Weird. All the Dem posters here…

[zingerdawg]

Derek Chauvin had two official reprimands, one for shooting a latino suspect in the back and one for kneeling on the neck of a black woman during a domestic violence call.

Beyond that, you are being incredibly obtuse. The video caused the riots. The same video that captured three officers doing nothing while one officer knelt on the neck of a defenseless black man for eight minutes while he looked directly into the camera recording the situation several times. The same video that captured civilians begging Chauvin to get off his neck because the officer was killing Floyd. No video, no riots.

Did people draw their own conclusions regarding what happened? Of course, everyone was able to watch the entire episode and draw their own conclusions. Or I guess you are suggesting that people should have waiting for the result of a detailed investigation? Kind of like the people on this and other threads on the Chat decided to wait for the result of a weeks-long investigation before making accusations about the Trump shooting?

I'm confident that if you or I were black, and either of us had a bad personal experience with the police or knew people who had, you would absolutely draw conclusions from that video. That's human nature and, once again, no video, no riot.

Speaking of changing the subject yet again, now you want to talk the documents case. Cannon dismissed the case because she has decided that the prior rulings of every court related to whether the appointment of a special prosecutor is constitutional or not are inconvenient for her agenda, so irrelevant. That literally has nothing to do with anything Jack Smith did or didn't do beyond agreeing to the appointment. It also says nothing about Trump's guilt or innocence. It also means that Hunter Biden walks, as his special prosecutor is also supposedly unconstitutional. If you attribute that to Jack Smith, you should refrain from commenting on the matter.

Find me a reputable legal commentator (one who isn't on the Fox payroll) who defends the Cannon decision, and I will gladly read what he or she has to say.

Still waiting to hear what I lied about.


Did you peak in high school? You sound like someone who peaked in high school.

Derek Chauvin had two official reprimands, one for shooting a latino suspect in the back and one for kneeling on the neck of a black woman during a domestic violence call.

Beyond that, you are being incredibly obtuse. The video caused the riots. The same video that captured three officers doing nothing while one officer knelt on the neck of a defenseless black man for eight minutes while he looked directly into the camera recording the situation several times. The same video that captured civilians begging Chauvin to get off his neck because the officer was killing Floyd. No video, no riots.

Did people draw their own conclusions regarding what happened? Of course, everyone was able to watch the entire episode and draw their own conclusions. Or I guess you are suggesting that people should have waiting for the result of a detailed investigation? Kind of like the people on this and other threads on the Chat decided to wait for the result of a weeks-long investigation before making accusations about the Trump shooting?

I'm confident that if you or I were black, and either of us had a bad personal experience with the police or knew people who had, you would absolutely draw conclusions from that video. That's human nature and, once again, no video, no riot.

Speaking of changing the subject yet again, now you want to talk the documents case. Cannon dismissed the case because she has decided that the prior rulings of every court related to whether the appointment of a special prosecutor is constitutional or not are inconvenient for her agenda, so irrelevant. That literally has nothing to do with anything Jack Smith did or didn't do beyond agreeing to the appointment. It also says nothing about Trump's guilt or innocence. It also means that Hunter Biden walks, as his special prosecutor is also supposedly unconstitutional. If you attribute that to Jack Smith, you should refrain from commenting on the matter.

Find me a reputable legal commentator (one who isn't on the Fox payroll) who defends the Cannon decision, and I will gladly read what he or she has to say.

Still waiting to hear what I lied about.


Did you peak in high school? You sound like someone who peaked in high school.

The African American police chief and captain said nothing racial about those complaints. You as usual forgot to include that in another spin. We can agree chauvin is a piece of crap. Here is the truth if you want to read it. 18 complaints actually filed against him. Not two. Only one was allowed to be mentioned in court. Again. You can’t get one thing right. Not one. 😂

Derek Chauvin used force against suspects before George Floyd. The jury won't hear about 6 of those incidents.

Prosecutors tried to introduce six incidents in which they say Derek Chauvin used unreasonable force on people. The judge didn't allow them.

www.usatoday.com

Opposing views here and agreements with the Jack smith ruling. And a history of his failures. Since you said you can’t find one person defending her. I will help you out with that.

