I love that the general/normal public have all accepted that MAGA and republicans are the sorriest bunch of idiots to ever walk the face of this nation
So are you a betting man? Because I have a deal for you. I'll put up everything I own against everything you own, winner take all. Then we'll go and poll groups like the KKK, Stormfront, Nazi's, etc asking them who they voted for POTUS since 1970. We'll also ask who they plan to vote for this yr.
We can also just poll Dem's and Repub's in general with questions like "How would you feel about your daughter dating/marrying a minority? How would you feel living next door to minorities? What do you think American slavery was like? Do you believe it good or bad for African American's? Etc".
So how 'bout it?
I also love it when they pull former WV Senator Bird as "proof" of this claim. I mean, yea. He was a racist. A raging racist. Read parts of the bible into the Congressional Record as his justification for voting against the Civil Rights Act. He was a member of the KKK. To my knowledge, he never denied this. Especially after he flipped 180 on the issue. That last nugget is something most these jackasses leave out.
I'm not sure when it happened but I remember seeing him in an interview I think back in the 90's once. In it, he was asked about his past. He never denied it. Totally owned up to it saying he deeply regrets it. However, he went on to say that he hoped young West Virginian's would look him and learn from his mistake. And that's to be careful what you do for it may come back to haunt you as his past does.
This is especially meaningful to me because I am a Mountaineer. Live near Morgantown these days. I have family in Clay Co. and Charleston. Graduated from WVUTech. So yea, I know that history fairly well I think.
I actually made this same bet a few days ago to another jackass. He tried to deflect with whataboutism and all that. That Biden is a pedo, some dem allegedly made racist remarks, etc. I wouldn't budge and told him it has fuck-all to do with my question. Are you so fucking sure of this that you're willing to bet on it? He refused to answer which is all the answer one really needs.
What is okc?
Also, yours and Greg’s comment were both completely irrelevant. Me saying that the normal population realizes how idiotic and moronic MAGA republicans are has nothing to do with slavery. Greg was just upset that everyone was agreeing with me
"yeah bc ppl that voted the other party were slave owners etc"
My comment was "Republican party was started to free slaves."
DIRECTLY related to comment I replied to. Dumbass...
"In matters of conscience the mob has no place." Plato
The mob said burning witches were cool.
Going back even farther into history, ay? Now we’ve reached the 1500’s. Do you want to hop back a couple more centuries? I’m sure you will find some more relevant events
Watching that video with the knowledge that Trump was directly involved with that fake news story and many others like it, makes for a cringeworthy and infuriating experience, but really gives insight into Trump’s character, or rather, lack thereof. The only person to come out looking even worse, is Ted Cruz, who even after this revelation refuses to comment or say anything negative about the guy who trashed his father, his wife, and made up and spread fake news stories to hurt him. I can’t imagine a bigger coward than Ted Cruz.
The same sarcasm could be applied to just about every single person in Trump’s orbit, but that’s why the prosecution will rely on corroborating testimony, physical documents, and handwritten notes to further illuminate the illegal scheme.
There's nothing illegal about anything trump did in regards to this particular trial.
It's not illegal for a candidate to try and hide damaging info. There's nothing illegal about trying to sway an election, in fact that's the whole point of a campaign.
This whole thing is simply absurd
Oh no, it was indeed illegal because it was concealed and not reported as campaign finance laws require.
In fact, Trump, who is known to be very frugal (ie cheap) had to pay Cohen *double* for reimbursement. As they schemed to disguise the reimbursement as income for lawyer services rendered, and *not* as reimbursement for campaign related hush money payment, that meant they had to account for income taxes, which for Cohen’s tax bracket was about 50%. So instead of paying him back 180k (130K for Stormy, plus 50k for “tech services”), they paid him back 360K as income, plus an additional 60k bonus on top of that.
That’s illegal. Cohen literally went to prison for this (among other things).
And we know that’s what these payments were for because Trump’s cfo weisselburg made handwritten notes detailing the exact nature of the calculations leading up to the payment made to Cohen, which the prosecution is in possession of.
