US Elections (& Politics) :)
- Thread starter sdkid
- Start date
bigredfish
Known around here
And more...
"Everything Appears To Be A Cover Up": Capitol Police Chief Challenged J6 Narrative In Never-Aired Tucker Carlson Interview
"Everything Appears To Be A Cover Up": Capitol Police Chief Challenged J6 Narrative In Never-Aired Tucker Carlson Interview | ZeroHedge
bigredfish
Known around here
Victor Davis Hanson: Two Sets Of Laws For Two Americas
Victor Davis Hanson: Two Sets Of Laws For Two Americas | ZeroHedge
Victor Davis Hanson: Two Sets Of Laws For Two Americas | ZeroHedge
bigredfish
Known around here
Quite possibly the best/smartest Constitutional Lawyer in the country...
"This Is A Free-Speech-Killing Indictment" - Dems Move To Criminalize Political Dissent
"This Is A Free-Speech-Killing Indictment" - Dems Move To Criminalize Political Dissent | ZeroHedge
"This indictment is a really sad moment for me," exclaimed George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley during an interview with FOX News host Sean Hannity highlighting his fears that Democrats are reaching a line with the American people that will not be able to un-cross.
Turley warns that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment “basically just accuses him of disinformation. This is a disinformation indictment” and charges “many” things that are protected by the First Amendment.
Reflecting further, Turley said: (emphasis ours)
"This is a free speech-killing indictment. There's no way around it. I write a great deal in academia in the free-speech area and I rarely seen a more chilling filing by the Department of Justice. The question that people have to ask themselves is, when is the price too high?
People are obviously enraged, but when is the price too high to bag Donald Trump? This indictment is that prohibitive cost. Meaning, what they are attempting to do is criminalize what they consider to be disinformation.
And I have to tell you, this indictment is really sad moment for me.
I hoped that Smith is going to indict on January 6th, that he would find unassailable evidence and unquestioned legal authority. He has neither in this indictment...
...This is a speaking indictment but it doesn't say very much.
It basically just says that we think Trump is lying that he actually didn't believe this. I can't tell you how facilely ridiculous this claim is.
It starts up by saying, of course, you can say false things in the campaign, but then says that Trump knew they were false. Is that the test going forward in terms of criminalizing political speech?
Smith is just not only going to have to just bulldoze through the First Amendment, he's going to have to bulldoze through a line of cases by the Supreme Court..."
"This Is A Free-Speech-Killing Indictment" - Dems Move To Criminalize Political Dissent
"This Is A Free-Speech-Killing Indictment" - Dems Move To Criminalize Political Dissent | ZeroHedge
"This indictment is a really sad moment for me," exclaimed George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley during an interview with FOX News host Sean Hannity highlighting his fears that Democrats are reaching a line with the American people that will not be able to un-cross.
Turley warns that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment “basically just accuses him of disinformation. This is a disinformation indictment” and charges “many” things that are protected by the First Amendment.
Reflecting further, Turley said: (emphasis ours)
"This is a free speech-killing indictment. There's no way around it. I write a great deal in academia in the free-speech area and I rarely seen a more chilling filing by the Department of Justice. The question that people have to ask themselves is, when is the price too high?
People are obviously enraged, but when is the price too high to bag Donald Trump? This indictment is that prohibitive cost. Meaning, what they are attempting to do is criminalize what they consider to be disinformation.
And I have to tell you, this indictment is really sad moment for me.
I hoped that Smith is going to indict on January 6th, that he would find unassailable evidence and unquestioned legal authority. He has neither in this indictment...
...This is a speaking indictment but it doesn't say very much.
It basically just says that we think Trump is lying that he actually didn't believe this. I can't tell you how facilely ridiculous this claim is.
It starts up by saying, of course, you can say false things in the campaign, but then says that Trump knew they were false. Is that the test going forward in terms of criminalizing political speech?
Smith is just not only going to have to just bulldoze through the First Amendment, he's going to have to bulldoze through a line of cases by the Supreme Court..."
Oceanslider
Known around here
Bidet is bad enough, now this stupid twat is embarrassing us Internationally. Nice.
I doubt Chris Christie and Pence are going to steal any MAGA votes. They are now more of a never trumper and Pence said American problems are not his concern. He was polling 4% which is also close to the marging of error, so the pollsters gave Pence the benefit of doubt. He could well be zero.
Vivek sent a letter to all the other Republicans and Democrats in the 2024 race, asking in writing whether they would pardon Trump. Chris Christie was the first to respond with a firm No.
Asa Hutchinson hinted a No.
Nikki Haley, Mike pence, Tim Scott all dodged the question by saying its too early.
Desantis says he would consider pardoning him after loosing ground to Vivek. The key word is consider.
Only Vivek said he would pardon him since Trumps first indictment months back.
I like him, but does that mean he is telling the truth. If true, would that mean if he was Trumps Vice President and they win the election then Trump is convicted that he could pardon him and reinstate him as President?
If the Marxist (Leftist and Rino Socialists) succeed in stopping Trump, they may stop the man, but they are only stepping on the gas of the movement and fueling their own destruction.
If he isn't telling the truth, then he has to be the best liar out there. So far its the former.
He has thus far said he would not consider being a VP or be in the Trump Admin. But no candidate in the history of US says they want to be VP even before dropping out, since that would mean you are betraying your donars and voters.
If he is the VP and Trump wins, Trump can pardon himself and he doesn't need anyone else for it. Trump can even become the President even if he is in a Prison and come out after self pardoning and be the president for the next 4 years.
But to win he needs a strong non polarizing VP, if for some reason the swamp gets there way and bar Trump from ever running for office.
Then you know who is going to get all the MAGA votes. Vivek by law cannot make Trump president again but he can pardon him.
Ha, ha. Probably made a wrong turn trying to get to Taco Bell and ended up there. He really thinks this is going to get him votes?
So I keep hearing about Blackrock from the likes of Elon Musk, Vivek and Tucker.
But I never researched about it but Joe Rogan discuss this. So after watching this do you really think Trump, Vivek, RFK have a chance or anyone thinking of draining the swamp have any chance to become the President.
But I never researched about it but Joe Rogan discuss this. So after watching this do you really think Trump, Vivek, RFK have a chance or anyone thinking of draining the swamp have any chance to become the President.
mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 15,124
- 25,558
Hard to drain this swamp .. have to change the way the elections are funded to do this ..
Also so many American's a really messed up now with their views ..
Again, go right ahead and tie it to the floating barrier. Why should we give two rats asses about it? Don't try to violate our borders and you have nothing to worry about.
mat200
IPCT Contributor
- Jan 17, 2017
- 15,124
- 25,558
Do you think that DJT subpoenas Ray Epps to testify?