Discussion:
Bruce Castor: Trump lawyer offers bewildering defence statement
(too old to reply)
Tekkie©
2021-02-12 20:30:29 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:20:33 -0800, Bob F posted for all of us to digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-12 20:33:29 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 06:35:56 -0600, Jim Joyce posted for all of us to digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-12 20:35:10 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 05:07:38 -0800 (PST), trader_4 posted for all of us to
digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
A president could just decide to say screw you, I'm going fishing and refuse
to do his job. Or they could decide that from now on they will decide whether
to sign or veto a bill based on a coin flip.
That would not be a federal crime, so I guess according to
Fretwell, that would not be cause for removal either. Could someone be
convicted of inciting that riot in a criminal trial, based on just one speech
on Jan 6? Doubtful. Could someone be convicted in a criminal court for
two months of lies and agitation, plus the final speech? Maybe yes. But that isn't
the question, it's not the standard for a PRESIDENT, who is sworn to preserve
protect and defend the Constitution. For two months Trump directly assaulted
the Constitution and our democracy, by claiming we worst than a third world
country, with a "stolen election", all based on lies. He betrayed his oath of
office, incited those people with lies and hate and we saw the result on Jan 6.
I was watching part of the presentation yesterday. Very powerful. They showed
how Republicans in Congress, under siege and fearing for their lives, were
communicating with Trump, telling him he needed to tell the mob to stop
and Trump did NOTHING. They showed the mob inside the Capitol, repeating
what Trump had just tweeted, proving they were listening to him and he could
have stopped it. Hours later, when he finally did do something, he started off
by lying again about the election being stolen, that he understands
why people are doing this. He finally did call
for an end to violence but he also praised the insurrection,
calling them great people and patriots. And that night, after it was over,
he sent out a message again praising them, "we love you", and telling America
that's what you get when you steal an election. This guy really is one
real POS. And the Democrats laid it all out, with more coming today.
I hear they may have a message sequence that shows that while the mob
was screaming to kill Pence and Trump knew he was in danger, Trump
sent out another message attacking Trump. Having seen this I was beginning
to think maybe another 10 Republicans will stop fearing Trump and the
Trumpets, become Americans again and vote to convict. But then I
realized that's still very unlikely. Which is why something like 150K people
have left the Republican party last month. Something like 12K in PA for
example. There was no fraud anything like that, but 12K certainly could
have changed the results in GA and could change the results in 2022 in
many states.
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-12 20:37:41 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 16:33:34 -0600, Jim Joyce posted for all of us to digest...
Post by Tekkie©
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 05:07:38 -0800 (PST), trader_4
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
A president could just decide to say screw you, I'm going fishing and refuse
to do his job. Or they could decide that from now on they will decide whether
to sign or veto a bill based on a coin flip.
That would not be a federal crime, so I guess according to
Fretwell, that would not be cause for removal either. Could someone be
convicted of inciting that riot in a criminal trial, based on just one speech
on Jan 6? Doubtful. Could someone be convicted in a criminal court for
two months of lies and agitation, plus the final speech? Maybe yes. But that isn't
the question, it's not the standard for a PRESIDENT, who is sworn to preserve
protect and defend the Constitution. For two months Trump directly assaulted
the Constitution and our democracy, by claiming we worst than a third world
country, with a "stolen election", all based on lies. He betrayed his oath of
office, incited those people with lies and hate and we saw the result on Jan 6.
I was watching part of the presentation yesterday. Very powerful. They showed
how Republicans in Congress, under siege and fearing for their lives, were
communicating with Trump, telling him he needed to tell the mob to stop
and Trump did NOTHING. They showed the mob inside the Capitol, repeating
what Trump had just tweeted, proving they were listening to him and he could
have stopped it. Hours later, when he finally did do something, he started off
by lying again about the election being stolen, that he understands
why people are doing this. He finally did call
for an end to violence but he also praised the insurrection,
calling them great people and patriots. And that night, after it was over,
he sent out a message again praising them, "we love you", and telling America
that's what you get when you steal an election. This guy really is one
real POS. And the Democrats laid it all out, with more coming today.
