2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

In English, Commie is only an insult when it comes from those who oppose Socialism.. Thanks for abandoning your murderous philosophy of collective authoritarianism for the side where freedom and common sense reign. We are a big tent, thanks for joining!

You're 'avin a larf............Genrikh..........😂

8 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

It's clear that you are a graduate of the University of pulling it out of your a** Not surprising that Trump supporters are incapable of coping with data. 

So I was correct.

1 minute ago, transam said:

You're 'avin a larf............Genrikh..........😂

Glad to have you here. Lets go rag on some Commies! MAGA is fun because you can have your own opinion and even argue with folks without worrying about hate, irrationality, violence, doxing, arson, gas chambers, mass murder, racism, collectivization, the Great Leap forward, etc.

 

Yeah. F them Commies!

FIXED -  US Prosecutors Suspended for Telling The Truth Using Lawfare to Attack Political Opponent

6 minutes ago, transam said:

With your ideology, I don't doubt that, comrade............

Yeah! Hes a commie! Get him! Go MAGA go 

1 minute ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

FIXED -  US Prosecutors Suspended for Telling The Truth Using Lawfare to Attack Political Opponent

damn dude, ya got that font thing going that they use all the time. Cool. Maybe they will stop now.

38 minutes ago, transam said:

Was I right about you, Monte.........?  🫡

You tell me, Sam 🙂

A number of off topic bickering posts and replies trolling about other members have been removed.

21 minutes ago, Alan Zweibel said:

It's clear that you are a graduate of the University of pulling it out of your a** Not surprising that Trump supporters are incapable of coping with data. 

Oh, I quite capable of coping with data.

 

Especially when it’s 312/Trump and 226/Harris.

 

You and your types are the ones incapable of dealing with it.

There were some rioters.  And there were some protestors - an activity protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution¹.  It depended WHERE on the capitol grounds you were that day as well as what you were personally doing.  The rioters should be indicted and prosecuted.  And the sanctions should be within reason.

The problem with Jan 6th is that Leftist dump everyone anywhere near the Capitol, including President Trump, as "rioters", or worse, "insurrectionists." I'm sorry, but when the Capitol police opened the Capitol doors and invited people in, there no longer was a riot in those locations of the Capitol, just peaceful protest.  So rioters should be prosecuted, protestors should be exonerated and their "Witch-hunt" convictions overturned and thrown out.  The prosecutors who engaged in that "Witch-hunt" should now themselves be sanctioned.

1.  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

1 minute ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

Oh, I quite capable of coping with data.

 

Especially when it’s 312/Trump and 226/Harris.

 

You and your types are the ones incapable of dealing with it.

You have to be really clueless to have said this. I'll leave you a few minutes to work out why.

3 hours ago, Alan Zweibel said:

Just because they violently forced their way into the Capitol to stop the Constitutionally prescribed transfer of power was underway these prosecutors called them a mob of rioters?

The Capitol Police opened some of the doors to the Capitol - and invited protestors in!  

Those who "violently forced their way into the Capitol" should be prosecuted.
Those who were invited in - by the Capitol police - to peaceful protest should be exonerated.

The prosecutors who lumped every single person at the Capitol that day as "rioters" who "violently forced their way into the Capitol" should themselves be sanctioned (that's not what happened) And now those prosecutors are being identified and their actions brought into question...as it should be.  And I'll take it one step further.  The current DOJ should look into the activities of the January 6th Committee and review for illegalities, i.e., the deliberate attempt to subvert US justice in order to target Trump supporters who peacefully assembled to petition the government for the redress of greivences.

26 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

damn dude, ya got that font thing going that they use all the time. Cool. Maybe they will stop now.

Mate - they cannot stop - it is all they know how to do. They have been doing this sort of thing since Clinton was POTUS - and getting away with it - and supported by the MSM.  Trump is the first GOP Leader to fight fire with fire, and as I was saying many times last year or two to the T*S sufferers here, when Trump becomes POTUS again he is going to burn your houses down. The Dems started this BS - and the GOP under Trump is going to finish it. And before Trump leaves Office he will give Pardons to every single one of his supporters in the Admiration and House and Senate - and he will sign them all himself.   Speaking of which - when the Biden autopen Pardons are cancelled - Hell has no fury like the Trump Administration.  Hunter will be in jail for a long time - until a Dem is elected POTUS - maybe in 15-20 years.     

16 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Hunter will be in jail for a long time

Joe signed his, they made sure.

It wasn't a riot. Plenty of video footage shows police indulging in provocative actions to provoke one. Are you going to repeat Biden's lie, that 4 policemen were killed on that day? How about Pelosi refusing to let the national guard intervene, as requested by Trump himself? How about White House officials kindly inviting those guys to visit the White House and then prosecute them all for trespassing? How about AOC claiming that the "rioters" tried to get into her office while she was there, when she was miles away? Why haven't the pipe bomb guys been arrested, why did the FBI not react immediately when one was found near the Dems headquarters where Kamala was actually present? I won't go into the mail-in ballots, ballot harvesting, refusal to render voting records, mysterious deliveries of trucks to voting places at 2am,  Rep. observers being blocked from ballot counting rooms?

You can probably find convoluted reasons to explain all of this, but it DOES seem a little strange, right? Too many lieds and fabrications.

 

8 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Joe signed his, they made sure.

I see - did not know that - makes sense.  They know how to scam and lie and cheat dont they. 

4 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

I see - did not know that - makes sense.  They know how to scam and lie and cheat dont they. 

I think he hand signed Milley's too.

10 minutes ago, cooked said:

It wasn't a riot. 

