Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Trump charged with four counts over 2020 election

Featured Replies

12 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Pick me! Donald Trump. He's the only one who's been charged with trying to foment an insurrection.

Actually if you read the indictment. Trump hasn't actually been charged with insurrection in specific terms! 

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Views 49.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • I don't anything real here. All fake trumped up charges. He didn't cause the riots. All he did was question the election results.    

  • It’s about time!hopefulley it’s televised so everyone sees the seriousness of his deeds

  • earlinclaifornia
    earlinclaifornia

    I read the document and in my lifetime I never have read something so shocking and so well laid out factually. Toast is an accurate summation.

Posted Images

6 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

Actually if you read the indictment. Trump hasn't actually been charged with insurrection in specific terms! 

In specific terms. Smith chose not to charge Trump with inciting riot because discussion about first amendment rights would blur the waters and be harder to prove than the less spectacular charges that have been laid. Most of us won't be fooled by semantics, though, insurrection is what it was.

 

edit: Harder to prove because it goes to Trumps mindset. It is possible Trump is so wacky that he could get a physician to say he was out to lunch on the comprehension scale. There have been some clangers which lean in this direction like security briefings which had to get down the level of winners and losers to get through.

 

Internal Memo Shows Donald Trump's Daily Intelligence Briefings Are, Um, Very Dumbed Down

No dissenting opinions. Very few words.

 

https://www.gq.com/story/donald-trump-daily-intel-briefings-are-dumb

  • Popular Post
1 hour ago, tilaceer said:

It would not be surprising that the large number of comments in a Trump article

could be due to the fact that the Trumper/Maga/Qanon/Sovcits members continually post

such bizarre trolling posts, conspiracy theories, opinions posing as facts, deflections and

and “whatabout” Biden posts, that the more informed feels obliged to offer detailed lucid responses pointing out their misconceptions. But, it doesn’t stop there, because when the medication kicks in on another Trumper, they rinse and repeat and off we go again.

imop

I just see abuse from.the haters.

  • Popular Post

It's very risky for Smith to charge Trump on the basis of his state of mind or intent.

 

When Donald Trump was elected president, it quickly became obvious that the traditional national-security briefing a person in his position receives daily would be well beyond his zone of proximal development. The briefings were slimmed down in length, chopped up into easy-to-digest bullet points, and decorated with lots of graphs and pictures. Alas, the Washington Post reports, even the kiddie version of the presidential brief has proven too challenging.

 

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/02/dumbed-down-security-briefings-still-too-difficult-for-trump.html

  • Popular Post
14 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

Actually if you read the indictment. Trump hasn't actually been charged with insurrection in specific terms! 

They never read it. Just jumped onto the hate train. Every Trump topic is the same repetitive hate.

4 minutes ago, bignok said:

I just see abuse from.the haters.

QED

  • Popular Post
3 minutes ago, bignok said:

What is QED? 

It's Greek for Look It Up.

  • Popular Post
2 hours ago, candide said:

The Dems did claim massive voter fraud for years? Tried to overturn elections, invented fake electors , voted against certifying elections? And nobody told me?

And Russian interference 555. Were they ever called out on  that?

9 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

It's very risky for Smith to charge Trump on the basis of his state of mind or intent.

 

When Donald Trump was elected president, it quickly became obvious that the traditional national-security briefing a person in his position receives daily would be well beyond his zone of proximal development. The briefings were slimmed down in length, chopped up into easy-to-digest bullet points, and decorated with lots of graphs and pictures. Alas, the Washington Post reports, even the kiddie version of the presidential brief has proven too challenging.

 

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/02/dumbed-down-security-briefings-still-too-difficult-for-trump.html

Why is an Aussie living in Pattaya obsessed with US politics?

1 minute ago, bignok said:

Why is an Aussie living in Pattaya obsessed with US politics?

I not obsessed with US politics. That said it's also often said in Australia that when the US sneezes, Australia catches a cold. That's what gives me the right to comment when I'm not a US citizen, contrary to the inferences of some around here.

20 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

In specific terms. Smith chose not to charge Trump with inciting riot because discussion about first amendment rights would blur the waters and be harder to prove than the less spectacular charges that have been laid. Most of us won't be fooled by semantics, though, insurrection is what it was.