I hear they may have a message sequence that shows that while the mob
was screaming to kill Pence and Trump knew he was in danger, Trump
sent out another message attacking Trump. Having seen this I was beginning
to think maybe another 10 Republicans will stop fearing Trump and the
Trumpets, become Americans again and vote to convict. But then I
realized that's still very unlikely. Which is why something like 150K people
have left the Republican party last month. Something like 12K in PA for
example. There was no fraud anything like that, but 12K certainly could
have changed the results in GA and could change the results in 2022 in
many states.
You still keep ignoring the fact that Trump is not the president
You keep ignoring the fact that Trump was the President up until noon on
January 20th of this year. The behavior that got him impeached for the
second time happened while he was President. The impeachment also happened
while he was President. The Senate trial would have, and could have, taken
place while he was still President, but McConnell blocked it, pushing it
off to when Biden would take over as President.
If you have a problem with a Senate impeachment trial taking place after
the crook has left office, you can talk to McConnell about that, but you
have a much bigger problem in that there is plenty of precedent for holding
an impeachment trial after the person has left office. Use your head for a
change. If a person could avoid an impeachment trial by simply leaving
office, what would that say about a person being above the law? Why are you
against law and order?
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-12 21:04:14 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 08:02:43 -0500, ***@aol.com posted for all of us to
digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
Impeachment applies to public servants. Trump is a private citizen
with no connection at all to the government. If he is being accused of
something he deserves his day in court with all of the liabilities and
dangers that presents.
The democrats are not willing to do that because they might not even
get an indictment. It is a lot easier to do this political hit job
when they control the indictment process, own the "judge" and have
half the "jury" convinced he was guilty since November of 2016. They
also do not need to prove their case without a shadow of a doubt and
2/3ds convicts.
This is not a trial, it is an inquisition and will only make Trump
stronger when he wins. They still don't have the votes, even in this
kangaroo court.
You folks have only enhanced his martyr status with 74 million voters.
Biden will be the big loser here. The divide just became wider.
Happy now?
I will also note that the voters of both parties will get a whiff of this
shitshow and think about all the money and time spent when the country in the
midst of a pandemic, and mounting debt that won't be paid until the gov't runs
out of paper. Disregard people from other countries that come in and being
resettled without Covid testing while the existing population is being forced
to shelter in place and wear double masks (today's edict) and being prosecuted
for such and deportees with major felonies come back to commit the same crimes
again without having to post bail or answer for them.

Be aware of the Newsome recall effort, maybe people are waking up that carrot
has already been eaten and the stick is now used as a whip.

Posted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 19:47:31 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 11:50:30 -0800 (PST), trader_4 posted for all of us to
digest...
And you neglected to mention that he said "peacefully" ONE time early on, and used "FIGHT" 20 times. Just a trump CYA.
But it's acceptable when the communist democrats use the phrase "fight like hell", is it?
Democrats are two-faced deceitful hypocrites.
https://news.yahoo.com/unearthed-tweets-show-jamie-raskin-212526080.html
If the result of any Democrat whipping up a mob was an attack on the Capitol or
similar, then I'm sure they would be facing the consequences too. And this was
not just one speech, it was an aggressive incitement with despicable lies that
targeted the heart of our democracy that went on for two full months. Watch
the impeachment trial, they are doing an excellent job of documenting all that
Trump has done going all the way back to his campaign that encouraged violence,
like telling his crowd to assault a protester, that he would pay their legal bills.
The best example is the nut from New Mexico, a county commissioner who
organized cowboys for Trump. They showed pictures of him with Trump,
that Trump has talked extensively with him on the phone. Last spring that guy
put up a Youtube video where he says that "the only good Democrat is a dead
Democrat". Trump re-tweeted it. On Jan 6 that scum was arrested inside
the Capitol. He went back to NM, is on another video promising that a second
amendment rally is coming and there will be blood pouring down the steps of
the Capitol. You'd have to be totally in denial to not see that Trump motivated
people like that, they came to DC at his request, they were there to do what
he wanted them to do, "stop the steal". What method was left to do that on
Jan 6, other than the insurrection?
