6 hours ago, Tug said:

Awww he’s all tuckered out from all the winning remember when he said that……….actually it’s a well known fact criminals tend to yawn during interrogation/court feigned boredom 

 

Well known fact. Right. Yawn.

5 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Here’s the laugh out loud, tone deaf hypocrisy of that argument.

 

Trump supporters are busy making the argument that the politically biased SCOTUS judges he himself nominated will save him from any criminal verdicts Juries hand down against him.

 

Some going as far as to argue they will only accept a Jury’s guilty verdict against Trump if it’s upheld by the Supreme Court.

 

The claim the SCOTUS will save Trump is a common refrain from Trump supporters both foreign and domestic.

 

 

 

Oh yes. These pages are full of such arguments. Yawn.

4 hours ago, Emdog said:

What are the hours the court is in session?

remember seeing his schedule while in the White House included late rising, puttering about with Fox on in background, long lunch... basically hours of a retired man with few hobbies or interests

To expect him to stay awake, even get up in the morning, is more than "Sleepy Don" can handle

 

Can we see this sleepy schedule then? I can't remember it.

Edited April 16, 20242 yr by nauseus

4 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Our friends the Trump fans don't post until they get talking points, so there's always a lag.

 

The official talking point from Trump is that he didn't fall asleep. 

 

That's pretty weak sauce, but tomorrow some Trump fan will post that it's a lie that Trump was sleeping in court.

 

The weak source is at the foot of the the OP. Even the biased MSM can't agree. NYT says he was dozing while CNN says he was paying "close attention". Difficult to do both. Bunch of jokers.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/15/politics/video/trump-courtroom-new-york-scannell-digvid 

3 hours ago, Roo Island said:

Oops. Meant Grifter...

 

Anybody's guess.

20 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Anybody's guess.

It's been proven. Many times.

40 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

The weak source is at the foot of the the OP. Even the biased MSM can't agree. NYT says he was dozing while CNN says he was paying "close attention". Difficult to do both. Bunch of jokers.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/15/politics/video/trump-courtroom-new-york-scannell-digvid 

 

'Difficult to do both'.

Logic would suggest otherwise.

The statement presents a false dilemma and a dichotomy either/or fallacy. It suggests that the only two possibilities are that he was either dozing or paying close attention at the same time, when in reality, there could be a range of behaviors in between these two extremes over the four hours that he was in court.

 

 

Edited April 16, 20242 yr by LosLobo

20 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

 

'Difficult to do both'.

Logic would suggest otherwise.

The statement presents a false dilemma and a dichotomy either/or fallacy. It suggests that the only two possibilities are that he was either dozing or paying close attention at the same time, when in reality, there could be a range of behaviors in between these two extremes over the four hours that he was in court.

 

 

 

If you say so, Doctor. Same time next week?

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Oh yes. These pages are full of such arguments. Yawn.

Somewhere back in these pages is a missive from yourself getting extremely irate when I pointed out you don’t accept the allegations against Trump, you will not accept any indictments against Trump, you will not accept any trial of Trump, you will not accept any verdict against Trump and you will not accept any sentences handed down by the court against Trump.

 

I plan to dig it out when the right moment arises.

 

 

8 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump wasn't yawning, he was sleeping. Because of the "old man" thing.

Yes, I agree with that post and I have to say that the poor grifter is certainly looking his age now and perhaps the last few months of frantic activity and worry are catching up with him, as he certainly looks tired and pudgy now........

 

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Somewhere back in these pages is a missive from yourself getting extremely irate when I pointed out you don’t accept the allegations against Trump, you will not accept any indictments against Trump, you will not accept any trial of Trump, you will not accept any verdict against Trump and you will not accept any sentences handed down by the court against Trump.

 

I plan to dig it out when the right moment arises.

 

 

Most MAGA nuts believe in alternative facts. What do you expect considering their source for information.

29 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Somewhere back in these pages is a missive from yourself getting extremely irate when I pointed out you don’t accept the allegations against Trump, you will not accept any indictments against Trump, you will not accept any trial of Trump, you will not accept any verdict against Trump and you will not accept any sentences handed down by the court against Trump.

 

I plan to dig it out when the right moment arises.

 

 

 

No time like the present, eh? 

12 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Most MAGA nuts believe in alternative facts. What do you expect considering their source for information.

I don't accept that.  

18 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

No time like the present, eh? 

There’s a right time for everything.

 

 

27 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Most MAGA nuts believe in alternative facts. What do you expect considering their source for information.

Most MAGA nuts believe in alternative facts. What do you expect considering their source of or disinformation!

8 hours ago, LosLobo said:

 

The problem is that Trump allegedly interfered and attempted to influence the outcome of the elections in 2016, which could be seen as an attempt to deceive the American electorate in their decision-making process.

