US Politics Thread

[RupertKBD]

4 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said:

I don't "have" to make any assumptions.  I'm not perfect and I'm not a lawyer or judge.  I don't pretend to be an expert at law either.  This is all my assumptions based on past political prosecutions I've seen both nationally and here in NY.  I could be right in my opinions, or I could be wrong. 

 

I prefer having discussions rather than "winning" them.  I don't get the winning a discussion mentality some people have.

 

Unlike a fair amount of people who post over the internet, I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong or changing an opinion if presented with well reasoned arguments.

 

I apologize when I make mistakes that mislead others or even when I misunderstand and derail or confuse others in what's being discussed.

 

I prefer to enjoy my conversations with people.  Not try and have a half-assed competition with them that I won't remember days after.

 

It's why I enjoy talking with you.  You seem to be of like mind and when I've apologized for not correctly wording something or misunderstanding something you've said, it's over and done with immediately and you don't try and do weird "victory" dances.

 

Even on here and the old CDC, I would watch people who couldn't carry on collegiality in their discussions.  Fortunately they would usually go away when others stopped talking to them.

 

I more or less agree with all of this. That being said, we'll have to agree to disagree on the reason for all of these criminal charges. As I've pointed out in the past, they were all approved by Grand Juries with no particular political affiliation. The people who approved those Indictments were not exclusively "democrats", or "Trump haters"....they were people who believed criminal charges were warranted.

 

Of course, just like you, this is purely my opinion....

[4petesake]

1 hour ago, D.B Cooper said:

Jesus fucking hell. 
How many pages do we need to do the back and forth between which old man is dumber?  
They are both horrible old cunts and the entire country should be ashamed for letting themselves be stuck with the two.   
Neither are better or worse than the other. 
They both suck so bad, and if you support either of them, you are just as fucking stupid.  
 

Can we please move on to real topics?   

 

Sure, bring one up. Or like my wife, am I supposed to read your mind to know what you want to talk about?

[D.B Cooper]

1 hour ago, Sharpshooter said:

One’s policies is better for the American people and the world, than the other’s. 
 

Those are the choices regardless of age. 

 

1 hour ago, bishopshodan said:

 

In the US politics thread you are going to get chatter about the two guys running for POTUS. If there is concern about their mental capacity, then that chatter will and should be alot.

 

And,IMO, If you cant see that one is worse than the other... something, something, fucking stupid. 

They are the two worst choices that they could possibly have.  
 

We have seen what they both can and can’t do.   
Either way, those poor folks are going to have a dog shit 4 years. 
 

Yes, clearly one is a little less evil, but still a fuck face in his own…

 

The same couple of people have had the same ‘my dad can beat up your dad’ thing for days and it has gone nowhere.  
 

 

[D.B Cooper]

1 minute ago, 4petesake said:

 

Sure, bring one up. Or like my wife, am I supposed to read your mind to know what you want to talk about?

Well if you don’t already know, I don’t know what to tell you.

[4petesake]

Just now, D.B Cooper said:

Well if you don’t already know, I don’t know what to tell you.

Bazinga!

This guy gets it.

Edited March 5 by 4petesake

[bishopshodan]

2 minutes ago, D.B Cooper said:

 

They are the two worst choices that they could possibly have.  
 

We have seen what they both can and can’t do.   
Either way, those poor folks are going to have a dog shit 4 years. 
 

Yes, clearly one is a little less evil, but still a fuck face in his own…

 

The same couple of people have had the same ‘my dad can beat up your dad’ thing for days and it has gone nowhere.  
 

 

 

OK, 

Now i dont mind that rant as much. I agree they are shit choices. 

 

However, one is worse than the other.  Thats what I wanted to clear up with ya. Thank you. 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

@Cerridwen gave me at least 6 Demko blocks.  I think she has a crush on me really...   

 

It doesn't matter how many blocks Demko tries on me, I am still going to score...   

 

Oh wait, I just got a wiener too.  There is no way I am playing with that fat boy Kessel...   

Edited March 5 by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

5 hours ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

It doesn't.

 

All this ruling does is sets the bar a little higher.  Like, being indicted or convicted for the actual crimes that are listed in the amendment.  It's kinda the same reason why steps to remove Santos early on failed.  In that case, it wasn't until after the ethics investigation and further indictments happened that he was ultimately removed.  

 

Republicans had their chance to prevent TRUMP from running.  They chose not to.  I say Republicans here because the Colorado case was initiated by Republicans.

 

 

EDIT:  The case that will really destroy the constitution is the immunity decision that the SCOTUS is dragging their feet on.  That is the one.

 

The problem I see with the immunity case is that it is going to cause a huge delay with the trial and the trial will most likely not get resolved until after the election.

 

If this happens and Trump somehow wins the election, I highly doubt they are going to put him in jail.  I mean has that ever happened before?  Also, if the SCOTUS rules that Presidents aren't immune from being prosecuted for actions they did while in office, what is to stop Trump from hiring some lackey as his Attorney General to then go after all of the other former Presidents?  Didn't Trump say he would be on his "revenge" tour if he wins the Presidency?