Take your made up news, hate and vitriol to:
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 19:53:22 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 12:51:43 -0800 (PST), trader_4 posted for all of us to
digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
And you neglected to mention that he said "peacefully" ONE time early
on, and used "FIGHT" 20 times. Just a trump CYA.
All his stooges CLEARLY understood his message, and his complete FAILURE
to ever try to stop their violence PROVES that violence was his
intention, as was his excitement while watching it all day.
The fact that Trump stood by for hours, while Congressmen inside the Capitol
were pleading for their lives, on the phone with him, asking him to make them
stop, is some of the most damning evidence. And when late in the day Trump
finally told them to go home, there is video inside the Capitol of the insurrectionists
sharing that information, saying that Trump had just told them to stop, telling
one another that now they should stop. They were obeying his commands and
there are many interviews with the insurrectionists saying that is exactly what
they were doing, what they believed Trump wanted.
Boy, you really have your hackles up. Whey don't you remedy this by:
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 20:15:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 02:11:01 -0800 (PST), ***@yahoo.com posted for all
of us to digest...
Is this all about simply making sure Trump can't get elected again?
Are you really worried about that and shouldn't that be up to 160
million voters, not 67 Senators?
Now who is assailing democracy?
This sounds more like the Kremlin selecting who can run for premier.
Why, do you suppose, the Framers put "disqualification to hold and enjoy
any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States" right there
in Article 1?
Cindy Hamilton
That can also be revoked?
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 20:20:16 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 20:31:56 -0800, Bob F posted for all of us to digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
Impeachment applies to public servants. Trump is a private citizen
with no connection at all to the government. If he is being accused of
something he deserves his day in court with all of the liabilities and
dangers that presents.
The democrats are not willing to do that because they might not even
get an indictment. It is a lot easier to do this political hit job
when they control the indictment process, own the "judge" and have
half the "jury" convinced he was guilty since November of 2016. They
also do not need to prove their case without a shadow of a doubt and
2/3ds convicts.
This is not a trial, it is an inquisition and will only make Trump
stronger when he wins. They still don't have the votes, even in this
kangaroo court.
You folks have only enhanced his martyr status with 74 million voters.
Biden will be the big loser here. The divide just became wider.
Happy now?
When the crime took place he was a government official so the proper
channel would be impeachment.
That protection that impeachment circumvents was gone on Jan 20. He is
a regular citizen now and deserves his day in court if he is being
charged.
By the looks of things, he'll get more than a few days in court, but for
now there's an impeachment going on. I know, I know, that confuses the hell
out of you but it is what it is.
Doubt he will be convicted for pure political reasons though. Make him
stronger? In the eyes of a few but in reality I thing he is pretty much
done.
Then why the circus?
Like everything else related to this impeachment exercise, that's also been
explained multiple times. What problem are you having?
Refresh my memory, I heard a lot of blathering but in one short
sentence, what do they hope to accomplish?
They state clearly to the WORLD that such behavior is not befitting of a
US President, then assure that he will NEVER be allowed to have such
power again, thereby setting a precedent for anyone in the future that
thinks such actions are OK.
Once again, I will ask who is THEY ? You left wingers trying to destroy the
country with your hate and lies.

Go over to us.politics to debate with them - or are you a wuss, incapable of
interacting in a credible debate?

Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Bob F
2021-02-13 21:19:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tekkie©
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 20:31:56 -0800, Bob F posted for all of us to digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
Impeachment applies to public servants. Trump is a private citizen
with no connection at all to the government. If he is being accused of
something he deserves his day in court with all of the liabilities and
dangers that presents.
