Vaccine

espola said:
Harding was worse than Hoover. Hoover was an honest man of principles in office at the wrong time.

T was the worst President ever. His most fervent supporters (sons, daughter, Rudy, pillowguy) are all now laughingstocks.
Click to expand...
We are defintely lit- kicking ass and taking names. Excellent polling, firm diplomacy that displays international leadership, precise management of domestic policy that has been efficient in keeping inflation in check, borders secure, and cohesive/unifying pandemic policy.

We can only be so lucky to be led by a crack team of foreign policy experts, domestic policy experts, and public health gurus. And back to the polls, excellent work in garnering support and unifying the American people. It's like we've began an American renaissance. You couldn't be prouder.

Can't forget about our crown jewels - NYC, SF, Chicago, Baltimore. Never has a political party done so much for their constituents. Ahh, forgot LA. Can't forget LA, the city and county made up of a rare breed of people who can hold their breath for extended periods of time. I heard the mayor is thinking about competing as a free diver.
 
espola said:
Why bother? The DOJ and NY AG are giving him enough trouble. There is a possibility that the "richest President ever" may need to beg a judge for a Public Defender.
Click to expand...
Do you ever ask yourself -- "who cares?" I suppose media outlets with terrible ratings care. cnn and msdnc hope that trumpy stays in the limelight long enough to maybe get a ratings rebound..
 
what-happened said:
Do you ever ask yourself -- "who cares?" I suppose media outlets with terrible ratings care. cnn and msdnc hope that trumpy stays in the limelight long enough to maybe get a ratings rebound..
Click to expand...
God knows they are trying. Even the attack on Joe Rogan has fizzled and boarders on backfiring…..Especially when everyone who lined up behind Neil Young realized he used it as an opportunity to sell that catalogue he pulled to Amazon for quite a mint!
 
Pelosi says Putin will pay even without Ukraine invasion: you can’t ‘bully the world and take a walk’

Putin is like T now. No matter what he does, he will pay dearly. If he invades, he pays. No invasion, he still pays.
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
It's just one part of the ongoing lawfare but in this context interesting that just yesterday a judge ruled in the ongoing civil conspiracy suit re several 1/6 figures that Trump (but not Jr. , Guilliani, Brooks, etc) remains on the hook:

"Immediately before directing them to the Capitol, he told rally-goers that they would need to “fight like hell and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.” When those supporters did “fight like hell,” just as he had told them to, the President did not demand they act “peacefully and patriotically.” He instead tweeted that “Mike Pence didn’t have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country.”.....These other statements by the President stand in stark contrast to his passing observation that rally-goers would soon be “peacefully and patriotically” marching to the Capitol."

so, at least for Trump, this heads to discovery. To which, re civil conspiracy, the judge noted.

"....the President’s confidant, Roger Stone. Stone posted on Parler in late December that he had met with the President “to ensure that Donald Trump continues as our president.” Shortly thereafter, Stone spoke with Tarrio, and later he used the Oath Keepers as his security detail for the January 6 Rally. The court does not rely on these allegations to establish the President’s knowledge of the Proud Boys or the Oath Keepers. Other alleged facts make that inference plausible. That said, Stone’s connections to both the President and these groups in the days leading up to January 6th is a well-pleaded fact. Discovery might prove that connection to be an important one."

Click to expand...
1. It’s a civil suit. Not a criminal or impeachment. The standard of proof is much much lower
2. The charge there is conspiracy. Specifically an implied conspiracy. I’ve done a few of these. They are really hard to prove because if there isn’t an express agreement you have to somehow get evidence to prove an implied one
3. The ruling was on demur (or the equivalent in that jurisdiction). It says if the complaint is taken at face value, does it outline a valid claim. It’s not a ruling on evidence. The motion assumes the evidence exists. It’s different than a summary judgment motion which weighs evidence.
4. That’s why the judge emphasized discovery. It’s possible they find evidence to support the charge. It’s possible they don’t.
 
Grace T. said:
1. It’s a civil suit. Not a criminal or impeachment. The standard of proof is much much lower
2. The charge there is conspiracy. Specifically an implied conspiracy. I’ve done a few of these. They are really hard to prove because if there isn’t an express agreement you have to somehow get evidence to prove an implied one
3. The ruling was on demur (or the equivalent in that jurisdiction). It says if the complaint is taken at face value, does it outline a valid claim. It’s not a ruling on evidence. The motion assumes the evidence exists. It’s different than a summary judgment motion which weighs evidence.
4. That’s why the judge emphasized discovery. It’s possible they find evidence to support the charge. It’s possible they don’t.
Click to expand...
Excellent job counselor.
 
