Trump

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

No, you're doing your verbal tricks again. Navarro tried to explain how the "plan" not the "coup" was meant to work. And he pointed out how it was according to constitutional principles.

The MSNBC guy never rebutted the constitutionality of the plan. He said the SCOTUS rejected it. But it was not accepted by SCOTUS because of process not because of legal merit. Three of the Justices did want to hear the case. The Court majority ruled that it was a matter to be decided at state levels. Which, per the Constitution, is what Navarro's plan would have done. But, ironically, the Jan6 riot stopped the cert. hearings just before Cruz, et. al. were about to implement it, and so that effort was scuttled by stopping the proceedings for safety, and when they resumed, certification was without further delay verified, and so then the plan was made mute.

So your theory is that instead of following the constitution and going thru the courts presenting valid evidence (which they did not) you just wait and then do a run around.
Show one case that was decided in Trump's favor.
Show one State that found significant errors in the election, before or after.
Or is it as Navarro claimed "George Soros and Never trumpers did it"
There was no valid way for the Vice President to do other than he did, no "maybe this is his duty" in that area of the Constitution.

You would have been ecstatic if this was the speech yesterday.

President Trump, His Elective Highness Eternal: "Greetings to my loyal and faithful patriotic Americans. Tonight we celebrate our victory one year ago. One year ago today we established once and for all that America is OUR country. It belongs to US. They can never it take away from us. They tried, but we stopped them. What happened a year ago has been misunderstood. THEY say you aren't PATRIOTS, but are a "mob" or "insurrectionists." They'll never admit that THEY tried to STEAL the election. They rigged it. There is no way that we lost. Look at us. We're strong. We're patriots. We're the real America. They are weak. Corrupt. They cheat. First they tried to steal the election, then when we caught them, they tried to use the process & courts against us. Then when we beat them there, they planned to make it look like we had a riot on the Capitol. But we didn't. We love our country. We would never break the law. And we won the election. And we won the court cases. And we won on January 6th. And we always win because we're the best. And the best are the winners. We've fixed it so that they won't be able to cheat us out of an election ever again. They won't cheat us. They can't now. When I was inaugurated on January 20, 2021 I swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. And I will. Forever. I made them change it so that the dirty Democrats can't cheat us out of our election victories anymore. No, they won't. They can't now. As your forever president I declare that patriots only can run for office. Only patriots--the best Americans who really, really love our country--can be leaders. And that just makes sense. Doesn't it? Don't we want the best of America to lead America? We do and I made sure the best will lead. I'm the greatest president this country has ever seen. And you are the greatest people. Look at all the good we've done together. They won't admit it, but the Trump presidency is a great presidency. We strengthened the US, now no one will mess with us. We have the most amazing economy. We are the only ones who figured out how to handle the hoax pandemic. Total success. Total. I was so good at making America great again that they had to cheat to get me out of office. The lying cheaters! They want America to fail, but we kept America great. They keep attacking me because I see how corrupt they are. I see the hypocrisy and conspiracy. But, it's not really me that they're after. I'm just in the way of them getting to you. I'm the only thing standing in the way. I'm the only one that stops them from giving away your country. And, believe me, they want to give your country away. They were already doing it. And they would be doing it now if we hadn't fought like hell to keep it. We had to fight. That's what January 6th, 2021 was about. It was about us standing up to them. The cheaters. The election stealers. We stood up to them and said "no, you're not taking our country away. N-O." And they don't like that and they call it a "coup." It wasn't a coup. How could it be? This is our country. You can't coup your own country. But they want you to believe that you did something wrong. You did something right. You are the patriots. You are the real Americans. They are the cheaters and liars. I won't let them lie about us anymore. Today, as your president, His Elective Highness Eternal, I proclaim and decree that only PATRIOTS can run for office or run elections in this land of the free. And January 6th will forever be remembered as the day we kept our country. It is keep America great day. Thank you.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

you just wait and then do a run around.

Was what you refer to as a "run around" unconstitutional? Did you read the plan?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Was what you refer to as a "run around" unconstitutional? Did you read the plan?

Yea I did
It called for Pence to do other than his responsibility as outlined in the Constitution
There’s a reason that when he asked Republicans who he luckily respected, that he decided to follow their recommendations and do his duties.
Trump would have gleefully celebrated Pences murder
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

so we have spence saying it’s not “overturning an election” if they try to install someone other than the winner from the same party as the winner.

wayne says that describing someone’s actions as “acting like a spoiled brat who is willing to undermine the constitution” is actually an endorsement of what they did, not a criticism of what they did.

and pete says it’s ok to make
multiple attempts to overturn an election, as long as you don’t involve the vice president. only if the VP is part of the plan, is it a bad plan.

whew.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

they are clearly suffering from post traumatic trump disorder....