The democrats are not willing to do that because they might not even
get an indictment. It is a lot easier to do this political hit job
when they control the indictment process, own the "judge" and have
half the "jury" convinced he was guilty since November of 2016. They
also do not need to prove their case without a shadow of a doubt and
2/3ds convicts.
This is not a trial, it is an inquisition and will only make Trump
stronger when he wins. They still don't have the votes, even in this
kangaroo court.
You folks have only enhanced his martyr status with 74 million voters.
Biden will be the big loser here. The divide just became wider.
Happy now?
When the crime took place he was a government official so the proper
channel would be impeachment.
That protection that impeachment circumvents was gone on Jan 20. He is
a regular citizen now and deserves his day in court if he is being
charged.
By the looks of things, he'll get more than a few days in court, but for
now there's an impeachment going on. I know, I know, that confuses the hell
out of you but it is what it is.
Doubt he will be convicted for pure political reasons though. Make him
stronger? In the eyes of a few but in reality I thing he is pretty much
done.
Then why the circus?
Like everything else related to this impeachment exercise, that's also been
explained multiple times. What problem are you having?
Refresh my memory, I heard a lot of blathering but in one short
sentence, what do they hope to accomplish?
They state clearly to the WORLD that such behavior is not befitting of a
US President, then assure that he will NEVER be allowed to have such
power again, thereby setting a precedent for anyone in the future that
thinks such actions are OK.
Once again, I will ask who is THEY ? You left wingers trying to destroy the
country with your hate and lies.
Go over to us.politics to debate with them - or are you a wuss, incapable of
interacting in a credible debate?
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
You take it there. Give us a good example of yourbelief in your system

subject contains us.politics delete.
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 21:21:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 14:51:52 -0500, Tekkie© posted for all of us to digest...
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 12:47:34 -0800 (PST), trader_4 posted for all of us to
digest...
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
Impeachment applies to public servants. Trump is a private citizen
with no connection at all to the government.
Trump was the President when the bad behavior took place.
Trump was the President when he was impeached for the second time.
What were you saying?
Greg is a smart person. That is a problem because he thinks others are
sensible too. He is making the assumption that other think like him and
storming the capitol is illegal and a dumb thing to do.
Trump supporters though, do not have logical thought, do not think for
themselves and they honestly believe all the rhetoric. "fight like
hell" and so forth, they thought they were the patriots saving the
United States.
The guy is a shyster salesman that, like Hitler got people to believe he
is the savior and is the only one to save democracy as he becomes a
dictator. Trump has read all about Hitler and followed his methods of
big rallies and getting the crowds stirred up.
+1
I always wondered how most Germans could ignore the holocaust, even as
their neighbors were hauled away, their property confiscated, how they could
be in such denial of the facts before them. With Trump, we're seeing similar
denial. Rudy is on the WABC right now, he just said that many of the people
that stormed the Capitol building were Antifa. That there is evidence online
of them organizing it. Here he's taken a shred of truth, which is that some
Antifa did organize, did come to DC that day as COUNTER protesters and
turned it into a despicable lie, that they were the ones invading the Capitol.
We have 200 plus arrested, AFAIK only one is a leftie, not Antifa, but a BLM
type. All the others are Trump supporters including Qanon, Proud Boys,
white supremacists and ordinary people turned into crazed fools. Yet the
Trumpets listen to these horrible lies spread by aholes like Rudy and it becomes
their alternate facts. It's sad that the owner of WABC allows this to continue.
They were subjugated by the left wingers then and is now happening to us. You
control the media, the currency, the tech industry but you are not satisfied
until everyone is under control by a certain few lefty's like you.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 21:23:17 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 15:04:53 -0500, Tekkie© posted for all of us to digest...
Post by Tekkie©
of us to digest...
Post by Tekkie©
of us to digest...
I just don?t believe that roughly HALF of
those who bother to vote are like that.
There are millions of Republican voters who would vote for anybody
with the R after their name. It would never occur to them to put any
thought into the decision. "I've always voted Republican and I'm not
about to change now."