Grace T. said:
1. It’s a civil suit. Not a criminal or impeachment. The standard of proof is much much lower
2. The charge there is conspiracy. Specifically an implied conspiracy. I’ve done a few of these. They are really hard to prove because if there isn’t an express agreement you have to somehow get evidence to prove an implied one
3. The ruling was on demur (or the equivalent in that jurisdiction). It says if the complaint is taken at face value, does it outline a valid claim. It’s not a ruling on evidence. The motion assumes the evidence exists. It’s different than a summary judgment motion which weighs evidence.
4. That’s why the judge emphasized discovery. It’s possible they find evidence to support the charge. It’s possible they don’t.
Click to expand...

Sure. It's a ruling on motion to dismiss. Probably tours the DC circuit and supremes. Long way from a T deposition. But Mehta speaks to peaceable nature of speech (or lack thereof). Comments re degrees of separation between OK, Willard and T are interesting.
 
Grace T. said:
I recall someone posted clips of ds using the same “fight like hell” response. If that’s your smoking gun it’s legally a poor one.
Click to expand...
Taken in context with what all else was being said by others you’d have to be fool or a strictly partisan fool to see otherwise. Lots of things are legal that aren’t right, moral and might even put you in serious danger when perpetrated against the wrong people. Like I have heard said, “you may hear Harleys, you may not”.
 
Kicker 2.0 said:
God knows they are trying. Even the attack on Joe Rogan has fizzled and boarders on backfiring…..Especially when everyone who lined up behind Neil Young realized he used it as an opportunity to sell that catalogue he pulled to Amazon for quite a mint!
Click to expand...
You sure about that! Amazon? Lol! Try again . . . and your timing is all wrong as well. But what do you know that you aren’t told to know? Lol!

Oh, and even Rogan admitted he needed to clean up his act, sooooo. Again, lol!
 
EvilGoalie 21 said:
Sure. It's a ruling on motion to dismiss. Probably tours the DC circuit and supremes. Long way from a T deposition. But Mehta speaks to peaceable nature of speech (or lack thereof). Comments re degrees of separation between OK, Willard and T are interesting.
Click to expand...
Meh. He’s a bit of a partisan hack (most of the federal judges are these days). I do agree with his opinion though…a civil case for conspiracy was stated, trump wasn’t acting as president and therefore not immune. I think it’s almost an impossible case to make out but not before trump is subjected to uncomfortable discovery. If it holds it bodes ill for politicians on both sides who use speech in a wink and a node to spur their supporters to violence. Some ds like waters could find themselves in trouble too for events like blm including the vp
 
Grace T. said:
Meh. He’s a bit of a partisan hack (most of the federal judges are these days). I do agree with his opinion though…a civil case for conspiracy was stated, trump wasn’t acting as president and therefore not immune. I think it’s almost an impossible case to make out but not before trump is subjected to uncomfortable discovery. If it holds it bodes ill for politicians on both sides who use speech in a wink and a node to spur their supporters to violence. Some ds like waters could find themselves in trouble too for events like blm including the vp
Click to expand...
What comes around goes around. *Boom* *Boom* *Boom*, the Boomerang Effect!!!
 
Hüsker Dü said:
You sure about that! Amazon? Lol! Try again . . . and your timing is all wrong as well. But what do you know that you aren’t told to know? Lol!

Oh, and even Rogan admitted he needed to clean up his act, sooooo. Again, lol!
Click to expand...
- Yes

- Timing?

- Never said he didn’t have room to grow. That’s why the Cancel Culture failed and the narrative is waning….
 
Grace T. said:
Meh. He’s a bit of a partisan hack (most of the federal judges are these days). I do agree with his opinion though…a civil case for conspiracy was stated, trump wasn’t acting as president and therefore not immune. I think it’s almost an impossible case to make out but not before trump is subjected to uncomfortable discovery. If it holds it bodes ill for politicians on both sides who use speech in a wink and a node to spur their supporters to violence. Some ds like waters could find themselves in trouble too for events like blm including the vp
Click to expand...
In a huge koinky dink aoc just laid out in a tweet a similar accusation against tucker Carlson for inciting his fans. It will be completely awesome if in addition to suits against politicians against this stuff we start dragging in the media and the ladies of the view get caught up in it. Take the battle to the courts! Clog them with civil lawsuits! It will be so damn epic! It will be hilarious to see the elites tear each other apart using their own elitist tools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top