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Yea I did
It called for Pence to do other than his responsibility as outlined in the Constitution
There’s a reason that when he asked Republicans who he luckily respected, that he decided to follow their recommendations and do his duties.

I asked if Navarro's plan was unconstitutional. You implied that it wasn't following the Constitution. Theoretically, if one senator and one representative object to a slate of electors, the Senate and House will vote separately on whether to discard them. It would not be unconstitutional for a senator and a representative to make such an objection. But it would have to be done before certification. This has already happened in the past. But the VP can overrule the objection.

Navarro's plan had no chance of succeeding unless it actually could have somehow created enough national attention and desire for investigations into the objected elections. But, according to Navarro, the Jan6 riots took away the opportunity to make the objections before certification took place.

I don't see how it was unconstitutional or a "coup" or a threat to "our democracy."

[wdmso]

Cyber Ninjas to File for Bankruptcy, CEO Plans to Start New Firm with Same Employees

The move comes as a blow to audit dead-enders who have long insisted that Cyber Ninjas secretly has proof of Donald Trump’s 2020 victory—but who are now smearing the group as “grifters.”

Cyber Ninjas shutting down after judge fines Arizona audit company $50K a day

Keep spreading the big lie

[wdmso]

Peter Navarro wants you to know they only intended to overthrow the government peacefully

That changes everything he said PEACEFULLY

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Peter Navarro wants you to know they only intended to overthrow the government peacefully

That changes everything he said PEACEFULLY

He said he wanted to overthrow the Trump Administration? Geez, I didn't know he said that. Thanks for the info.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

He said he wanted to overthrow the Trump Administration? Geez, I didn't know he said that. Thanks for the info.

The end goal of the scheme was to keep Trump in office by pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to block the certification of the Electoral College votes

The strategy, named after the football play famously used by Vince Lombardi's Green Bay Packers, involved more than 100 congressmen and senators, including Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona and Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas. The pair were the first to challenge election results in the swing state of Arizona.

he coordinated with former chief White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon was "within the boundaries" of the U.S. Constitution and will ultimately clear Trump's name.


But your good with that …. Funny what you choose to be seen as threats to the constitution

[wdmso]

Trump’s Cable Cabinet: New texts reveal the influence of Fox hosts on previous White House


There were times the president would come down the next morning and say, ‘Well, Sean thinks we should do this,’ or, ‘Judge Jeanine thinks we should do this,


No kidding everyone knew that was happening
but Trumps cult said that was fake news

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The end goal of the scheme was to keep Trump in office by pressuring Vice President Mike Pence to block the certification of the Electoral College votes

The strategy, named after the football play famously used by Vince Lombardi's Green Bay Packers, involved more than 100 congressmen and senators, including Republican Rep. Paul Gosar of Arizona and Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas. The pair were the first to challenge election results in the swing state of Arizona.

he coordinated with former chief White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon was "within the boundaries" of the U.S. Constitution and will ultimately clear Trump's name.


But your good with that …. Funny what you choose to be seen as threats to the constitution

Navarro did not want us to know that "they only intended to overthrow the government" as you claimed. But you're apparently good with lying about it and making a false accusation. And I don't see how working within the bounds of the Constitution is a threat to it.

Meanwhile, as to whom the real insurrectionists and threats to democracy are, there's this by VDH":

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...?ocid=msedgntp

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Navarro did not want us to know that "they only intended to overthrow the government" as you claimed. But you're apparently good with lying about it and making a false accusation. And I don't see how working within the bounds of the Constitution is a threat to it.

Meanwhile, as to whom the real insurrectionists and threats to democracy are, there's this by VDH":

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...?ocid=msedgntp

What do I post that was a lie ?

Keep spinning your wheels that nothing happened


the tragedy of Jan. 6 is not just the assault of that day and the lies that produced it, but what it signals for days to come. As our first president warned when explaining his intention to relinquish the office, “cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, and to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Nah, you can’t believe anything you read in such a right-wing, fascist news site as……..oh, wait a minute
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

What do I post that was a lie ?