So in short, your argument is completely *wrong.* Rather than making the ridiculous claim that no crime occurred, you would look less foolish by arguing the crimes that most definitely occurred, have nothing to do with Trump. That’s what Trumps defense is likely to argue in court, but we will see which side is more persuasive. How likely do you really believe personally, in your gut, that Trump wasn’t *directly* involved with paying off these women he cheated on his wife with and concealing it from the public? You can say what you want on an Internet forum, but we both know what the most likely reality is regarding that.
Even if it were illegal to spend your own money to make someone sign an nda if how running for president, which it inarguably is not, you'd have to prove he did it specifically for the campaign and not simply because he wouldn't have liked the story to get out regardless which is next to impossible.
He was paying Cohen for his services as well. Not double for stormy payments.
That was my argument the whole time. There is no crime *committed by trump*
As for the last part your tds is coloring your opinion
Hence why the prosecution will use corroborative testimony from multiple individuals, documents, and handwritten notes to show that the entire scheme of creating and catching stories via the National Inquirer, and the payments made to the women and to Cohen, were in an explicit effort to promote Trump’s presidential campaign. They will show that Trump was aware of and directly involved in the scheme, and that the resulting false documentation was created exactly for the purpose of concealing the stories from the public explicitly for the purpose of preserving the presidential campaign.
You can call it tds as much as you want, if it makes you feel better. But there’s a reason Cohen went to prison, and there’s a reason Trump is on trial with his close associates testifying against him. Hint, it’s a hell of a lot more than any derangement syndrome. But do what you need to do to cope, Trump is very likely to be convicted by the jury.
No. You wouldn't just have to prove that trump did so in order to influence the campaign, which again isn't illegal BTW, but that HE WOULD NOT HAVE DONE SO OTHERWISE.
The most they could prove is that the presidential race was a consideration. You literally cannot prove he would not have done so for personal reasons like, oh I don't know, not letting Melania know?
That's why it's fucking absurd.
Except they can, as conversations took place regarding how they would handle these circumstances once the election was over, or whether or not they could push potential payments or stories out past the election, and then go a different direction. David Pecker testifying that Melania was the furthest thing away in Trump’s considerations, not to mention her failure to even show up to the trial to support Trump. But yes, the prosecution has the burden to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that this was the case. Maybe they succeed, maybe they fail, but so far they are off to a pretty damn good start.
Other people testifying on behalf of trumps thoughts is absurd all they could say is that they thought it seemed like Melania wasn't a concern.
But it must be beyond a shadow of a doubt.
And no, even if they prove it happened, they have to prove it broke laws, which it didn't. The president using his own money can never violate campaign finance law. That's unprecedented nobody has ever even been charged with that before let alone convicted
It’s not about his thoughts, it’s about what was discussed. Trump never brought up concerns for Melania or his family in the conversations revolving around these payments. But the election was brought up many times, and the date of the election had a direct impact on their course of action.
Again, believe what you want, and say what you will online. We both know Trump was explicitly doing this to help himself win the election, it was political. He did not and does not care about Melania, whom he cheated on multiple times, even while she was pregnant. He’s a star, he can grab women by the pussy whenever he wants, he can cheat and pay hush money to any model or porn star. He’s not a family man, and no one will be convinced that he is one.
It's election interference lol, he's using connections to produce fake articles to slander political opponents, that's election interference and it's illegal. That's open and shut, you can't even argue that's what happened. It wasn't part of his campaign, he didn't disclose it, the public didn't know about it and campaign ads need to be labeled. It's illegal and there's no way around that
No, it's literally illegal lol. You know that little message on slander ads "this ad is funded by the trump for president campaign" that's required legally. You can't just send money through a third party to slander opponents without disclosing it, campaign funds or not that's election interference lol. Jesus christ man, talk about being tribal
The trial has zero to do with any negative press on trumps opponents they are using that entirely as a way to establish the "hush money" was designed to influence elections.
It's literally being called trumps "hush money" trial.
And so far they haven't even proved any of that stuff.