Why Jack Smith Appointment Was Unconstitutional: Andy McCarthy | National Review

Judge tosses Trump classified documents case, rules prosecutor appointment unconstitutional

Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the criminal case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents.

www.usatoday.com

Trump-appointed federal judge rules Trump’s classified document case is unconstitutional – here’s how special counsels have been authorized before

In 1988, the US Supreme Court ruled that independent counsels were constitutional.

theconversation.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/opinion/special-counsel-jack-smith-merrick-garland.html

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/4/jack-smiths-record-rife-mistrials-overturned-convi/

Damn

If I did peak in hs, I could count on you to spin that too. I am sure you would have had a good view from the bleachers.

 

[Papapete11]

Derek Chauvin had two official reprimands, one for shooting a latino suspect in the back and one for kneeling on the neck of a black woman during a domestic violence call.

Beyond that, you are being incredibly obtuse. The video caused the riots. The same video that captured three officers doing nothing while one officer knelt on the neck of a defenseless black man for eight minutes while he looked directly into the camera recording the situation several times. The same video that captured civilians begging Chauvin to get off his neck because the officer was killing Floyd. No video, no riots.

Did people draw their own conclusions regarding what happened? Of course, everyone was able to watch the entire episode and draw their own conclusions. Or I guess you are suggesting that people should have waiting for the result of a detailed investigation? Kind of like the people on this and other threads on the Chat decided to wait for the result of a weeks-long investigation before making accusations about the Trump shooting?

I'm confident that if you or I were black, and either of us had a bad personal experience with the police or knew people who had, you would absolutely draw conclusions from that video. That's human nature and, once again, no video, no riot.

Speaking of changing the subject yet again, now you want to talk the documents case. Cannon dismissed the case because she has decided that the prior rulings of every court related to whether the appointment of a special prosecutor is constitutional or not are inconvenient for her agenda, so irrelevant. That literally has nothing to do with anything Jack Smith did or didn't do beyond agreeing to the appointment. It also says nothing about Trump's guilt or innocence. It also means that Hunter Biden walks, as his special prosecutor is also supposedly unconstitutional. If you attribute that to Jack Smith, you should refrain from commenting on the matter.

Find me a reputable legal commentator (one who isn't on the Fox payroll) who defends the Cannon decision, and I will gladly read what he or she has to say.

Still waiting to hear what I lied about.


Did you peak in high school? You sound like someone who peaked in high school.

All you got? HS..... I was the one talking about HS. I will peak when the ass is out of DC

 

[zingerdawg]

All you got? HS..... I was the one talking about HS. I will peak when the ass is out of DC

He hasn’t gotten anything right all day. So that would makes sense if he got that wrong as well.

 

[willdup]

Trump has a VP? Huh? I thought Biden said Trump was his VP?

That’s about as funny as Trump claiming Nikki, Nikki, Nikki Haley was Speaker of the House on J6.

 

[willdup]

The African American police chief and captain said nothing racial about those complaints. You as usual forgot to include that in another spin. We can agree chauvin is a piece of crap. Here is the truth if you want to read it. 18 complaints actually filed against him. Not two. Only one was allowed to be mentioned in court. Again. You can’t get one thing right. Not one. 😂

Derek Chauvin used force against suspects before George Floyd. The jury won't hear about 6 of those incidents.

Prosecutors tried to introduce six incidents in which they say Derek Chauvin used unreasonable force on people. The judge didn't allow them.

www.usatoday.com

Opposing views here and agreements with the Jack smith ruling. And a history of his failures. Since you said you can’t find one person defending her. I will help you out with that.

Why Jack Smith Appointment Was Unconstitutional: Andy McCarthy | National Review

Judge tosses Trump classified documents case, rules prosecutor appointment unconstitutional

Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the criminal case against former President Donald Trump over his handling of classified documents.

www.usatoday.com

Trump-appointed federal judge rules Trump’s classified document case is unconstitutional – here’s how special counsels have been authorized before

In 1988, the US Supreme Court ruled that independent counsels were constitutional.

theconversation.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/opinion/special-counsel-jack-smith-merrick-garland.html

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/jul/4/jack-smiths-record-rife-mistrials-overturned-convi/

Damn

If I did peak in hs, I could count on you to spin that too. I am sure you would have had a good view from the bleachers.