How does the hush money payment an attempt to interfere with an election. 

8 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Two of Trump's other criminal cases are about the 2020 election and likewise are alleged election interference.

Georgia and what's the other? 

8 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Similarly Russian collusion, and both impeachments, more election interference.

All proven false

8 hours ago, LosLobo said:

Seems Trump doesn't give two hoots about letting the American people decide.

Seeps he has a better shot with them than with the "judicial" system. 

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

There’s a right time for everything.

 

 

There’s a right time for everything. doing the right thing!

19 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I don't accept that.  

You would!

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Here’s the laugh out loud, tone deaf hypocrisy of that argument.

 

Trump supporters are busy making the argument that the politically biased SCOTUS judges he himself nominated will save him from any criminal verdicts Juries hand down against him.

So the SCOTUS judges are biased? 

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Some going as far as to argue they will only accept a Jury’s guilty verdict against Trump if it’s upheld by the Supreme Court.

What I said was that the "crime' in this case is made up, and that the judge hates Trump. That is what I would not trust the outcome. 

 

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The claim the SCOTUS will save Trump is a common refrain from Trump supporters both foreign and domestic.

 

8 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The Prosecution have asked the Judge to rule on three cases of Trump violating the gag order he’s under.

 

The Judge will hear these cases on Thursday April 23.

 

I’m guessing Trump will be wide awake during that hearing.

 
 

But will he accept any judgement against him, without breaking the gag order?

6 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

There’s a right time for everything. doing the right thing!

Putting Trump on trial is doing the right thing.

 

Nobody above the law!

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So the SCOTUS judges are biased? 

What I said was that the "crime' in this case is made up, and that the judge hates Trump. That is what I would not trust the outcome. 

 

 

Ok, you got the point of my post.

 

Now sit back and enjoy the trial.

6 minutes ago, scottiejohn said:

But will he accept any judgement against him, without breaking the gag order?

Trump will not accepted any judgement against him.

 

Nor will his followers, both foreign and domestic.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 16, 20242 yr by Chomper Higgot

10 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So the SCOTUS judges are biased? 

What I said was that the "crime' in this case is made up, and that the judge hates Trump. That is what I would not trust the outcome. 

 

 

SCOTUS judges biased. Absolutely. On both sides. But especially Thomas. Hello...free RV!

Just now, Roo Island said:

SCOTUS judges biased. Absolutely. On both sides. But especially Thomas. Hello...free RV!

How what position has Thomas taken you felt was biased? 

 

What does free RV mean?

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Trump will not accepted any judgement against him.

 

Nor will his followers, both foreign and domestic.

 

 

 

 

If he does not believe he is guilty, why should he? 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

If he does not believe he is guilty, why should he? 

I’m absolutely sure Trump doesn’t think he’s broken any laws, he thinks he’s above the law.

 

He’s said so on a number of occasions.

 

But what he thinks once the Jury has passed verdict is an irrelevance.

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How what position has Thomas taken you felt was biased? 

 

What does free RV mean?

Well there was this to start with:

 

For example, Thomas declined to recuse himself and dissented when the Supreme Court denied Arizona Republicans’ petition to stop the so-called "January 6 committee" from obtaining their phone records in the probe of the Capitol attacks.

The justice participated despite the fact that his wife had contacted Arizona lawmakers to urge them to help overturn the election results, according to reports by the Washington Post in June 2022. Ginni Thomas was even questioned by the January 6 committee. (The recusal statute requires disqualification if a spouse has an interest in the proceeding or may be “a material witness in the proceeding.”).

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/column-justice-thomas-rare-recusal-was-an-attempt-damage-control-little-else-2023-10-24/#:~:text=Oct 24 (Reuters) - Justice,as too little%2C too late.

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well there was this to start with:

 

 

For example, Thomas declined to recuse himself and dissented when the Supreme Court denied Arizona Republicans’ petition to stop the so-called "January 6 committee" from obtaining their phone records in the probe of the Capitol attacks.

The justice participated despite the fact that his wife had contacted Arizona lawmakers to urge them to help overturn the election results, according to reports by the Washington Post in June 2022. Ginni Thomas was even questioned by the January 6 committee. (The recusal statute requires disqualification if a spouse has an interest in the proceeding or may be “a material witness in the proceeding.”).

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/column-justice-thomas-rare-recusal-was-an-attempt-damage-control-little-else-2023-10-24/#:~:text=Oct 24 (Reuters) - Justice,as too little%2C too late.

What position has Thomas taken you felt was biased? 

 

What does free RV mean?

13 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I’m absolutely sure Trump doesn’t think he’s broken any laws, he thinks he’s above the law.

 

He’s said so on a number of occasions.

 

But what he thinks once the Jury has passed verdict is an irrelevance.

I don't think Trump has ever said he was above the law. Do you have anything that supports your false claim?