Jump to content

Trump found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records


Recommended Posts

Posted
5 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

I think the polls are going to be very interesting over the coming weeks but I also think it better to pay attention to poll averages.

 

The established pollsters will be following a fixed polling period and might not publish results for days or weeks, and most poll results in the coming days will have been conducted before the verdict.

 

I think two things to be cautious of, a poll in immediate response to this emotive verdict and the media selecting polls that promote the view they wish to drive viewer engagement in.

 

Poll averages approaching the Republican Convention are going to be the most ‘interesting’.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

You got something against Tonto ... :cheesy:

 

Hint:  Johnny Depp playing a fictitious movie character

 

Aside from that, you are forgetting you are on the 'Commonwealth' forum.   Anything & everything, not part of the commonwealth countries is always a negative.  

 

Especially; USA, RU, CH & TH of course

Tonto is Spanish for stupid. 

 

I bet the dude with the racist avatar signed the petition demanding that the Redskins change their logo.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

well we know you will be safe in Mommys basement, troll.


Don’t waste time dreaming such stuff up.

 

You can be assured I’m chilled and not posting highly emotive rants on this forum.

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:


 

 

You can be assured I’m chilled and not posting highly emotive rants on this forum.

 

Ill give you that. Ignorant, hypocritical, fascist talking points, but not emotive. No sense waking Mommy up with keyboard pounding. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:


Oh, the personal attack line of no arguments left.

No the lack of desire to engage in a war of words with intellectually dishonest trolls.

  • Like 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Tonto is Spanish for stupid. 

 

I bet the dude with the racist avatar signed the petition demanding that the Redskins change their logo.

Actually Latin, as most of Spanish is derived from Latin.  Having studied and been fluent in both.  Leaning Latin first made Spanish a breeze to learn.

 

Begs to ask, why did I not go South to retire ... :cheesy:

Posted
1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

Actually Latin, as most of Spanish is derived from Latin.  Having studied and been fluent in both.  Leaning Latin first made Spanish a breeze to learn.

De minimus

Posted
6 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

https://www.rawstory.com/msn-uk/trump-tower-speech-2668436617/

"He looks visibly exhausted from it,” she explained while discussing the trial ordeal. “His under-eye area looks darker and it looks more puffy, overall his skin color and tone are more sallow. It looks like he hasn’t slept.”

 

He has only himself to blame.

I remarked yesterday that the photos and videos from the daily court appearances of Convicted Felon Trump reveal his marked deterioration.

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

A post using an incorrect member name has been removed, please do not alter member names when replying to them, thank you.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I remarked yesterday that the photos and videos from the daily court appearances of Convicted Felon Trump reveal his marked deterioration.

 

 

Convicted felon Trump does not look too well hope it is not something too serious.

  • Haha 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Actually Latin, as most of Spanish is derived from Latin.  Having studied and been fluent in both.  Leaning Latin first made Spanish a breeze to learn.

 

Begs to ask, why did I not go South to retire ... :cheesy:

fluent in latin?  really?  really?  what are you the pope?

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Walker88 said:

Here's a couple of very simple questions that even those who favor the convicted felon should be able to answer:

 

Do the American people have a right to know---BEFORE they vote---whether one candidate tried to subvert the will of the people and stop the certification of a free and fair election?

 

Do the American people have a right to know---BEFORE they vote---why one candidate took highly classified documents to his country club, without authorization, that could jeopardize US national security and the identities of foreign clandestine intelligence assets and operations? I ask "why" because clearly he did take the documents. That is not in any dispute, not even by him. Also, why did he subsequently LIE about returning all of the documents? Do the American people have a right to know what he intended to do with these thousands of highly classified documents that have absolutely nothing to do with running a country club?

 

Do the American people have a right to know---BEFORE they vote---why he pressured the Georgia SecState to "just find me...11,780 votes" and---per the indictment---violate RICO statutes?

 

Do the American people have a right to know---BEFORE they vote---why he called supporters to DC for 6 January 2021, Tweeting "It'll be WILD!", and then why did he tell them to "march to the Capitol" and "fight like hell", when all that was happening at the Capitol that day was the pro forma certification of the election 50 States and territories had already certified as his loss?

 

Do the American people have a right to know---BEFORE they vote---why he sat idle in the Oval Office for 187 minutes, while the violence that destroyed Capitol property and injured 140 police officers was happening live on TV around the world as he himself watched, but he refused to call out the DC National Guard, despite the President having sole authority to do so (the Speaker lacks that authority)?

 

He claims "I'm the most innocent man in the world...totally innocent" and "Nobody is more innocent than me". Since he has been indicted for acts that suggest otherwise, should he not only WANT, but be required---as any other American citizen would be required---to prove his innocence through the legal system, and BEFORE the people vote?

 

Or do his supporters believe the Founding Fathers of the United States of America were wrong and that some people are above the law and totally immune? Do his supporters believe the United States should have its own lese majeste laws where not only is its leader infallible, but no criticism, much less a criminal indictment, should be allowed?

 

Pretty easy questions. I await answers from his supporters.

Agree with you except for this sentence.

" prove his innocence through the legal system".  I understand where you're coming from, and yes, no doubt he is guilty of what you accuse him of, but it still should be proven in a court of law and it should be proven to be crimes.

Posted
9 minutes ago, pomchop said:

fluent in latin?  really?  really?  what are you the pope?

Back in the day, it was a requirement at many medical schools.  Aspirations of being a vet. in my youth.

Posted
1 minute ago, jerrymahoney said:

No different from Lindsey Graham -- I read it here.

Well if you will make the argument that a Republican in today’s GOP has any kind of moral authority on the basis of past history towards Convicted Felon Trump.

 

Far too many spin on a dime.

Posted
4 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Back in the day, it was a requirement at many medical schools.  Aspirations of being a vet. in my youth.

No. Being fluent was never and nowhere a requirement. 

Being able to read and understand texts, yes. But that's far from being fluent.

Posted
1 minute ago, HappyExpat57 said:

And anyone who uses Fox Not News as a source has drank the Kool-Aid and put on the blinders of idiocy.

To be fair FOX News has been rather enjoyable this past few days. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No. Being fluent was never and nowhere a requirement. 

I didn't say being fluent was a requirement, but Latin 101 was at many schools .... 'BACK IN THE DAY'.

 

No longer required at any, I think.  Please research before replying to me, about what I know are facts ...  getting a bit repetitive.

image.png.93f32e9d1ffe37e68c445a58de0b1d00.png

Posted
14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No. Being fluent was never and nowhere a requirement. 

I believe the correct and more appropriate term is to ‘have Latin’ or ‘have some Latin’.

 

As a child I learned classical Latin, and to this day still read Latin classics, most recently ‘The Agricola’ but I don’t read ecclesiastical or Medieval Latin.

 

Latin as a subject has been widely taught in western schools and I expect far more people have at least some Latin than might be expected.

 

 

 

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...