I didn’t ask you if you peaked in high school. That was a question for @Papapete11, the guy who suggested that all liberals were bullied in high school, which is exactly the kind of thing that someone who peaked in HS would say. I was going to ask how often he breaks out the old HS letterman jacket, but I thought that was a little mean spirited.

And can you not read what I say? I said that Chauvin had two official reprimands, not complaints, which is correct. Also, I didn’t say Chauvin’s reprimands were racially motivated. You inferred that I was saying that the same way that so many people inferred that the Floyd situation was racially motivated, which is a reasonable conclusion given, oh, I don't know, maybe the history of racially motivated police abuse across a few hundred years of our history? That’s why the video caused the protests, as I keep saying over and over again. Such blatant behavior from a LEO who knew he was being filmed and didn't care at all spoke to a deep and painful history.

I read all of your links. One person from the National Review opined that all special counsels are unconstitutional but didn't address that every prior court, including the SCOTUS in 1988, found that they were constitutional. The rest of the articles don't really make the case, they simply reported on what happened and the history of how SCs have been used in the past.

 

[zingerdawg]

I didn’t ask you if you peaked in high school. That was a question for @Papapete11, the guy who suggested that all liberals were bullied in high school, which is exactly the kind of thing that someone who peaked in HS would say. I was going to ask how often he breaks out the old HS letterman jacket, but I thought that was a little mean spirited.

And can you not read what I say? I said that Chauvin had two official reprimands, not complaints, which is correct. Also, I didn’t say Chauvin’s reprimands were racially motivated. You inferred that I was saying that the same way that so many people inferred that the Floyd situation was racially motivated, which is a reasonable conclusion given, oh, I don't know, maybe the history of racially motivated police abuse across a few hundred years of our history? That’s why the video caused the protests, as I keep saying over and over again. Such blatant behavior from a LEO who knew he was being filmed and didn't care at all spoke to a deep and painful history.

I read all of your links. One person from the National Review opined that all special counsels are unconstitutional but didn't address that every prior court, including the SCOTUS in 1988, found that they were constitutional. The rest of the articles don't really make the case, they simply reported on what happened and the history of how SCs have been used in the past.

It is weird. On my side I didn’t see a response to anyone but me. But I see it on the quoted post. My bad on the hs thing. It looked on my end like it was directed at me. Check papette’s reply. He isn’t in it as being replied to. Really strange. Rivals is malfunctioning I guess. It looks totally addressed to me.

The links were in response to you saying you have seen no one support her that is respectable, I found several. The Supreme Court even mentioned her opinion. Jack smith gets clobbered in the Supreme Court so this is par for course. There were some that went back to Nixon. There was another in an article from your viewpoint who imo was spot on. Either way, it is an argument. If you still believe the doj isn’t being weaponized well I don’t know what to tell you. The shoe gets put on the other foot once and you don’t like it.

You can spin the reason for the riots. I don’t disagree with what you are saying but you are leaving things out. I get why. It doesn’t fit the narrative. When everything came out there was nothing screaming Floyd’s death was racially motivated. If anything it looks like he was just irritated with his behavior. We find out later his subordinates are all African American. We find out later he wasn’t targeted for race when he committed the crime. Chauvin is just a bad human being.

 

[brimur]

What the hell are you talking about? Where have you heard that Trump is going to end Civil protections? MSM? Talking points from deranged leftists? Prove it. As far as our government.. it has eroded itself quite nicely (deliberately maybe) without anyone else's help. The same goes for the courts and especially the media. Any distrust has been of their own insane bias. You think Biden's policies, mandates, restrictions, lies are all for the good of democracy? You are delusional.

Are you really that proudly ill-informed? He literally already started to do this with an executive order October 2020 but his efforts were rolled back by Biden. Educate yourself- https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-105504

 

[Moosefish]

It also means that Hunter Biden walks, as his special prosecutor is also supposedly unconstitutional.

