Opl

43 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

Deutche Bank, among others previously forgave hundreds of millions in debt incurred by trump, possibly the banks will do the same again to get rid of him. trump and family have millions in assets, trump has a future life of luxury, will never go without, unless in prison.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2020/10/27/report-trump-had-over-280-million-in-debt-forgiven-and-avoided-paying-taxes-on-most-of-it/?sh=1239b5e37ac4

+ Trump still reaping probably over $300M from disinformation fundraising messages 

The mega MAGA mess Trump leaves for Biden to inherit     

“If you read my speech — and many people have done it, and I’ve seen it both in the papers and in the media, on television — it’s been analyzed, and people thought that what I said was totally appropriate,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews, en route to Alamo, Texas."

Trump tries to defend his pre-riot speech as 'totally appropriate' - POLITICO

 “As far as this is concerned, we want no violence, never violence, absolutely no violence, and on the impeachment, it’s really a continuation of the greatest witchhunt in the history of politics. It’s ridiculous, it’s absolutely ridiculous, this impeachment is causing tremendous anger, and you’re doing it, and it’s really a terrible thing that they are doing. For Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to continue on this path, I think it’s causing tremendous danger to our country, and it’s causing tremendous anger. I want no violence, thank you very much.”

Trump Comes Out Of Hiding To Threaten America With Violence (politicususa.com)

"..in the history of politics...."

5 hours ago, Pedrogaz said:

I guess this tells you everything you want to know about Trump....stupidity itself. Could there possibly be a worse lawyer in the US than Guiliani???? To select him out of the thousands of smart lawyers is an act of insanity.

Or Giuliani is paid to muddy waters for Trump' benefit 

1 minute ago, GrandPapillon said:

there is already a media uproar about Trump account shutdown, maybe not in the US, but here in Europe a lot of political leaders do not agree with this, even if they disliked Trump

we really have bigger fish to fry, but welcome the debate to finally limit the toxic combination of social media + conspiracy theories -  never too late    

51 minutes ago, Virt said:

 No off course not ???? 

 

If they banned Biden if he posted similar things like Trump I would be just as mad. 

 

It's not about political sides, even though some think so.

It's about censorship which I'm not a fan of. 

 

I read up on the Qanons ideologies and boy oh boy, they have some messed up ideas. 

But I wouldn't want them banned too, even if I strongly disagree with their clueless concept. 

 

How anyone can believe in them is a mystery, but I still think those people should be allowed to say and write what they like. 

 

 

They do, because Trump promoted and empowered them.

QAnon supports Trump and vice versa

Trump endorses QAnon supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene after Republican primary win | The Independent | The Independent

1 hour ago, transam said:

And rightly so, misguided, brainless people......

"“My commander-in-chief called me and my Lord and Saviour told me” to come, said Debbie Lusk, 66, a retired accountant from Seattle. “We either take our country back, or it is no more.”

Donald Trump’s base storms Washington a day early (theaustralian.com.au)

4 minutes ago, crobe said:

Again, respectfully, that argument does not hold

There are records of both Mayor Bowser and Capito Police Chief Sund calling in to the DoD, and this will be recorded. 

The calls to the DoD were transferred to the acting Secretary who, it seems, refused to take the call, and any argument he may have that he was unavailable will of course beg the question "what was more important that he could not take the calls"

The Senate will probably hear this evidence when it reconvenes to look at the impeachment only on the 19th, so too late for Trump to issue a pardon - if he issues a pardon in advance it is tantamount to an admission of guilt.

My own view - Miller is going down or taking someone else down in the process

And Trump meanwhile, watching it live on TV and doing nothing, except twitting his allies to delay the certification.

4 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

 

As far as I know banning the President from holding office in the future could only be imposed as a sentence after conviction by the same two-thirds of senators present required to impose a sentence of removal from office.  

And even so, then you'll get..1st in line of succession  Don Jr and his girlfriend .. "the best is to come"

11 minutes ago, transam said:

You could be right, but I think many folk are easily led, even brainwashed, we know that from the ISIS mob, a bit different but to me much the same...

and Ted Cruz and Matt Gaetz, and Lindsey Graham, all the rest of why not me would be POTUS too, all voluntarily hostages of Trump's mobs - it's far worse - but those are Americans, so it's OK   

15 minutes ago, transam said:

Not really, an unhappy crowd that did not cause a bloodbath, did not blow the place up, and the lack of enforcement allowed it....???? 

White supremacists,  conspiracists, neo nazis, leading pro-Trump rioters  - this is just America     

1 hour ago, transam said:

Yep, it is strange that some here make something seem waaay worse than it actually was...