In Michigan, in addition to the lists of names for each office being
___ Democratic party
___ Republican party
It's a big timesaver for those who want to vote a straight ticket.
Cindy Hamilton
The exact same thing applies to Democrats-in fact I would say more so.
No argument from me. But we were talking about Republican voters.
You are good at trying to divert, you have done this several times.
Post by Tekkie©
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
Repost wherever you like. I'm reading and posting in alt.home.repair.
Cindy Hamilton
You are alienating people that want answers to their home repair projects
and/or problems. Typical, no respect for others, just do or post whatever the
hell you feel like. Your lifestyle must be everyone else's lifestyle, typical
left winger; do as I say not as I do. You lefty's certainly love stirring the
pot until it turns into a shitshow then blame others.
You post here because you are not intelligent enough or have the wherewith-all
to engage the people in us.politics.
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 21:23:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 15:08:34 -0500, Tekkie© posted for all of us to digest...
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:15:17 -0800, Bob F posted for all of us to digest...
Post by Tekkie©
of us to digest...
I just don?t believe that roughly HALF of
those who bother to vote are like that.
There are millions of Republican voters who would vote for anybody
with the R after their name. It would never occur to them to put any
thought into the decision. "I've always voted Republican and I'm not
about to change now."
In Michigan, in addition to the lists of names for each office being
___ Democratic party
___ Republican party
It's a big timesaver for those who want to vote a straight ticket.
Cindy Hamilton
The exact same thing applies to Democrats-in fact I would say more so.
No argument from me. But we were talking about Republican voters.
Post by Tekkie©
Reposted to the group us.politics which is where this post belongs.
Please subscribe and post there.
Repost wherever you like. I'm reading and posting in alt.home.repair.
Cindy Hamilton
And thank you for removing the idiots cross post. He is just trying to
increase the off topic posters.
Same as Cindy don't have the cojones to engage in discussion with far superior
knowledge than you. Typical left winger - attribute to me what you are trying
to achieve.
--
Tekkie
Tekkie©
2021-02-13 21:24:58 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Feb 2021 15:25:07 -0500, Tekkie© posted for all of us to digest...
Post by Tekkie©
digest...
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 08:07:25 -0800 (PST), trader_4
Post by Tekkie©
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 05:07:38 -0800 (PST), trader_4
Donald Trump's lawyers stole the show at the opening of his impeachment
trial at the US Senate - but not in a way that will have pleased the
former president.
Indeed Mr Trump was unhappy, according to media reports, with the
performance of Bruce Castor, whose 48-minute address appeared to have
very little substantive content.
Mr Castor's presentation contrasted sharply with a dramatic video
montage presented by impeachment managers - the Democrats tasked with
leading the prosecution. The clip showed Mr Trump telling supporters to
"fight like hell" before they stormed the US Capitol last month.
And the defence was roundly criticised by Republican allies and critics
of Mr Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56007788
It's hard to defend the indefensible.
They neglected to show Trump also saying they should "peacefully"
demonstrate in that same speech. I guess the Trump lawyers will show
that part.
This is not a trial. it is just political circus.
Right. He used the word "peacefully" ONCE early in the speech. But he
used the word "FIGHT" at least 20 times. His goals were clear, he got
what he wanted, he did NOTHING to stop his goons attack, and the
Democratic prosecution is making that absolutely CLEAR.
How many times do the BLM people use "fight" in their rhetoric? They
attack federal court houses with impunity and that represents a
co-equal branch of government. In fact without the judiciary, Congress
is just a debating society with a checkbook.
Clearly, you have not been watching the trial. This whole thing was
clearly planned out for months before the event, with plenty of trump
efforts to make sure the violent crowd showed up, and not a single
effort by trump to avert it after he knew what was going on. It was
clearly his plan accomplished.
If this is such a slam dunk, why didn't they seek a federal
indictment?