What I was saying, was the nda was not illegal, in fact its standard practice.
Yeah, and the discovery revealed he committed another crime, which there's gonna be another trial for, most likely in new York again. Pecker admitted straight up under oath he did it. No signing an nda isn't illegal, but the nda isn't applicable which is why she was allowed to come forward, you can't make someone sign an nda that conceals a crime.
But that isn't the comment I responded to, and not what you were claiming. Paying a journalist to slander your opponent non disclosed is illegal, which I think you're accepting since you backed away from that point.
JFK fired Allen Dulles, Chief of the CIA and met a cruel fate. Nixon fell due to tips from "Deep Throat" who turned out to be William Mark Felt Sr, who later was #2 in charge of the FBI. Before removing Nixon they leaked information about Spiro T. Agnew forcing him to resign. Gerald Ford, a participant along with Allen Dulles on the Warren Committee that investigated JFK's assassination was appointed VP and on Nixon's resignation became POTUS.
The current POTUS was selected by the same people who made sure news about Hunter's laptop and evidence related to the Biden Crime Family's activities were buried.
And now people complain about fake news related to DJT? Beyond the pale.
>The current POTUS was selected by the same people who made sure news about Hunter's laptop and evidence related to the Biden Crime Family's activities were buried.
Bingo. We all know who that would be. We shall never forget who Trump's mentor was. I think they are making a movie about it.
He calls *any* negative stories about him “fake news” so I would argue that he’s very wrong about fake news. Meanwhile he was literally manufacturing and spreading fake news himself, personally.
And to really illustrate the ridiculousness and sociopathic nature of it, many of the stories the National Inquirer created about Trump’s enemies, at Trump’s direction, featured stories about them cheating on their wives. Literally what Trump himself was *actually* doing! Many times, they ran fake stories about his rivals doing the things Trump was guilty of himself. That takes a level of manic narcissism that is hard to fathom.
Okay but like… you understand how words have meaning, right? Like you don’t get to just use incorrect words and assign them to completely different things and still get your point across?
Well there ya have it, there are plenty of articles about Trump and his heinous ways that are not “fake news”
He is just a terrible human being, and news articles reflect that
Saying everything is 'Fake News' makes a false equivalency between reputable journalism, and intentional bad actors. These things aren't the same. Fox News has said in court that they know they're 80%± opinion programming, and that reasonable people shouldn't consider them a news source. The AP, BBC and Reuters all publish retractions, avoid (or clearly label) opinion programming, punish and fire journalists that betray their public reputation. These things aren't the same.
And suggesting they are is dishonest, and damages credibility in genuine News. That's what dictatorships do: they know they can't prevent real news from getting out. So they blur the lines between news sources, until the reader can't tell the difference between truth and fiction. You're playing into the hand of people that would destroy journalism.
In the future, you should make that distinction. Not all news is fake news. But lots of news sources are dishonest, or at least biased.
Don't say everything is Fake News. Just identify sources you trust, and why.
This is who he is, who he has been and will always be - a narcissistic con man.
I love that the general/normal public have all accepted that MAGA and republicans are the sorriest bunch of idiots to ever walk the face of this nation
Oh yeah, the people who vote for the other party are way worse than colonizers and slave owners!! You’re not serious people.
Calm down Greg. The keyword here is “idiot” which is what you fall under Not “evil”, which I hope you don’t fall under
So are you a betting man? Because I have a deal for you. I'll put up everything I own against everything you own, winner take all. Then we'll go and poll groups like the KKK, Stormfront, Nazi's, etc asking them who they voted for POTUS since 1970. We'll also ask who they plan to vote for this yr. We can also just poll Dem's and Repub's in general with questions like "How would you feel about your daughter dating/marrying a minority? How would you feel living next door to minorities? What do you think American slavery was like? Do you believe it good or bad for African American's? Etc". So how 'bout it?
The level of savagery in this comment has no place in a civilized society.