That's a misunderstanding of her ruling. David Weiss was appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the U.S. Senate and is currently a U.S. Attorney. Jack Smith has not been subject to any of that, which she argues is required by the Constitution. To put it another way: A special counsel doesn't need to be confirmed by the Senate. Federal prosecutors do. But you can't be a special counsel unless you're a federal prosecutor

From her ruling:

“Adopting the position of the Special Counsel allows any Attorney General, without Congressional input, to circumvent this statutory scheme and appoint one-off special counsels to wield the immense power of a United States Attorney...If the political branches wish to grant the Attorney General power to appoint Special Counsel Smith to investigate and prosecute this action with the full powers of a United States Attorney, there is a valid means by which to do so,”

Previous rulings on SPs were not dealing with this specific argument. Elie Honing of CNN noted:

"One difference here, though, that’s important to note is that Jack Smith has never been confirmed by the Senate, whereas at least Robert Mueller and David Weiss had, at various prior points in their career, had been vetted and confirmed by the Senate. So there’s a slight distinction here."

 

[MarcusBarcus]

Name the policy questions that concern you most.

He cited the potential ending of civil service protections as one of the main things causing lots of consternation and sleepless nights.
He apparently does not want Donald Trump to be able to fire the incompetent dipwads at the Secret Service that just almost got him freaking killed.
That sum it up, counselor?

 

[jlstone412]

Hate to say it, but we’ll probably never know the truth unless somebody makes a deathbed confession. Some generic commission will “look”:at it, and the path backward will be littered with opinions, planted evidence or incorrect interpretations of the evidence. The police and SS could not be this intentionally irresponsible. I bet the resulting conclusion will be less than satisfactory conclusion.

Jesus Christ could descend from heavens and outline the truth of the events to the masses but some would disregard it because of their "logical assumptions".

It's unreal the allegations being made already. We still have a thread titled "Dems tried to assassinate trump" when none of the data supports that conclusion...Yet....bring up Jan 6 and folks here get their panties in a bunch...it's maddening

 

[ToddBburn]

Are you really that proudly ill-informed? He literally already started to do this with an executive order October 2020 but his efforts were rolled back by Biden. Educate yourself- https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-22-105504

I was more worried about the influx of inverted illegal immigrants, authoritarian actions to forgive student loan debt, use OSHA to mandate employers require COVID vaccines, inflation etc. This is far more concerning and I know I will not sleep tonight.

 

[Dillenger1914]

You keep accusing me of lying while making up the things that I said or introducing topics that have nothing to do with the thread. It's wild.

I don't know how to engage on your George Floyd narrative because I don't know what your point is. I made no comment about Floyd's guilt or innocence or even the role he played in his own death. I described what happened, which was that three LEOs watched one LEO spend eight minutes choking a man to death who was entirely under the control of the police at the scene and who was no threat at any time during at least the last seven of those eight minutes.

This isn't my opinion, it's what a jury found in each officer's trial. So how, exactly, is what I said a lie?

The video that captured the episode enflamed communities that had experienced police violence many times over the years. The video is what initiated the riots. Also a lie?

I didn't say Trump won't reach out to the victim's families. I said he had time to play golf Sunday and didn't make time to contact the families. Biden called the victim's wife and she refused to take the call because her husband "was a devout republican and wouldn't have wanted me to talk to him". As of yesterday afternoon, Trump hadn't reached out. Where is the lie there?

I'm going to need a link to evidence that Trump, not his campaign, has said he will not pardon anyone convicted of violence. How about the Proud Boys or some of the other conspirators? Any word on if he will pardon those guys? They weren't violent but they were convicted of sedition. Should they walk?

Regardless, he still praises the day and calls the participants heroes and patriots. Is that a lie?

I said nothing in this thread about the "suckers and losers" situation. As I've said before, insisting that Trump is more truthful than Gen. Kelley is certainly a choice to make. You weren't there and neither was I, so it's all speculation anyway.

Most importantly, I've condemned all political violence so frequently on here I'm sure people are sick of hearing my view. I've said multiple times that I'm glad that Trump survived the attack. I can express that very consistent view while also pointing at that Trump has been the source of some of the absolute worst rhetoric regarding political violence that we've ever seen from a candidate for POTUS, much less someone who formerly held the position.

If you want to accuse me of lying, at least use what I actually said to make your point.