Edited March 5 by Elias Pettersson

[RupertKBD]

1 hour ago, D.B Cooper said:

Jesus fucking hell. 
How many pages do we need to do the back and forth between which old man is dumber?  
They are both horrible old cunts and the entire country should be ashamed for letting themselves be stuck with the two.   
Neither are better or worse than the other. 
They both suck so bad, and if you support either of them, you are just as fucking stupid.  
 

Can we please move on to real topics?   

 

Okay, I'll bite....what makes Biden "horrible" and why should anyone who supports him be "ashamed"?

[RupertKBD]

3 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

 

 

Yeah, but he's doing it "on purpose"....

[The Arrogant Worms]

[Chicken.]

3 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

 

Didnt seem that bad to me, though he is looking an increasingly darker shade of orange than what I recall lol

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, Sapper said:

If the supreme court feels that actions of a sitting president to change election results is not grounds to be removed from a ballot then they have made it near impossible for the courts to remove a president

 

All.trump.has to do once back in office is declare he feels his rightful term was stolen and order that he has the right to run again .... And again 

 

It's not just the conservative judges but all of them have basically exempted a president from being held to the constitution. This needs to be fixed but can't until politics in the states returns to some level.of sanity

 

The absolute best thing for the USA is if both Biden and Trump went into full retirement and bowed out ..... Will.neber happen sadly

 

Wasn't the 9-0 vote simply to allow Trump back onto the ballot?  What does the actions of a sitting President have to do with anything?  Are you insinuating that Trump should be barred from being the Republican candidate?  If so, doesn't that go right to what Trump is saying, that that would constitute election interference?

 

If people are worried that Trump might beat Biden, then Biden shouldn't be the candidate.  Like I said already, they should do the switcheroo and put Michelle Obama on the ballot to ensure victory.  This is the legal way to do things.  If people are so confident that Biden is capable enough to run again, then really there is nothing to worry about, correct?

 

And I already brought up the point about the immunity case.  If SCOTUS rules in Jack Smith's favour and the trial doesn't conclude until after the election and Trump wins, then don't be surprised if Trump uses that ruling in his favour and goes after all of his political enemies while he is the President.  He literally already said he was going to do this.  Which will turn the USA into a banana republic...

[the destroyer of worlds]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

The problem I see with the immunity case is that it is going to cause a huge delay with the trial and the trial will most likely not get resolved until after the election.

 

If this happens and Trump somehow wins the election, I highly doubt they are going to put him in jail.  I mean has that ever happened before?  Also, is the SCOTUS rule that President's aren't immune from being prosecuted for actions they did while in office, what is to stop Trump from hiring some lackey as his Attorney General to then go after all of the other former Presidents?  Didn't Trump say he would be on his "revenge" tour if he wins the Presidency?

Good, maybe stuff like Iran Contra would actually lead to presidents getting indicted.  

 

If there is evidence of malfeasance, then you must imdict them.  

 

In what planet is any of the crimes TRUMP is indicted for stuff that is regular Presidential duties.   The answer is NONE and he should not be immune from prosecution for any.  

[D.B Cooper]

1 hour ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Okay, I'll bite....what makes Biden "horrible" and why should anyone who supports him be "ashamed"?

Oh you again. 
My apologies. Biden is fucking fantastic. 
He isn’t super old and clearly losing it. 
The Democrats are absolutely perfect.  
Have a great night

[Sapper]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Wasn't the 9-0 vote simply to allow Trump back onto the ballot?  What does the actions of a sitting President have to do with anything?  Are you insinuating that Trump should be barred from being the Republican candidate?  If so, doesn't that go right to what Trump is saying, that that would constitute election interference?

 

If people are worried that Trump might beat Biden, then Biden shouldn't be the candidate.  Like I said already, they should do the switcheroo and put Michelle Obama on the ballot to ensure victory.  This is the legal way to do things.  If people are so confident that Biden is capable enough to run again, then really there is nothing to worry about, correct?

 

And I already brought up the point about the immunity case.  If SCOTUS rules in Jack Smith's favour and the trial doesn't conclude until after the election and Trump wins, then don't be surprised if Trump uses that ruling in his favour and goes after all of his political enemies while he is the President.  He literally already said he was going to do this.  Which will turn the USA into a banana republic...

They should have formally charged with with leading an insurrection.  Seems they courts.ruling relies on the fact that he isn't a convicted insurectionist .. just accused 

 

Which leads back to the uselessness of the constitution if Trump can attempt to lead the overthrow of government then be able.to stall justice just long enough to get back in power and pardon himself

 

The perfect crime.

 

 

 

 

[PistolPete13]

6 hours ago, Wiggums said:

 

The media has been trolling him for the last 8 years.  The true and biggest threat to democracy is that, the media.  

Freedom of the press. Something every fascist opposes. 