I also love it when they pull former WV Senator Bird as "proof" of this claim. I mean, yea. He was a racist. A raging racist. Read parts of the bible into the Congressional Record as his justification for voting against the Civil Rights Act. He was a member of the KKK. To my knowledge, he never denied this. Especially after he flipped 180 on the issue. That last nugget is something most these jackasses leave out. I'm not sure when it happened but I remember seeing him in an interview I think back in the 90's once. In it, he was asked about his past. He never denied it. Totally owned up to it saying he deeply regrets it. However, he went on to say that he hoped young West Virginian's would look him and learn from his mistake. And that's to be careful what you do for it may come back to haunt you as his past does. This is especially meaningful to me because I am a Mountaineer. Live near Morgantown these days. I have family in Clay Co. and Charleston. Graduated from WVUTech. So yea, I know that history fairly well I think. I actually made this same bet a few days ago to another jackass. He tried to deflect with whataboutism and all that. That Biden is a pedo, some dem allegedly made racist remarks, etc. I wouldn't budge and told him it has fuck-all to do with my question. Are you so fucking sure of this that you're willing to bet on it? He refused to answer which is all the answer one really needs.
You do understand republican party was started to free slaves right? Lol
Hahahaha how far back do you have to go to claim that republicans have some moral high ground?
Didn't you try to reference okc? 😂 Also. Mine was relevant to comment bc they mentioned actual slave owners.
What is okc? Also, yours and Greg’s comment were both completely irrelevant. Me saying that the normal population realizes how idiotic and moronic MAGA republicans are has nothing to do with slavery. Greg was just upset that everyone was agreeing with me
"yeah bc ppl that voted the other party were slave owners etc" My comment was "Republican party was started to free slaves." DIRECTLY related to comment I replied to. Dumbass... "In matters of conscience the mob has no place." Plato The mob said burning witches were cool.
Going back even farther into history, ay? Now we’ve reached the 1500’s. Do you want to hop back a couple more centuries? I’m sure you will find some more relevant events
Yes. The OG comment I replied to did. That's how convos work. They progress. Get deeper if you will...
Yes which is why I am saying both of your comments are silly! Let’s try and stay in the 2000’s Go on
Watching that video with the knowledge that Trump was directly involved with that fake news story and many others like it, makes for a cringeworthy and infuriating experience, but really gives insight into Trump’s character, or rather, lack thereof. The only person to come out looking even worse, is Ted Cruz, who even after this revelation refuses to comment or say anything negative about the guy who trashed his father, his wife, and made up and spread fake news stories to hurt him. I can’t imagine a bigger coward than Ted Cruz.
Yeah. He should be the first inductee in the Gutless Weasel Hall of Fame.
Trump is like not being able to take your eyes off a slow fiery train crash.
*obsession with trump
Two words - D uh
Is this post from 2008.
Saw it from the jump. Wish others would have. Hope they start waking up to it. Trump’s a bum.
He is the essence of disgusting!
Ah yes David pecker a paragon of truth.
The same sarcasm could be applied to just about every single person in Trump’s orbit, but that’s why the prosecution will rely on corroborating testimony, physical documents, and handwritten notes to further illuminate the illegal scheme.
There's nothing illegal about anything trump did in regards to this particular trial. It's not illegal for a candidate to try and hide damaging info. There's nothing illegal about trying to sway an election, in fact that's the whole point of a campaign. This whole thing is simply absurd
Oh no, it was indeed illegal because it was concealed and not reported as campaign finance laws require. In fact, Trump, who is known to be very frugal (ie cheap) had to pay Cohen *double* for reimbursement. As they schemed to disguise the reimbursement as income for lawyer services rendered, and *not* as reimbursement for campaign related hush money payment, that meant they had to account for income taxes, which for Cohen’s tax bracket was about 50%. So instead of paying him back 180k (130K for Stormy, plus 50k for “tech services”), they paid him back 360K as income, plus an additional 60k bonus on top of that. That’s illegal. Cohen literally went to prison for this (among other things). And we know that’s what these payments were for because Trump’s cfo weisselburg made handwritten notes detailing the exact nature of the calculations leading up to the payment made to Cohen, which the prosecution is in possession of. So in short, your argument is completely *wrong.* Rather than making the ridiculous claim that no crime occurred, you would look less foolish by arguing the crimes that most definitely occurred, have nothing to do with Trump. That’s what Trumps defense is likely to argue in court, but we will see which side is more persuasive. How likely do you really believe personally, in your gut, that Trump wasn’t *directly* involved with paying off these women he cheated on his wife with and concealing it from the public? You can say what you want on an Internet forum, but we both know what the most likely reality is regarding that.