Waste of time to state facts. There is a contingent of posters that are as bad as it gets, but have the audacity to say we (Dems or Liberals or whatever yall call people these days) are evil. They are worst than a cult. Facts be Damn. Human decency be Damn. "I am Right (get it) and You are wrong!!!"

 

[ToddBburn]

Jesus Christ could descend from heavens and outline the truth of the events to the masses but some would disregard it because of their "logical assumptions".

It's unreal the allegations being made already. We still have a thread titled "Dems tried to assassinate trump" when none of the data supports that conclusion...Yet....bring up Jan 6 and folks here get their panties in a bunch...it's maddening

Well Trump should be counted as a Democrat since he was registered as Democrat for the majority of his life.
Did I do that right? Twisting things to fit a narrative or to make a point?

 

[Dillenger1914]

Well Trump should be counted as a Democrat since he was registered as Democrat for the majority of his life.
Did I do that right? Twisting things to fit a narrative or to make a point?

This is true. It wasnt until he started questioning a black man about this birth certificate and his legal claim to the office that other nuts thought "this man speaks for us!!"

 

[ToddBburn]

This is true. It wasnt until he started questioning a black man about this birth certificate and his legal claim to the office that other nuts thought "this man speaks for us!!"

Both sides twist the narrative to our(the people’s) detriment. It creates emotional responses when logic and dialogue is needed. This creates an environment of division and neither side is able or willing to see their biases and where they are wrong.

 

[Dillenger1914]

Both sides twist the narrative to our(the people’s) detriment. It creates emotional responses when logic and dialogue is needed. This creates an environment of division and neither side is able or willing to see their biases and where they are wrong.

Twisting Narratives is Politics. I enjoy good Politics most of the time. A complete and bold-face lie that is not disputed by the leaders of the Party provides more emotional responses to me. You (the Republican Party) didn't spank his hands for carrying on a lie for over a year because deep down you agreed with it. That just don't sit well with me.

 

[ToddBburn]

Twisting Narratives is Politics. I enjoy good Politics most of the time. A complete and bold-face lie that is not disputed by the leaders of the Party provides more emotional responses to me. You (the Republican Party) didn't spank his hands for carrying on a lie for over a year because deep down you agreed with it. That just don't sit well with me.

That happens on both sides and most will not acknowledge the others lies. They are numerous examples we could discuss.
I am willing to call them out and I try to do so. I have grown through the years to realize I am not as smart as I thought I was and that things are rarely as they seem at first glance. Today people rarely take time to breathe and see how things look once the dust settles and then speak. It is only getting more out of control with social media and smart phones.

 

[Captain]

I assume you keep referencing Pamala Hemphil, who is from Idaho, not Indiana.

She is serving two months, not three years.

The prosecution had video of her enlisting the help of the police, claiming to be a journalist, and then encouraging people to enter the Capitol. Her lawyer acknowledged that "she may have provided encouragement that she now regrets."

The prosecution also showed a social media post of Hemphil bragging about her participation in an attack on the Idaho statehouse in 2020.

During her hearing ,after she accepted a plea agreement (seems relevant), she said the following:

"I fully regret everything I said and did at the Capitol," adding that her intentions were to record what was happening, not be a part of it. She compared her actions to cheering on a team at a football game.

"Then the fans started going onto the field. I should have gone home. Instead, I was there filming chaos when I should never have left the stands in the first place," Hemphill said.

Fighting back tears, Hemphill apologized to police.
"They saved my life," she said. "They should be honored forever."

So pretty much everything you said about Pamala Hemphil was wrong.

Regarding J6, it wasn't a trespassing, it was a violent effort to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power. Call that whatever you prefer, it doesn't change what actually happened.

Different person.

I call it trespassing. There was no organization, they were unarmed. Pelosi has admitted it was her fault it took place because she revised beefed up security.

What do you call the $3 Billion in property damage, looting, injuries, deaths carried out by AntifaBLM in 2020? Are you going to defend that? How many of those looters, arsonists were sought out arrested, prosecuted by DOJ? Those riots were closer to insurrection than the Capitol. Those who caused property damage at the Capitol should have been prosecuted. However, solitary confinement 22 hrs day, limited showering, awaiting trial without bond for 2+ years is Soviet style. Especially compared to how rioters, looters, arsonists escaped similar punishment. DOJ dropped charges against Antifa/BLM members in Portland who glued doors shut at a Fed Courthouse with people inside then proceeded to set it on fire. Is that Justice?