[RupertKBD]

6 minutes ago, D.B Cooper said:

Oh you again. 
My apologies. Biden is fucking fantastic. 
He isn’t super old and clearly losing it. 
The Democrats are absolutely perfect.  
Have a great night

Sooo....you've got nothing?

 

I disagree that being old makes one horrible...nor should anyone be ashamed of supporting someone that age.....especially considering the alternative.

[Elias Pettersson]

4 minutes ago, Sapper said:

They should have formally charged with with leading an insurrection.  Seems they courts.ruling relies on the fact that he isn't a convicted insurectionist .. just accused 

 

Which leads back to the uselessness of the constitution if Trump can attempt to lead the overthrow of government then be able.to stall justice just long enough to get back in power and pardon himself

 

The perfect crime.

 

 

 

 

 

He's literally charged with like 90 criminal offences as we speak.  So, the issue is not charging and indicting him.  The issue is whether any of these 90 charges will lead to a conviction before the election.  Seems like nothing is going to happen prior to the election, which is the biggest problem right now.  

 

Again, if people are confident that Biden can beat him, then there shouldn't be an issue.  Biden will win the Presidency again and Trump is fucked and will go to jail.  However, if Trump actually wins, then all bets are off.

 

I'm of the opinion that the risk is too high to run Biden again and they should do the switcheroo and put Michelle Obama on the ballot.  However, most other people disagree with me.  Which is totally fine.  We will see how it all plays out in about 8 months time...

[PistolPete13]

6 hours ago, Wiggums said:

 

Why?  He admitted this months ago..  He says he believes Obama is still running the whitehouse which is another troll job cause clearly Joe doesn't have the mental capacity to do so himself.  

 

It's the only thing he messes up repeatedly...cause it's on purpose, like I said he's been doing it for months.

 

You're on the line, not me.  You probably still think he called his wife Mercedes too 

 

 

Is this your yearbook picture?

 

 

[D.B Cooper]

33 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

Sooo....you've got nothing?

 

I disagree that being old makes one horrible...nor should anyone be ashamed of supporting someone that age.....especially considering the alternative.

I enjoy and respect your opinions on hockey. 
All our previous conversations outside of that tend to be annoying, so to keep it respectful, I’m going to decline this one.  
Cheers!

[CBH1926]

11 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

Since some people here prefer CNN still, the Russians, according to them, have lost 87% of their troops and 2/3 of all of it's tanks, and 1/3 of their lite fighting vehicles.  I'm amazed Putin still has such a grip on power after his troops were so badly exposed.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/12/politics/russia-troop-losses-us-intelligence-assessment/index.html

 

 

It's going to take Russia years to build back their ground forces to the point where just the UK and/or France can't overwhelm their advances.  As far as Russia goes, the only thing keeping them from being invaded by the paper tiger EU is their nuclear arsenal.

if these analysts think that Russia lost 315k troops out of initial 360k, they are out to lunch.

To me lost means killed, being wounded doesn’t necessarily mean you won’t be back on the battlefield.

As in every war, losses are exaggerated for the propaganda purposes. Russians have suffered big losses but I think their army is still able to wage a large scale war.

 

 

[Spur1]

3 hours ago, D.B Cooper said:

Oh you again. 
My apologies. Biden is fucking fantastic. 
He isn’t super old and clearly losing it. 
The Democrats are absolutely perfect.  
Have a great night

You said it. 

[coho8888]

4 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

He's literally charged with like 90 criminal offences as we speak.  So, the issue is not charging and indicting him.  The issue is whether any of these 90 charges will lead to a conviction before the election.  Seems like nothing is going to happen prior to the election, which is the biggest problem right now.  

 

Again, if people are confident that Biden can beat him, then there shouldn't be an issue.  Biden will win the Presidency again and Trump is fucked and will go to jail.  However, if Trump actually wins, then all bets are off.

 

I'm of the opinion that the risk is too high to run Biden again and they should do the switcheroo and put Michelle Obama on the ballot.  However, most other people disagree with me.  Which is totally fine.  We will see how it all plays out in about 8 months time...

I think if Michelle would consider being the running mate instead of Kamala, that would be optimal.  The democrats would have a great relief pitcher ready.

[Sabrefan1]

4 hours ago, CBH1926 said:

if these analysts think that Russia lost 315k troops out of initial 360k, they are out to lunch.

To me lost means killed, being wounded doesn’t necessarily mean you won’t be back on the battlefield.

As in every war, losses are exaggerated for the propaganda purposes. Russians have suffered big losses but I think their army is still able to wage a large scale war.

 

I'm just going by what that source is publishing.  According to them 315k are no longer in fighting shape.  CNN, along with MSNBC, is among this board's "approved" and highly revered sources of news.  I don't do loads of Google searches, but when I do, I try to find sources that people will accept.

 

Unless of course I'm purposely posting something that brings a little sound proofing to the echo chamber habits of some. 

 

Speaking of which, I was going to make mention of the MSM ignoring some primaries and post some Trump Primary numbers in red states where only Republicans can vote but since tomorrow is Super Tuesday, I'm curious to see how they'll report those first.