You edited that quite a bit? I think what you mean is, Smith knows he can't prove a case of Insurrection, but thinks he can on those other less than spectacular charges. Charges which seem more related to slavery and how slaves should be treated etc.

4 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

And Russian interference 555. Were they ever called out on  that?

No, because it was proved to be true. What wasn't proved so far was collusion.

7 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

You edited that quite a bit? I think what you mean is, Smith knows he can't prove a case of Insurrection, but thinks he can on those other less than spectacular charges. Charges which seem more related to slavery and how slaves should be treated etc.

I'd lay off the putting words into my mouth bit. A charge dating from times of slavery isn't necessarily about slavery. Slaves didn't commit insurrection that I'm aware of.

 

hint: Try writing "Do you mean" instead of "I think you mean". Can you spot the difference?

Just now, ozimoron said:

I didn't edit one word. The first sentence was my own.

So your post pre edit didn't say. Jack Smith said it was trumps first amendment right to lie? Or words to that effect. Knowing it would stop Trumps Lawyers from arguing amendment rights? It must have been another poster? lol

Just now, CharlieKo said:

So your post pre edit didn't say. Jack Smith said it was trumps first amendment right to lie? Or words to that effect. Knowing it would stop Trumps Lawyers from arguing amendment rights? It must have been another poster? lol

I've edited my post. I thought you were referring to another post.

8 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

No, because it was proved to be true. What wasn't proved so far was collusion.

No it wasnt. Nothing is proven unless something goes to all courts.

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I'd lay off the putting words into my mouth bit. A charge dating from times of slavery isn't necessarily about slavery. Slaves didn't commit insurrection that I'm aware of.

How that is putting words in your mouth, I have no idea. But hay if the cap fits wear it! 

 

You are aware that the fraudulent charge against Trump, comes from a law dated 1870 used against the KKK. And had everything to do with how slaves could or could not be treated. 

  • Popular Post
3 minutes ago, bignok said:

No it wasnt. Nothing is proven unless something goes to all courts.

Russians aren't subject to U.S. courts. Russian interference in U.S. elections favoring Trump is a FACT. 

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, CharlieKo said:

How that is putting words in your mouth, I have no idea. Buy hay if the cap fits wear it! 

 

You are aware that the fraudulent charge against Trump, comes from a law dated 1870 used against the KKK. And had everything to do with how slaves could or could not be treated. 

Using laws from 1870 sums up how weak, pathetic and political these charges are. Really nasty stuff from left to keep power.

Just now, bignok said:

Using laws from 1870 sums up how weak, pathetic and political these charges are. Really nasty stuff from left to keep power.

Indeed.

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Russians aren't subject to U.S. courts. Russian interference in U.S. elections favoring Trump is a FACT. 

Nonsense. US voters make up their own minds.

 

Does a Thai person impact your US vote?

 

Just more pathetic excuses.

2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Russians aren't subject to U.S. courts. Russian interference in U.S. elections favoring Trump is a FACT. 

link?

15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I not obsessed with US politics. That said it's also often said in Australia that when the US sneezes, Australia catches a cold. That's what gives me the right to comment when I'm not a US citizen, contrary to the inferences of some around here.

You don't need an excuse.

I'm interested in the politics of numerous countries.

Namely: the U.S. obviously, Thailand, China, Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, U.K., Phillipines, India, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. 

  • Popular Post
3 minutes ago, bignok said:

Using laws from 1870 sums up how weak, pathetic and political these charges are. Really nasty stuff from left to keep power.

What's nasty is Trump's behavior to destroy American democracy. 

  • Popular Post
Just now, Jingthing said:

What's nasty is Trump's behavior to destroy American democracy. 

Except the opposite is true. The Democrats are trying to cancel out their main threat. Using 1870 laws mind you. It's pathetic.

  • Popular Post
Just now, bignok said:

Except the opposite is true. The Democrats are trying to cancel out their main threat. Using 1870 laws mind you. It's pathetic.

You're buying all the Trumpist lies wholesale. There is no basis of discussion possible in this case. 

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Russians aren't subject to U.S. courts. Russian interference in U.S. elections favoring Trump is a FACT. 

Russian Victor Bout. If memory serves, extradited from Thailand to USA for arms dealing. Later exchanged for a Trans athlete!

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

You're buying all the Trumpist lies wholesale. There is no basis of discussion possible in this case. 

You are a Democrat. Enough said.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.