 

[Captain]

Well, if the new VP candidate can speculate whether Trump is the new American Hitler, it’s fair that the rest of us might do the same.

View embedded media

JD Vance said Trump proved him, Vance, wrong. You failed to note that.

Where were these Hitler acts in his prior Presidency? Maybe you should stop watching JoyLess and msnbc.

 

[willdup]

Different person.

I call it trespassing. There was no organization, they were unarmed. Pelosi has admitted it was her fault it took place because she revised beefed up security.

What do you call the $3 Billion in property damage, looting, injuries, deaths carried out by AntifaBLM in 2020? Are you going to defend that? How many of those looters, arsonists were sought out arrested, prosecuted by DOJ? Those riots were closer to insurrection than the Capitol. Those who caused property damage at the Capitol should have been prosecuted. However, solitary confinement 22 hrs day, limited showering, awaiting trial without bond for 2+ years is Soviet style. Especially compared to how rioters, looters, arsonists escaped similar punishment. DOJ dropped charges against Antifa/BLM members in Portland who glued doors shut at a Fed Courthouse with people inside then proceeded to set it on fire. Is that Justice?

Different person? Ok, who is the right person? Would have thought you would share that by this point in the discussion. All I need is a name. I’ll do the research from there.

 

[Captain]

Different person? Ok, who is the right person? Would have thought you would share that by this point in the discussion. All I need is a name. I’ll do the research from there.

Sure

 

[DawglegrightinSC]

It was not an insurrection. It was tresspassing. Who ever heard of an insurrection without weapons? Think how ridiculous that sounds.

5 people died? So you folks on left have come up with another lie! The only person who died was the woman who was shot by Capitol Police officer while she was being escorted out. Why wasn’t he investigated?

How many hundred officers were injured, vehicles destroyed in Antifa/BLM riots?

Since when did we start convicting people based upon their beliefs? Proud Boys & Oathkeepers who committed treaspassing and vandalism should be tried accordingly. The 75 yr old Granny from Indiana who was undergoing chemo was neither, yet the Biden DOJ sought a prison sentence for her based upon 45 secs inside the building. She is serving 3 yrs in a Calif Fed Pen, That is indefensible but go ahead and try.

The point of my post is that a well-known personality on the right with millions of followers openly speculated about the benefit of a Trump assassination a mere five months ago. So, when people ask why anyone on the right would attempt to kill Trump, here is a potential answer.

At least you are keeping your sense of humor.

 

[ugafish]

Keep on with your "logical assumptions". The rest of us will keep living in reality.

The data is starting to prove you wrong...

Logical assumptions are often reality. This doesnt apply to liberals though, so that is a dilemma.

 

[mitchelldawg]

After what happened last Sat, I was naive enough to think things would get better on here.

The (extreme) right on here were losing their minds (rightfully so), talking about nuts on the far left that were wishing Trump had been killed.
I have seen some of this as well on social media.

All the posters on here, as far as I can see that are not on the "trump train", have done nothing but strongly condemn what happened, and violence in general.

I am convinced now more than ever that if the same thing had happened to Biden, the ones on here that were in such an uproar, would be glad it happened to Biden, and admit as much, gladly. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Some don't want the country united. That is really sad to me and to millions of others that lie somewhere in the middle.

If people can't come together after what happened on Sat, there is sadly, very little hope.

If Pearl Harbor happened today, we would all be speaking Japanese because we would just be arguing about if it was the "rights or lefts" fault we were attacked.

God bless us all.

 

[Eastmandawg]

Different person? Ok, who is the right person? Would have thought you would share that by this point in the discussion. All I need is a name. I’ll do the research from there.

HA!....you'll do the research??

Coming from a person who has an admitted "bias" towards DJT, that is just priceless. All you ever do is leave out context in order to damage someone. Post half-truths to deliberately deceive and hope for the best, for people to believe it. It all has been obvious for some time now; it shines like a beam of light. Bet U suck at the shell game too.

You have ZERO credibility. The only thing that your posts are good for on here is a few laughs, you have that going 4 you.