 

A.... "Coup"..."Terrorists", most of them probably ended up in McDonald's having a chin-wag over it....????

just another Trump's promise kept:  "build the wall !"

3 hours ago, TKDfella said:

IMO it was a mistake for Pres. Trump to have attended the protest rally in the first place let alone address them. His attendance and whatever he said was going to be used against him. However a charge of 'incitement' privately or in Law might be difficult since some will say his words were incitant and others will say they weren't. According to my Oxford English Dictionary, V.1 1961 it is a verb from 1483 both Latin & French sources, meaning to urge, spur on, stir up, instigate, stimulate. The main problem as I see it, would be to prove that Pres. Trump urged the protesters to be violent and enter the building. If it does come to litigation, will be interesting to see how the arguments for and against, go.

every rallye is an opportunity for Trump to motivate his followers, not only to donate to his Stop the steal charity, but also a way for him to find comfort in their adulation, it's all profitable 

Before mob stormed US Capitol, Trump told them to ‘fight like hell’ - The Boston Globe 

" In recent weeks, Trump heavily promoted the rally that led directly to the assault on the Capitol. The rally was part of the “Stop the Steal” movement, which, fueled by Trump’s own conspiratorial fantasies, explicitly aimed to halt the certification of Joe Biden’s election victory. On Dec. 19, Trump promised a “big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!” Trump promoted the rally again on Dec. 27, Dec. 30, and Jan. 1, in tweets compiled by the New York Times. "

Capitol riot: How Donald Trump incited an attack on America | Fortune

1 hour ago, GrandPapillon said:

didn't realize that FB and Twitter was an academic center for truth and facts, because frankly it isn't

it's full of half-truth, lies, and BS, yet 99% get away with it because these are channels to speak and express yourself

 

Trump has just a bigger audience, and my guess is that Twitter didn't like very much what he had to say. It could have been true or not was not even the point, they just wanted him to shutup because they felt they were being associated in his speech exercise.

"Long before last week’s Trump-inspired violence at the U.S. Capitol, the account’s most outspoken critics, both serious and less so, argued that @realDonaldTrump’s combination of a massive platform and brazen disregard for the truth was a menace to civic health — fueling a pipeline of disinformation that’s resulted in violent and bizarre crimes across the nation. Although its owner claimed ignorance, @realDonaldTrump repeatedly retweeted posts from overt white-nationalist groups and accounts, spreading their message to a far, far wider audience than it otherwise would have reached."

How @realDonaldTrump Changed Politics — and America - POLITICO

31 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

 

private organizations can limit "Free Speech" all they want, we know that. Still they are taking away your ability to free speech and your constitutional rights for it. That's all. Not illegal, but their actions is limiting your ability to free speech, and somehow you seem ok with that.

 

So if you believe or defend "Free speech" and that constitutional right, you shouldn't be happy on Trump suspended account, au contraire. And I think that says a lot for all defending Twitter actions.

Do you consider that Trump promoting conspiracy theories / inciting mobs to protest via his twitter account is exercising Free speech as an Individual, or giving the official U.S Government statement ?

10 minutes ago, GrandPapillon said:

let's see how you guys react when Twitter shutdowns the account of the next "whistle blower", and the freedom of speech rights will be invoked all over the place

 

this is a very dangerous trend, you can't deny it, even if you don't like the Twitter account

 

it's definitely a political statement, quite ironic in some ways since Republicans have been wanting to limit Twitter, Facebook etc... stand on "free speech"

Trump takes no responsibility for the consequences his words might cause, with 88M followers, sanitary filters need to do the job. Too much free speech kills free speech.

Absolute authority + zero responsibility= Trumpism

2 minutes ago, Virt said:

I think it's a dangerous path to choose, no matter who they ban from their platform. 

 

I'm not a big fan of censorship and when platforms start to ban politicians, they are taking side and that's not their job. 

 

It's important that noone are silenced no matter how much we may disagree with those individuals. 

 

After the latest scandals I started to look into some of the background of Those Q people and holy <deleted> what a bunch of messed up ideas , but I still wouldn't want them banned from various platforms. 

 

So yeah, I think Twitter made a wrong decision. 

Wrong decision? 

"Donald Trump has fired a shot across the bows of “big tech” companies by signing an executive order that aims to narrow their protections from liability over the content posted on their services."

Trump signs executive order to narrow protections for social media platforms | Donald Trump | The Guardian

2 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

IF the GOP and Pence had any balls they should invoke the  25th !

Blocking Trump on  social media  does nothing to stop his damage via executive  orders etc .

their choice is to keep America, Trump's hostage

6 minutes ago, paddypower said:

golf in Dubai, anyone?

here..