This is the only part I have to disagree with. IMHO, it was an easily contained riot and there were provocations, but normal folks should have known better. It was so far from being an attack on democracy that whenever I hear that, I giggle.

 

The fault lies in those who were responsible for security. Its all coming out soon

AI quickie Gemini:

 

Constitutional Text: Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution grants the President the power to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." It does not specify that the pardon must be a written document, nor does it require a signature.

Legal Interpretation: Legal experts and scholars have noted that the Constitution does not mandate a written document for a pardon to be valid, and therefore, a handwritten signature is also not a constitutional requirement.

 

Modern Practice: In modern practice, presidents do typically sign pardons and clemency actions, which are usually formal written documents prepared by White House staff after review by the Department of Justice's Office of the Pardon Attorney. This is for record-keeping and clarity.

10 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

I think he hand signed Milley's too.

I am sure we will find out soon. Trump's Admin has started the proceedings to have the Pardons overturned on the basis 1. Biden did not personally sign them.  2. Use of the autopen for Pardons under the Constitution is not  an appropriate method.  3. Pardons can only be issued for specific 'Offences' - not as a general exclusion Pardon for all possible offences committed in the past and in the future.   It will take a while because the Dems will delay it as long as possible, and the matter will have to go to the SCOTUS for a final decision.  

1 hour ago, transam said:

"We"...........😂

The Russians.

“I believe deeply that there is no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions and the conscience that guide your very own people.”

J.D. Vance

Munich Feb 2025

7 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

AI quickie Gemini:

 

Constitutional Text: Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution grants the President the power to "grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." It does not specify that the pardon must be a written document, nor does it require a signature.

Legal Interpretation: Legal experts and scholars have noted that the Constitution does not mandate a written document for a pardon to be valid, and therefore, a handwritten signature is also not a constitutional requirement.

 

Modern Practice: In modern practice, presidents do typically sign pardons and clemency actions, which are usually formal written documents prepared by White House staff after review by the Department of Justice's Office of the Pardon Attorney. This is for record-keeping and clarity.

All BS and Conjecture - none of those statements or opinion have been tested in Court. Trumps' Admin has started the process to do just that.  

 

Regarding your last point (modern practice) - Yes the POTUS signs the document after it is prepared, after it has gone through the White House Staff and DOJ processes. BUT - all those Biden Pardons issued at the 11th hour, they have no record of any DOJ involvement - and there is no official records of White Hose Staff involvement. The whole thing stinks of corruption and there was no 'due process'.  Biden had absolutely no involvement - there is no record of any verbal approval.  Looks like in the rush to protect themselves and their mates like Cheney, there was a 'wish list' of pardons put together. But with Biden (and his Wife) being very 'uncooperative' after being removed as the POTUS candidate, some White House Staff just went ahead and punched them all out themselves. 

 

It is likely that the Pardons will be cancelled, and that whoever did them is going to jail, and there will be a much more rigorous process implemented for any future POTUS Pardons.

4 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

Good. Start hammering them.

For what? 

 

Telling the truth.

 

No wonder you are a Trump supporter.

 

Truth and facts mean nothing to Trump.

 

Ne simply makes up his own, and the gullible swallow it.

11 minutes ago, Dan O said:

Don't you just hate facts? 

No, hbu? Did Trump win fair and square?

7 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

All BS and Conjecture

Thank you. Since there is no process to revoking a pardon, the scenario may be that Trump voids a pardon and someone like Ms. Cheney is indicted for a crime.

 

Then she could challenge the indictment based on a pardon.

9 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

All BS and Conjecture - none of those statements or opinion have been tested in Court. Trumps' Admin has started the process to do just that.  

 

Regarding your last point (modern practice) - Yes the POTUS signs the document after it is prepared, after it has gone through the White House Staff and DOJ processes. BUT - all those Biden Pardons issued at the 11th hour, they have no record of any DOJ involvement - and there is no official records of White Hose Staff involvement. The whole thing stinks of corruption and there was no 'due process'.  Biden had absolutely no involvement - there is no record of any verbal approval.  Looks like in the rush to protect themselves and their mates like Cheney, there was a 'wish list' of pardons put together. But with Biden (and his Wife) being very 'uncooperative' after being removed as the POTUS candidate, some White House Staff just went ahead and punched them all out themselves. 

 

It is likely that the Pardons will be cancelled, and that whoever did them is going to jail, and there will be a much more rigorous process implemented for any future POTUS Pardons.

Thats a fair analysis. 

17 minutes ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

The whole thing stinks of corruption and there was no 'due process'.

LOL, due process with pardons. Not a very good argument, looking at Trump's paid for pardons.

8 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

No, hbu? Did Trump win fair and square?

What has the election got to do with this OP? Nothing at all but when confronted with facts you never address them you just post disconnected questio. Try to look intelligent but your posts betray you for what you really are.

 

So you agree with the actions taken or feel its not appropriate? 

5 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Thank you. Since there is no process to revoking a pardon, the scenario may be that Trump voids a pardon and someone like Ms. Cheney is indicted for a crime.

Then she could challenge the indictment based on a pardon.

I dont think a POTUS can revoke a Pardon under the Constitution - but that has never been tested either. Maybe they will also try that approach if their attempt to invalidate the Pardons fail. Whatever happens, going forward the whole process and procedures about POTUS Pardons is going to be addressed.

 

But it is very very clear to me that a Pardon can only be given for someone that has been convicted of a crime - and usually they are serving a sentence.  A blanket 'free for all' Pardon for as yet unconvicted crimes, is extremely unlikely to be validated by SCOTUS.  

 

The exact words are - "The President... shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."