Trump's legal defeat in Colorado may turn into political gold

[ozimoron]

McCabe added that if Trump does get an en banc hearing, but if it rules in favor of Judge Tanya Chutkan's previous judgment that the former president is not immune from prosecution, then it may make it less likely that the Supreme Court could overrule the decision.

 

"Ironically, I think he goes through that step, and then he gets an en banc hearing, I think that makes the likelihood of a Supreme Court issuing cert even lower because by then you would have had likely two very consistent, very sound opinions by the most prospective circuit court in the country," McCabe said.

 

"And it may kind of lift the responsibility from the Supreme Court's shoulders to weigh in on it if they feel like it's been adequately covered."

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-immunity-supreme-court-andrew-mccabe-1855447

[placeholder]

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Yep. I can't check the text of the book but I can see errors even in this short piece - Trump did not call anyone to violence or criminal activity - that rubbish had already been started by the lunatics at the Capitol before Trump had finished speaking. 

First off, the most important thing he said was the Trump watched the rioters invade the Capitol for hours rather than call in the National Guard. This is widely known and supported by people present at the White House on January 6.

 

The only errors are your in understanding the paragraph. He said Trump fired up the crowd. Not that he called for violence. That said, de did call on them to fight. And so what if the violence began before he ended his speech. Did it begin before he started his speech?

 

"At the rally, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, and several Republican members of Congress addressed the crowd and repeated Donald Trump's false claims that electoral fraud affected the 2020 election outcome. In his hour-long speech, President Trump suggested marching towards the Capitol, assuring his audience he would be with them, to demand that Congress "only count the electors who have been lawfully slated", and "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard". Towards his conclusion, he said "we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."^[4][5][6]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack}

 

You don't think "we fight We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." constitutes firing up the crowd?

 

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

First off, the most important thing he said was the Trump watched the rioters invade the Capitol for hours rather than call in the National Guard. This is widely known and supported by people present at the White House on January 6.

 

The only errors are your in understanding the paragraph. He said Trump fired up the crowd. Not that he called for violence. That said, de did call on them to fight. And so what if the violence began before he ended his speech. Did it begin before he started his speech?

 

"At the rally, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, and several Republican members of Congress addressed the crowd and repeated Donald Trump's false claims that electoral fraud affected the 2020 election outcome. In his hour-long speech, President Trump suggested marching towards the Capitol, assuring his audience he would be with them, to demand that Congress "only count the electors who have been lawfully slated", and "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard". Towards his conclusion, he said "we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."^[4][5][6]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack}

 

You don't think "we fight We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." constitutes firing up the crowd?

 

Pretty sure I only heard Trump say there would be free cupcakes.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

First off, the most important thing he said was the Trump watched the rioters invade the Capitol for hours rather than call in the National Guard. This is widely known and supported by people present at the White House on January 6.

 

The only errors are your in understanding the paragraph. He said Trump fired up the crowd. Not that he called for violence. That said, de did call on them to fight. And so what if the violence began before he ended his speech. Did it begin before he started his speech?

 

"At the rally, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, and several Republican members of Congress addressed the crowd and repeated Donald Trump's false claims that electoral fraud affected the 2020 election outcome. In his hour-long speech, President Trump suggested marching towards the Capitol, assuring his audience he would be with them, to demand that Congress "only count the electors who have been lawfully slated", and "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard". Towards his conclusion, he said "we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."^[4][5][6]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack}

 

You don't think "we fight We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore." constitutes firing up the crowd?

 

 

 

What the most important thing "he" said is, is a matter of opinion and, of course, mine is different. "Widely known and supported" is not proof of anything.

 

Your error is in not understanding, then mixing and confusing words. I said that I can't check the text of the book but the third party precis is liable to be erroneous, at the very least. 

 

I think we all know Trump et al complained about the 2020 election. What's new?

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

 

What the most important thing "he" said is, is a matter of opinion and, of course, mine is different. "Widely known and supported" is not proof of anything.

 

Your error is in not understanding, then mixing and confusing words. I said that I can't check the text of the book but the third party precis is liable to be erroneous, at the very least. 

 

I think we all know Trump et al complained about the 2020 election. What's new?

 

 

He didn't "complain". He said, erroneously, that it was stolen.

[Danderman123]

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Note I did not say anything about prison sentences.

 

You mentioned your believe that the J6 insurrection was started by "troublemakers". Here is one of them:

 

Woman Who Used Bullhorn to Rally Rioters on Jan. 6 Gets Nearly 5 Years

 

Do you agree that such troublemakers deserve long prison sentences?