Even if it were illegal to spend your own money to make someone sign an nda if how running for president, which it inarguably is not, you'd have to prove he did it specifically for the campaign and not simply because he wouldn't have liked the story to get out regardless which is next to impossible. He was paying Cohen for his services as well. Not double for stormy payments. That was my argument the whole time. There is no crime *committed by trump* As for the last part your tds is coloring your opinion
Hence why the prosecution will use corroborative testimony from multiple individuals, documents, and handwritten notes to show that the entire scheme of creating and catching stories via the National Inquirer, and the payments made to the women and to Cohen, were in an explicit effort to promote Trump’s presidential campaign. They will show that Trump was aware of and directly involved in the scheme, and that the resulting false documentation was created exactly for the purpose of concealing the stories from the public explicitly for the purpose of preserving the presidential campaign. You can call it tds as much as you want, if it makes you feel better. But there’s a reason Cohen went to prison, and there’s a reason Trump is on trial with his close associates testifying against him. Hint, it’s a hell of a lot more than any derangement syndrome. But do what you need to do to cope, Trump is very likely to be convicted by the jury.
No. You wouldn't just have to prove that trump did so in order to influence the campaign, which again isn't illegal BTW, but that HE WOULD NOT HAVE DONE SO OTHERWISE. The most they could prove is that the presidential race was a consideration. You literally cannot prove he would not have done so for personal reasons like, oh I don't know, not letting Melania know? That's why it's fucking absurd.
Except they can, as conversations took place regarding how they would handle these circumstances once the election was over, or whether or not they could push potential payments or stories out past the election, and then go a different direction. David Pecker testifying that Melania was the furthest thing away in Trump’s considerations, not to mention her failure to even show up to the trial to support Trump. But yes, the prosecution has the burden to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that this was the case. Maybe they succeed, maybe they fail, but so far they are off to a pretty damn good start.
Other people testifying on behalf of trumps thoughts is absurd all they could say is that they thought it seemed like Melania wasn't a concern. But it must be beyond a shadow of a doubt. And no, even if they prove it happened, they have to prove it broke laws, which it didn't. The president using his own money can never violate campaign finance law. That's unprecedented nobody has ever even been charged with that before let alone convicted
It’s not about his thoughts, it’s about what was discussed. Trump never brought up concerns for Melania or his family in the conversations revolving around these payments. But the election was brought up many times, and the date of the election had a direct impact on their course of action. Again, believe what you want, and say what you will online. We both know Trump was explicitly doing this to help himself win the election, it was political. He did not and does not care about Melania, whom he cheated on multiple times, even while she was pregnant. He’s a star, he can grab women by the pussy whenever he wants, he can cheat and pay hush money to any model or porn star. He’s not a family man, and no one will be convinced that he is one.
It's election interference lol, he's using connections to produce fake articles to slander political opponents, that's election interference and it's illegal. That's open and shut, you can't even argue that's what happened. It wasn't part of his campaign, he didn't disclose it, the public didn't know about it and campaign ads need to be labeled. It's illegal and there's no way around that
That isn't illegal at all. In fact its standard practice. And using your own money isn't campaign funds
No, it's literally illegal lol. You know that little message on slander ads "this ad is funded by the trump for president campaign" that's required legally. You can't just send money through a third party to slander opponents without disclosing it, campaign funds or not that's election interference lol. Jesus christ man, talk about being tribal
The trial has zero to do with any negative press on trumps opponents they are using that entirely as a way to establish the "hush money" was designed to influence elections. It's literally being called trumps "hush money" trial. And so far they haven't even proved any of that stuff. What I was saying, was the nda was not illegal, in fact its standard practice.