You claimed that Navarro wanted to let us to know that "they [Navarro et. al.] only intended to overthrow the government". That is not at all what Navarro wanted to let us know. He wanted to let us know about their plan that could help us know about an attempt (not by Navarro et. al.) to overthrow the government. The government, at the time, was headed by the Trump Administration which was legally, constitutionally, in power until Jan. 21. Their plan was not to overthrow the Trump Administration, but to protect the U.S. government from being illegally subverted, thus "overthrown" by substantial voting fraud. He absolutely believed there was such fraud and thought that he had proof of that fraud.

Keep spinning your wheels that nothing happened

I explained what happened. You lied about it.

the tragedy of Jan. 6 is not just the assault of that day and the lies that produced it, but what it signals for days to come. As our first president warned when explaining his intention to relinquish the office, “cunning, ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, and to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I am very familiar with that quote by Washington. I've used it in the past. And I firmly believe that it forewarned of what various men have tried to do, and most successfully so by the Progressives who thought the constitutional system, the "very engines" that Washington helped to bring about, were an impediment to the unlimited system of administrative government they have to a great extent established--just a few more judges and a few more elections away from finishing the job.

Trump, as flawed as he is, was a temporary setback to their vision of how this country should be governed. Which is why even the Progressive lite "Conservatives" who were being exposed by him wanted him gone as much as the Dems did. Even Pete F, who nods toward the Constitution occasionally, and quotes some Founders every now and then, actually wants the growth of central ruling power which is anathema to the limitation by which the Constitution shackles government and to the separation of powers it provides.

As well, the various unconstitutional administrative agencies that are beneficiaries of the growing centralized power, especially including the security agencies, also wanted Trump gone as he was the greatest threat to them since Reagan and especially so since Kennedy who was a direct threat to the CIA before he was assassinated.

As well, the removal of Trump and maintenance of the growing central government power was preferred by most of the crony capital corporations who benefit by cooperation with, and even capture of, the administrative state and the thousands upon thousands of regulations it imposes on commerce that help eliminate smaller businesses to the advantage of large ones, which then progressively get larger by internal growth and the merging into centralized corporations. This includes most media corps.

As well, anti-Trumpism was promoted by an academia that once had been comprised of and run by those steeped in fields of knowledge who had a fervor for teaching their learning to students who hungered for it, but now had grown into corporate like organizations whose mission is more the gaining of money than the imparting of knowledge. And is run and guided by "administrators" who are expert, not in fields of academic knowledge, but in recruiting and finding financial resources which include continuous funding by government whose subsidization of tuition creates artificially high demand for college degrees which is an excuse for raising tuition prices. Which pours more money into the coffers of administrative academe and solidifies its symbiotic relationship with government and guaranties its compliance with government demands regarding the what, who, and how to educate, including the various norms that government wants to be indoctrinated.

So now even the original Progressive notion of government being basically unchained and with the unlimited power to do whatever it decides will be its version of benefit for the people is being corrupted into the fascistic centralized corporate State.

And people wonder why, in spite of all the really good sounding rhetoric of Progressive politicians, the "income gap" continuously expands and the number of small businesses keeps shrinking.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I am very familiar with that quote by Washington. I've used it in the past. And I firmly believe that it forewarned of what various men have tried to do, and most successfully so by the Progressives who thought the constitutional system, the "very engines" that Washington helped to bring about, were an impediment to the unlimited system of administrative government they have to a great extent established--just a few more judges and a few more elections away from finishing the job.

Trump, as flawed as he is, was a temporary setback to their vision of how this country should be governed. Which is why even the Progressive lite "Conservatives" who were being exposed by him wanted him gone as much as the Dems did. Even Pete F, who nods toward the Constitution occasionally, and quotes some Founders every now and then, actually wants the growth of central ruling power which is anathema to the limitation by which the Constitution shackles government and to the separation of powers it provides.

As well, the various unconstitutional administrative agencies that are beneficiaries of the growing centralized power, especially including the security agencies, also wanted Trump gone as he was the greatest threat to them since Reagan.

As well, the removal of Trump and maintenance of the growing central government power was preferred by most of the crony capital corporations who benefit by cooperation with, and even capture of, the administrative state and the thousands upon thousands of regulations it imposes on commerce that help eliminate smaller businesses to the advantage of large ones, which then progressively get larger by internal growth and the merging into centralized corporations. This includes most media corps.