 

 

[Danderman123]

4 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

What the most important thing "he" said is, is a matter of opinion and, of course, mine is different. "Widely known and supported" is not proof of anything.

 

You are responding to a post describing Trump's behavior during the J6 insurrection. His actions and inactions during that period are well documented.

 

If you have evidence that Trump tried to stop the rioters, please produce it.

 

Simply saying that you don't know what Trump was doing at that time indicates a high level of ignorance on your part. You *know* what Trump was doing, you simply troll to cover for your Orange Jesus.

 

Perhaps you can ask the Republicans who begged Trump to call in the National Guard about this.

[Danderman123]

7 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Yep. I can't check the text of the book but I can see errors even in this short piece - Trump did not call anyone to violence or criminal activity - that rubbish had already been started by the lunatics at the Capitol before Trump had finished speaking. 

Trump fired up the crowd to go fight at the Capitol.

 

His small group of conspirators needed a lot of bodies to overwhelm the Capitol Police. So, when Trump was finishing up, many in the crowd at the Ellipse headed to the Capitol, where they found the Proud Boys and others already engaged with the police.

 

Once the MAGA types who were urged to go to the Capitol by Trump arrived, they pushed through the police and entered the Capitol.

 

All of this is well known to you, but your internet masters have clearly asked you to troll where you can. One of your trolling techniques is to question basic facts about J6. As a result, you appear not to know anything, as if you support Trump out of ignorance.

 

It's not a good look.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

You are responding to a post describing Trump's behavior during the J6 insurrection. His actions and inactions during that period are well documented.

 

If you have evidence that Trump tried to stop the rioters, please produce it.

 

Simply saying that you don't know what Trump was doing at that time indicates a high level of ignorance on your part. You *know* what Trump was doing, you simply troll to cover for your Orange Jesus.

 

Perhaps you can ask the Republicans who begged Trump to call in the National Guard about this.

 

I was responding to an opinion, which I don't agree with. The ignorance is all yours.   

[nauseus]

57 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump fired up the crowd to go fight at the Capitol.

 

His small group of conspirators needed a lot of bodies to overwhelm the Capitol Police. So, when Trump was finishing up, many in the crowd at the Ellipse headed to the Capitol, where they found the Proud Boys and others already engaged with the police.

 

Once the MAGA types who were urged to go to the Capitol by Trump arrived, they pushed through the police and entered the Capitol.

 

All of this is well known to you, but your internet masters have clearly asked you to troll where you can. One of your trolling techniques is to question basic facts about J6. As a result, you appear not to know anything, as if you support Trump out of ignorance.

 

It's not a good look.

 

You can try making it up as you go along but all that does is make you look thicker.

 

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I was responding to an opinion, which I don't agree with. The ignorance is all yours.   

You were responding to facts about Trump's behavior during the J6 insurrection that give you a sad, and you expressed your sadness by trolling.

 

As you probably know, such trolling is going to result in people posting facts about what Trump did during J6, which I am sure you don't want.

 

Instead of trolling, you can show what your Orange Jesus did to put down the rioters at the Capitol.

 

 

[Danderman123]

12 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I was responding to an opinion, which I don't agree with. The ignorance is all yours.   

In other words, all you can do is fill up space with empty comments.

 

Trump watched Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot unfold on TV, ignored pleas to call for peace

 

Donald Trump sat for hours watching the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol unfold on live TV, ignoring pleas by his children and other close advisers to urge his supporters to stop the violence, witnesses told a congressional hearing on Thursday.

[impulse]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

You mentioned your believe that the J6 insurrection was started by "troublemakers". Here is one of them:

 

Woman Who Used Bullhorn to Rally Rioters on Jan. 6 Gets Nearly 5 Years

 

Do you agree that such troublemakers deserve long prison sentences?

She got 5 years for speaking into a megaphone. 

 

These guys got $500 fines, community service and probation for actually burning down a Wendy's during the Summer of Love.

 

Double standard of justice much?

 

https://apnews.com/article/rayshard-brooks-wendys-arson-guilty-pleas-d3656cb469b4ca4d0e292221e9483584

 

 

 

[Danderman123]

16 minutes ago, impulse said:

She got 5 years for speaking into a megaphone. 

 

These guys got $500 fines, community service and probation for actually burning down a Wendy's during the Summer of Love.

 

Double standard of justice much?

 

https://apnews.com/article/rayshard-brooks-wendys-arson-guilty-pleas-d3656cb469b4ca4d0e292221e9483584

 

Illinois Man Sentenced to Prison for Arson of Minneapolis Cell Phone Store During Summer 2020 Civil Unrest

 

A BLM protester in North Carolina got a harsher sentence than anyone from Jan. 6. Why?