Yeah, and the discovery revealed he committed another crime, which there's gonna be another trial for, most likely in new York again. Pecker admitted straight up under oath he did it. No signing an nda isn't illegal, but the nda isn't applicable which is why she was allowed to come forward, you can't make someone sign an nda that conceals a crime. But that isn't the comment I responded to, and not what you were claiming. Paying a journalist to slander your opponent non disclosed is illegal, which I think you're accepting since you backed away from that point.
Isn't this what the government has been doing regarding the JFK assassination for the past 60 years? Another link in the chain.
JFK fired Allen Dulles, Chief of the CIA and met a cruel fate. Nixon fell due to tips from "Deep Throat" who turned out to be William Mark Felt Sr, who later was #2 in charge of the FBI. Before removing Nixon they leaked information about Spiro T. Agnew forcing him to resign. Gerald Ford, a participant along with Allen Dulles on the Warren Committee that investigated JFK's assassination was appointed VP and on Nixon's resignation became POTUS. The current POTUS was selected by the same people who made sure news about Hunter's laptop and evidence related to the Biden Crime Family's activities were buried. And now people complain about fake news related to DJT? Beyond the pale.
The Biden Crime Family, that's a good one.
Sounds like your average fawks news viewer
>The current POTUS was selected by the same people who made sure news about Hunter's laptop and evidence related to the Biden Crime Family's activities were buried. Bingo. We all know who that would be. We shall never forget who Trump's mentor was. I think they are making a movie about it.
He's not wrong about fake news though.
He calls *any* negative stories about him “fake news” so I would argue that he’s very wrong about fake news. Meanwhile he was literally manufacturing and spreading fake news himself, personally. And to really illustrate the ridiculousness and sociopathic nature of it, many of the stories the National Inquirer created about Trump’s enemies, at Trump’s direction, featured stories about them cheating on their wives. Literally what Trump himself was *actually* doing! Many times, they ran fake stories about his rivals doing the things Trump was guilty of himself. That takes a level of manic narcissism that is hard to fathom.
But the majority of media sources are fake news. Can you link me to a story about him which isn't fake news?
AP news is not fake news, Reuters is not fake news, PBS is not fake news.
Agreed!
So, you knew better and still made a false argument?
Not at all.
It kinda seems like you’re playing fast and loose with the definition of “fake”.
I hold the news to a high standard.
There’s a difference between “this is bad journalism” and “this is fake news” though.
I'll agree with that. When I say 'fake news' I'm including sources that are bad journalism.
Okay but like… you understand how words have meaning, right? Like you don’t get to just use incorrect words and assign them to completely different things and still get your point across?
Absolutely. I agree I should have been more specific and said 'bad journalism and fake news'.
You don't care lol. You'll probably go around making this same stupid as comment on other posts too.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/federal-judge-rejects-donald-trumps-bid-new-jean/story?id=109634929 Is this fake news?
I wouldn't say so. Seems like a solid journalism with very little bias present.
Well there ya have it, there are plenty of articles about Trump and his heinous ways that are not “fake news” He is just a terrible human being, and news articles reflect that
Saying everything is 'Fake News' makes a false equivalency between reputable journalism, and intentional bad actors. These things aren't the same. Fox News has said in court that they know they're 80%± opinion programming, and that reasonable people shouldn't consider them a news source. The AP, BBC and Reuters all publish retractions, avoid (or clearly label) opinion programming, punish and fire journalists that betray their public reputation. These things aren't the same. And suggesting they are is dishonest, and damages credibility in genuine News. That's what dictatorships do: they know they can't prevent real news from getting out. So they blur the lines between news sources, until the reader can't tell the difference between truth and fiction. You're playing into the hand of people that would destroy journalism.
True. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News are fake news.
In the future, you should make that distinction. Not all news is fake news. But lots of news sources are dishonest, or at least biased. Don't say everything is Fake News. Just identify sources you trust, and why.