As well, anti-Trumpism was promoted by an academia that once had been comprised of and run by those steeped in fields of knowledge who had a fervor for teaching their learning to students who hungered for it, but now had grown into corporate like organizations whose mission is more the gaining of money than the imparting of knowledge. And is run and guided by "administrators" who are expert, not in fields of academic knowledge, but in recruiting and finding financial resources which include continuous funding by government whose subsidization of tuition creates artificially high demand for college degrees which is an excuse for raising tuition prices. Which pours more money into the coffers of administrative academe and solidifies its symbiotic relationship with government and guaranties its compliance with government demands regarding the what, who, and how to educate, including the various norms that government wants to be indoctrinated.

So now even the original Progressive notion of government being basically unchained and with the unlimited power to do whatever it decides will be its version of benefit for the people is being corrupted into the fascistic centralized corporate State.

And people wonder why, in spite of all the really good sounding rhetoric of Progressive politicians, the "income gap" continuously expands and the number of small businesses keeps shrinking.

Trumpism was promoted by an academia


And there it is in a nutshell
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Trumpism was promoted by an academia


And there it is in a nutshell


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this is gold....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is gold....

no arguing with that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is gold....

you’re making a false equivalence between his original
post, and your exact quote of it. false equivalence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

you’re making a false equivalence between his original
post, and your exact quote of it. false equivalence.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe wdmso found a needle in a haystack.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

this is gold....

guess you think that was my line sorry to disappoint

its another one of detbuch Manifesto's

anti-Trumpism was promoted by an academia that once had been comprised of and run by those steeped in fields of knowledge who had a fervor for teaching their learning to students who hungered for it, but now had grown into corporate like organizations whose mission is more the gaining of money than the imparting of knowledge. And is run and guided by "administrators" who are expert, not in fields of academic knowledge, but in recruiting and finding financial resources which include continuous funding by government whose subsidization of tuition creates artificially high demand for college degrees which is an excuse for raising tuition prices. Which pours more money into the coffers of administrative academe and solidifies its symbiotic relationship with government and guaranties its compliance with government demands regarding the what, who, and how to educate, including the various norms that government wants to be indoctrinated.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

guess you think that was my line sorry to disappoint

its another one of detbuch Manifesto's

anti-Trumpism was promoted by an academia that once had been comprised of and run by those steeped in fields of knowledge who had a fervor for teaching their learning to students who hungered for it, but now had grown into corporate like organizations whose mission is more the gaining of money than the imparting of knowledge. And is run and guided by "administrators" who are expert, not in fields of academic knowledge, but in recruiting and finding financial resources which include continuous funding by government whose subsidization of tuition creates artificially high demand for college degrees which is an excuse for raising tuition prices. Which pours more money into the coffers of administrative academe and solidifies its symbiotic relationship with government and guaranties its compliance with government demands regarding the what, who, and how to educate, including the various norms that government wants to be indoctrinated.

You left out the "anti" part, which changed things a lot.

Detbuch said anti Trumpism was promoted by academia, you said trumpism was promoted in academia. So you actually posted the exact opposite of what Detbuch said.

Just a typo, I make TONS of typos and you don't, so no biggie, but it was funny. Lighten up man!

Wayne, do you deny that academia has a serious left wing bias? Are you seriously going to deny that?

[Pete F.]

Imagine having a president who took 𝘑𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘗𝘪𝘳𝘳𝘰 seriously.

“There were times the president would come down the next morning and say … ‘Judge Jeanine thinks we should do this.’”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Imagine having a president who took 𝘑𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘗𝘪𝘳𝘳𝘰 seriously.

“There were times the president would come down the next morning and say … ‘Judge Jeanine thinks we should do this.’”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Another little meaningless funny by Progressive Big Government Pete.

[Pete F.]

Steve Bannon: “But the oligarchs’ day is coming. Remember, we’re going to turn all the social media companies into public utilities — public utilities, and get like a 7% return … and the public has to have a voice in the control of it.”

He’s a nationalist *and* a socialist.

National. Socialism. That has a certain ring to it but I can't put my finger on it...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Steve Bannon: “But the oligarchs’ day is coming. Remember, we’re going to turn all the social media companies into public utilities — public utilities, and get like a 7% return … and the public has to have a voice in the control of it.”

He’s a nationalist *and* a socialist.

National. Socialism. That has a certain ring to it but I can't put my finger on it...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Progressive Big Government Pete playing his signature deceptive verbal tricks. Here he implies that public utilities are socialist. In other circumstances he claims we are not a socialist country . . .yet we have public utilities.