 

Different circumstances, different sentences.

[nauseus]

41 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You were responding to facts about Trump's behavior during the J6 insurrection that give you a sad, and you expressed your sadness by trolling.

 

As you probably know, such trolling is going to result in people posting facts about what Trump did during J6, which I am sure you don't want.

 

Instead of trolling, you can show what your Orange Jesus did to put down the rioters at the Capitol.

 

 

 

That's a very sad post. 

 

Get well soon.

[Danderman123]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

That's a very sad post. 

 

Get well soon.

McCarthy told Trump that Jan. 6 rioters were ‘trying to f—— kill me’

 

A timeline of Sean Hannity's panicked texts to Trump's inner circle reveals how 'worried' he was about the January 6 rally and Capitol riot

[Dan O]

9 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

You obviously have not been paying attention. I made no such claim about effect.

 

The loons at the Capitol could not hear Trump anyway.

I believe you did and then posted a link and the loons were not at the capital originally they were at the rally.   You need to stop cherry picking facts that suit your claims. Use all the facts or none and stop posting nonsense

[Dan O]

9 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Most of the people from the Ellipse arrived at the Capitol, later, after the breech.

 

Any convictions of the truly guilty are fine by me.

 

Convictions were for a variety of crimes but very few for actual conspiracy.

Another false statement.  You need to stop the bs 

[nauseus]

51 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

In other words, all you can do is fill up space with empty comments.

 

Trump watched Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riot unfold on TV, ignored pleas to call for peace

 

Donald Trump sat for hours watching the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol unfold on live TV, ignoring pleas by his children and other close advisers to urge his supporters to stop the violence, witnesses told a congressional hearing on Thursday.

 

And all you do is constantly change the subject. On the different subject of Trump's behaviour on J6, then do I think that he should have tried to personally intervene to stop to the rioting and clear the Capitol but that was probably not that easy to do once the breech had been made and there was loud confusion everywhere. 

 

BTW using that hopelessly biased J6 Committee testimony won't help your cause.

[nauseus]

13 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Another false statement.  You need to stop the bs 

 

Up to you then to detail what this bs is. Carry on.

Edited December 27, 2023 by nauseus

[nauseus]

18 minutes ago, Dan O said:

I believe you did and then posted a link and the loons were not at the capital originally they were at the rally.   You need to stop cherry picking facts that suit your claims. Use all the facts or none and stop posting nonsense

 

Well you believe wrong ..... but you can get away with quite a lot using bad English language.

[Danderman123]

20 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

 

BTW using that hopelessly biased J6 Committee testimony won't help your cause.

Virtually every J6 witness was a Republican, most former Trump staffers. Why would they be biased?

 

Is Ivanka biased? She testified.

[Danderman123]

26 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

And all you do is constantly change the subject. 

Trump was disqualified because of his role in the insurrection. You deny that Trump was involved in the insurrection.

 

Acvording to you, refuting your claims = changing the subject.

 

Trump *did* incite the insurrection as part of a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Two court cases are pending about this. Two grand juries have concluded that there is probable cause to indict.

Edited December 27, 2023 by Danderman123

[Dan O]

29 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Up to you then to detail what this bs is. Carry on.

All your posting of partial facts is your bs 

[nauseus]

22 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump was disqualified because of his role in the insurrection. You deny that Trump was involved in the insurrection.

 

Acvording to you, refuting your claims = changing the subject.

 

Trump *did* incite the insurrection as part of a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Two court cases are pending about this. Two grand juries have concluded that there is probable cause to indict.

 

There you go again.

[nauseus]

18 minutes ago, Dan O said:

All your posting of partial facts is your bs 

 

I suppose that's about as detailed as you can manage. 

[nauseus]

28 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Virtually every J6 witness was a Republican, most former Trump staffers. Why would they be biased?

 

Is Ivanka biased? She testified.

 

The selection of the committee and witnesses was biased. 

[Dan O]

55 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Well you believe wrong ..... but you can get away with quite a lot using bad English language.

Go back and read what you wrote. You clear wrote how every ignored and forgot his plea for only a peaceful protest.  Yes your poor use of language and avoiding including all the facts is constant

[Dan O]

14 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

I suppose that's about as detailed as you can manage. 

I don't care to waste any more time on you than necessary.  You can read you own posts, no need for me to rewrite them 

[Danderman123]

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

The selection of the committee and witnesses was biased. 

They were all Republicans.

 

Was Ivanka biased?