That's a great question. Maybe you could scroll back to any of the dozen
other times you asked it and refresh your memory. Seems to me it has
something to do with impeachment being spelled out in the Constitution and
they don't say anything about Federal indictments, but go ahead and check
for yourself.
A president could just decide to say screw you, I'm going fishing and refuse
to do his job. Or they could decide that from now on they will decide whether
to sign or veto a bill based on a coin flip.
That would not be a federal crime, so I guess according to
Fretwell, that would not be cause for removal either. Could someone be
convicted of inciting that riot in a criminal trial, based on just one speech
on Jan 6? Doubtful. Could someone be convicted in a criminal court for
two months of lies and agitation, plus the final speech? Maybe yes. But that isn't
the question, it's not the standard for a PRESIDENT, who is sworn to preserve
protect and defend the Constitution. For two months Trump directly assaulted
the Constitution and our democracy, by claiming we worst than a third world
country, with a "stolen election", all based on lies. He betrayed his oath of
office, incited those people with lies and hate and we saw the result on Jan 6.
I was watching part of the presentation yesterday. Very powerful. They showed
how Republicans in Congress, under siege and fearing for their lives, were
communicating with Trump, telling him he needed to tell the mob to stop
and Trump did NOTHING. They showed the mob inside the Capitol, repeating
what Trump had just tweeted, proving they were listening to him and he could
have stopped it. Hours later, when he finally did do something, he started off
by lying again about the election being stolen, that he understands
why people are doing this. He finally did call
for an end to violence but he also praised the insurrection,
calling them great people and patriots. And that night, after it was over,
he sent out a message again praising them, "we love you", and telling America
that's what you get when you steal an election. This guy really is one
real POS. And the Democrats laid it all out, with more coming today.
I hear they may have a message sequence that shows that while the mob
was screaming to kill Pence and Trump knew he was in danger, Trump
sent out another message attacking Trump. Having seen this I was beginning
to think maybe another 10 Republicans will stop fearing Trump and the
Trumpets, become Americans again and vote to convict. But then I
realized that's still very unlikely. Which is why something like 150K people
have left the Republican party last month. Something like 12K in PA for
example. There was no fraud anything like that, but 12K certainly could
have changed the results in GA and could change the results in 2022 in
many states.
You still keep ignoring the fact that Trump is not the president
anymore and if his conduct was criminal, he can be charged.
Using a procedure designed to remove a president from office is not
appropriate at this time. What do they possibly hope to accomplish?
To document it all for history. To show that there were elected representatives
that saw this insurrection that Trump cultivated and incited for two months
with despicable lies and that they did what they could to hold him accountable.
To put all Congressmen and Senators on record as to where they stand at this
critical juncture in American history. He's now the only president impeached
twice and the Senate could convict him, giving him what he so richly deserves
and barring him from ever running again. That's why, but then it's all been
explained to you here many times.
Post by Tekkie©
Simply saying he can't run again is not an excuse. That decision
should be up to the voter and when he gets acquitted as seems the
likely outcome, you are just making him stronger.
Biden is going to be the ultimate loser here. He will be left with a
more divided country and a Trump who will say he was vindicated in a
trial that was rigged against him. You are making him more relevant
with his base by making him the center of attention at a time when he
should be waving goodbye.
If that's the result, so be it. It's just more fallout from the despicable Trump.
And I'm betting you haven't even watched any of the trial.
I watched enough to see this was a political side show with a whole
lot of emotion grabbing stuff that they never tied directly to Trump.
The burden of proof is a lot harder in court than it is in a place
where more than half of the jurors came in with their minds made up
before it started, there are no rules of evidence, the defense can't
object and the guy presiding is part of the prosecution.
That is nazi justice.
I just wonder if you will still think this is worth it when Trump
takes a victory lap around the country telling people he won again
with all odds stacked against him. Is that really what you wanted?
Ha ha, that won't stop their rhetoric and hate. They are laser focused on Trump
while Bidens crew is pulling their pants down and getting them greased up and
ready to go. Won't they feel good when they are blindsided?
--
Tekkie
Loading...