And he has claimed that Nazis, especially American ones, are right wing groups--his version of "conservatives." Yet here he is able to morph his notion of right wing conservatism (Nazis) into left wing socialism,

So, at will, he can either call Nazis socialists or conservatives, or he can contradict his own notions that we are not a socialist country. Or go the other way if and when it is necessary.

He is a master of not calling something by its proper name. But by whatever name that suits whatever lie he promotes as truth. He often resorts to tricky lies, but touts truth and honor, and castigates Trump and Trumpists for being liars.

[Pete F.]

Not a single Republican has displayed the courage to stand up to a defeated president to protect America's right to vote — not one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Rep. Jim Jordan declines to say if he's closed the door on cooperating with January 6 committee

Another GOP coward

After spending two years probing a 2012 terrorist attack on a U.S. diplomatic compound in Libya that killed four Americans, GOP Rep. Jim Jordan of Champaign County on Tuesday issued a blistering critique of how the Obama administration and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton handled the tragedy.

Jim J. accused the Obama administration and Clinton of being "so blinded by politics" and the desire to win elections that they disregarded the government's basic duty to "tell people the truth."

the GOP House committee probe into 2012's Benghazi attack was especially lengthy. At two years and four months, it was longer than Congressional probes into 9/11, Watergate, the JFK assassination and Pearl Harbor.

But Jan 6th. They want to wish it away and refuse it ever happened Such Patriots

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Spoken like a true Trump supporter It’s odd you admit your your fondness of this former POTUS who was willing to overturn an election .. and you claim you support Originalism not sure how you square that circle

I get weary of ripping out the lying words you keep stuffing into my mouth. I supported Many of Trump's policies, not Trump as a person. I don't know Trump. Neither do you. Pundit opinions, political smears, media analysis, especially about controversial people are usually fraught with bias and lies--positive or negative. High tone intellectual sounding opinions in Salon, and The Atlantic, et. al. were easily seen through. There was a point, early on, when I began to like how he fought back against the continuing avalanche of manufactured accusations and how he exposed various political hypocrites, but that pretty much wore off as it became as sketchy and corrosive as the attacks against him.

I "support" him as a person only in how I support anyone who is falsely or unfairly accused--especially when it is meant to destroy him--and for the typical dirty political motive of gaining power.

You don't know me, nor do you believe what I say. So you make stuff up about what I think or am "fond" of. You rarely debate at any length what I say or what I link.

So you spout the narrative about "overthrowing" an election. The choice of word is a non-objective politically loaded accusation, not merely a neutral unbiased description. It's so embedded in your brain that it's not worth debating or discussing with you.

If you wish to point out what was unconstitutional, or unoriginal about what you consider Trump's attempt to "overthrow" the election, that could be an interesting discussion.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I get weary of ripping out the lying words you keep stuffing into my mouth. I supported Many of Trump's policies, not Trump as a person. I don't know Trump. Neither do you. Pundit opinions, political smears, media analysis, especially about controversial people are usually fraught with bias and lies--positive or negative. High tone intellectual sounding opinions in Salon, and The Atlantic, et. al. were easily seen through. There was a point, early on, when I began to like how he fought back against the continuing avalanche of manufactured accusations and how he exposed various political hypocrites, but that pretty much wore off as it became as sketchy and corrosive as the attacks against him.

And I "support" him as a person only in how I support anyone who is falsely or unfairly accused--especially when it is meant to destroy him--and for the typical dirty political motive of gaining power.

You don't know me, nor do you believe what I say. So you make stuff up about what I think or am "fond" of. You rarely debate at any length what I say or what I link.

So you spout the narrative about "overthrowing" an election. The choice of word is a non-objective politically loaded accusation, not merely a neutral unbiased description. It's so embedded in your brain that it's not worth debating or discussing with you.



If you wish to point out what was unconstitutional, or unoriginal about what you consider Trump's attempt to "overthrow" the election, that could be an interesting discussion.

But You like other Trump supporters don’t get to separate Trumps deeds into convenient packages to excuse away his behaviors than claim he’s a poor victim or you like his policy’s. But your trying very hard .. this is not about knowing Trump personally it has no bearing on the conversation


I "support" him as a person only in how I support anyone who is falsely or unfairly accused--especially when it is meant to destroy him--and for the typical dirty political motive of gaining power.


So let me get this correct what happened on Jan 6th supported and encouraged by Trump and those around him

Yet You see people looking to hold Trump accountable. For Trumps actions and behaviors before during and after the elections and today as (non-objective politically loaded accusation)


But Trumps action do not raise to be classified as “typical dirty political motive of gaining power.”

Interesting