 

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

49 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

What an absolute load of tosh.

You are clearly bay sh!t mental.

Personal insults? Really?

 

43 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

You've clearly demonstrated that you have no idea how the American judicial system works in your previous posts so you not comprehending this case is no surprise.

I expect you'll continue to believe the conspiracy bullsh!t that you've been peddling.

I am not "peddling a conspiracy theory".

It was a genuine question, I was interested in your opinion. Ray Epps has been sentenced to 1 year probation after being caught on camera, in Washington D.C on the day,  clearly instructing people to "storm" the capitol building, far more than the Orange Man did to incite "insurrection". Where as others have been sentenced to serve time in prison for merely demonstrating at the Capitol building. These are immutable facts that are a matter of public record.

Notice the past tense though, "was interested". As you are clearly not interested in debating with anyone who challenges your delicate sensibilities, I will no longer question why you seem unable to defend your position without resorting to ad hominem attacks and will leave you to your echo chamber and safe space.

 

 

[Yellow Fever 3,838]

18 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

Personal insults? Really?

 

I am not "peddling a conspiracy theory".

It was a genuine question, I was interested in your opinion. Ray Epps has been sentenced to 1 year probation after being caught on camera, in Washington D.C on the day,  clearly instructing people to "storm" the capitol building, far more than the Orange Man did to incite "insurrection". Where as others have been sentenced to serve time in prison for merely demonstrating at the Capitol building. These are immutable facts that are a matter of public record.

Notice the past tense though, "was interested". As you are clearly not interested in debating with anyone who challenges your delicate sensibilities, I will no longer question why you seem unable to defend your position without resorting to ad hominem attacks and will leave you to your echo chamber and safe space.

 

 

Wasn't he actually charged with public disorder not insurrection. Just to get the facts straight. Neither did he enter the buildings? He has also it seems completely disassociated  / debunked any of these wild theories as to his actions.

Yes - it is a fringe or 'alternative reality' conspiracy theory. Seen Elvis recently?  

[horsefly 4,317]

25 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

Personal insults? Really?

 

I am not "peddling a conspiracy theory".

It was a genuine question, I was interested in your opinion. Ray Epps has been sentenced to 1 year probation after being caught on camera, in Washington D.C on the day,  clearly instructing people to "storm" the capitol building, far more than the Orange Man did to incite "insurrection". Where as others have been sentenced to serve time in prison for merely demonstrating at the Capitol building. These are immutable facts that are a matter of public record.

Notice the past tense though, "was interested". As you are clearly not interested in debating with anyone who challenges your delicate sensibilities, I will no longer question why you seem unable to defend your position without resorting to ad hominem attacks and will leave you to your echo chamber and safe space.

 

 

Conspiracy theory is exactly what you're peddling. Ray Epps is now a convicted criminal (not something that happens to FBI plants). His "light" sentence is the result of his plea deal (something available to all the J6 rioters). But don't take my word for it, try reading the newspaper of your choice The Daily Mail https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ray-epps-sentenced-january-6th-protestor-who-ordered-people-into-the-capitol-is-sentenced-to-one-years-probation-for-his-role-in-riot/ar-AA1mHEOu

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

14 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

Wasn't he actually charged with public disorder not insurrection. Just to get the facts straight. Neither did he enter the buildings? He has also it seems completely disassociated  / debunked any of these wild theories as to his actions.

Yes - it is a fringe or 'alternative reality' conspiracy theory. Seen Elvis recently?  

The video is out there. You will just have to work hard to find it as mainstream media sources won't be reporting on it, for whatever reason. He clearly says on camera "We are here to storm the Capitol." That is the verbatim quote. So if he was there to incite people to "storm" the Captiol, why hasn't he been given a stricter sentence in line with others?

No I've not seen Elvis, little green men, a sasquatch or the Loch Ness Monster ever. Have you?

Side note - Were he still alive, Elvis would have turned 89 this week. I would have thought he would have been older than that.

 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,221]

51 minutes ago, Iwans Big Toe said:

Personal insults? Really?

 

I am not "peddling a conspiracy theory".

It was a genuine question, I was interested in your opinion. Ray Epps has been sentenced to 1 year probation after being caught on camera, in Washington D.C on the day,  clearly instructing people to "storm" the capitol building, far more than the Orange Man did to incite "insurrection". Where as others have been sentenced to serve time in prison for merely demonstrating at the Capitol building. These are immutable facts that are a matter of public record.

Notice the past tense though, "was interested". As you are clearly not interested in debating with anyone who challenges your delicate sensibilities, I will no longer question why you seem unable to defend your position without resorting to ad hominem attacks and will leave you to your echo chamber and safe space.

 

 

They're not insults if they are true and in your case they definitely are.

[horsefly 4,317]

Anyone stupid enough to ignore the implications of Trump's own admission on-line that he believes a president can not be prosecuted for criminal behaviour (see above post), needs to make themselves aware of his legal team's claim in court that a president would be entitled to murder a political opponent. 

 

[Yellow Fever 3,838]

2 hours ago, horsefly said:

Anyone stupid enough to ignore the implications of Trump's own admission on-line that he believes a president can not be prosecuted for criminal behaviour (see above post), needs to make themselves aware of his legal team's claim in court that a president would be entitled to murder a political opponent. 

 

Yes - the funny thing is that if Trumps argument was in any way correct (it's not) I wouldn't give diddly squat for his chances with Biden the sitting President! Be careful what you wish for.

Edited January 12 by Yellow Fever

[horsefly 4,317]

Name the colour. https://x.com/a_toots/status/1745729908628656478?s=20

[Herman 9,828]

16 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Name the colour. https://x.com/a_toots/status/1745729908628656478?s=20

Bikini Atoll Sunrise. 

[TheGunnShow 6,010]

23 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Name the colour. https://x.com/a_toots/status/1745729908628656478?s=20

Covfefe Orange.

[horsefly 4,317]

10 minutes ago, Herman said:

Bikini Atoll Sunrise. 

 

3 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Covfefe Orange.

Farrow and Ball need to sign up to the Pinkun

[Yellow Fever 3,838]

3 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Covfefe Orange.

Engoron Red (after $370M judgement)

[TheGunnShow 6,010]

Not sure if I have chucked this into the forum before, but Trump's presidency did yield this hilarious song from a German satirist (who also ended up in some weird finagling with notoriously thin-skinned salafist in a suit Recep Erdowanker, who clearly needed a primer on the basics of the German constitution. Or indeed to have seen the whole freaking video in the first place....

Jan Böhmermann - Grab US by the **** Lyrics | Musixmatch