Re: Trump
« Reply #11440 on: June 11, 2024, 01:13:31 PM »
i will instantly believe anything i read on facebook so long as it supports the red team

yeah fam we know, you don't have to keep convincing us
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11441 on: June 11, 2024, 03:57:32 PM »
Perhaps one would want to look at the instructions given to the jury, in light of the Facebook post, and reevaluate.
Yeah, and?  What about them feels wrong? 
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6552
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11442 on: June 11, 2024, 04:04:42 PM »
Hey guys, my brother is on Hunter Biden's jury, and he's already promised a conviction! MAGA forever!
Welp, that's a mistrial then...
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10710
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11443 on: June 11, 2024, 06:01:18 PM »
An outright case of reverse jury nullification if there ever was one:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/06/08/gop-demands-trump-mistrial-after-facebook-comment-from-jurors-cousin-sparks-conspiracy/

Is that really how it works? Some random guy on the Internet can hint that he knows the verdict ahead of time, and that's it, we need a mistrial now? Would this work for someone else? Hey guys, my brother is on Hunter Biden's jury, and he's already promised a conviction! MAGA forever!

The court can investigate and determine if any jury members are telling people that it's going to be a sham trial. If they are, then it is grounds for a mistrial.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11444 on: June 11, 2024, 06:42:15 PM »
An outright case of reverse jury nullification if there ever was one:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/06/08/gop-demands-trump-mistrial-after-facebook-comment-from-jurors-cousin-sparks-conspiracy/

Is that really how it works? Some random guy on the Internet can hint that he knows the verdict ahead of time, and that's it, we need a mistrial now? Would this work for someone else? Hey guys, my brother is on Hunter Biden's jury, and he's already promised a conviction! MAGA forever!

The court can investigate and determine if any jury members are telling people that it's going to be a sham trial. If they are, then it is grounds for a mistrial.

Why?  The Jury had to be unanimous.  So one person would have been useless getting Trump guilty.  Need all 12.

And would defence allow all sham jurers?
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11445 on: June 11, 2024, 10:03:05 PM »
((Appologies for not answering sooner.  It fell off the radar))

So let me get this straight, the trade war, that lowered our trade with China and increased tariffs, you don't like it, it was bad, but also you wouldn't have a problem with it? It seems more and more that your position is "I don't like Trump, he's a big meanie :(" and not based on any policy reality.
It lowered it as an unintentional consequence then Trump tired to make it higher via the deal he finalized with China.  China did not follow through.  Not exactly the best of deals if you want to decrease China's business with the US.

Quote
A dirty bomb is not "nuclear technology" and also it's a Hollywood meme.
Yes and no.  It IS a real thing.  Typically an explosive that blows up plutonium, which dispurses the radioactive material over a large area.  Refinement requires some nuclear technology (the refinement process) but not fission.

Quote
I didn't say the Taliban is good. The Taliban is morally superior to the Afghani government that the US installed. The US really likes installing terrible governments, you pointed that out earlier with Iran.
I and many people (especially women) disagree with that assessment.  I'm not sure about the accusations of state sponsored rape but I do know that the Taliban happily forces marriage on women, which the Afghan Government installed by the US did not.  So I supose morally superior is a sentiment of opinion.

Quote
Did we actually do more business with China?
Its in the agreement.  But China didn't bother upholding their end.  So if youwish to say that Trump intentionally made a deal knowing China wouldn't follow through then... sure?

Quote
Let's see, does China and Russia ring any bells? You just admitted he reduced trade with China. Are you going to walk that back now? And Russia, Trump insisted that the EU stop relying on Russia for trade goods, and it worked to a slight extent. But let me guess, you think that's a bad thing now. We don't want to be too mean to Russia.
Intent and result are not always the same thing.  And unless you wish to claim Trump makes false intentions knowing the results will not be what is intended, I fail to see how Trump wanted less trade with China.

Quote
Putin quite literally said he refused to invade Ukraine because Trump "didn't understand geopolitics". He waited until Biden entered office, as he knew Trump would "overreact" to the invasion. In much the same way you think Trump did something very bad when he had an Iranian general rightfully killed. Had Putin invaded Ukraine while Trump was president, Trump probably would have started ordering the deaths of Russian generals.
Yes, lets trust the word of a man who wants to ensure Trump stays in power and rules his own country with an iron fist. Surely he would NEVER lie... right?
And given Trump's comments, I don't think Putin had anything to actually worry about. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/23/trump-putin-ukraine-invasion-00010923

Quote
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful,” Trump said in a radio interview with “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.” “He used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”

Trump was then very clear on his position that the US shouldn't be giving Ukraine Money unless Europe gives more.  Which Europe may not have been able to do.
And honstly, not sure he would order the Deaths of Russian generals.  He very clearly wanted to withdrawl from conflicts so he probably wouldn't risk jumping into another one with Russia by killing Russian Generals directly.

Iran is differnece since they have no chance of hurting the US.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3414
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11446 on: June 12, 2024, 01:16:29 AM »
An outright case of reverse jury nullification if there ever was one:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2024/06/08/gop-demands-trump-mistrial-after-facebook-comment-from-jurors-cousin-sparks-conspiracy/

Is that really how it works? Some random guy on the Internet can hint that he knows the verdict ahead of time, and that's it, we need a mistrial now? Would this work for someone else? Hey guys, my brother is on Hunter Biden's jury, and he's already promised a conviction! MAGA forever!

The court can investigate and determine if any jury members are telling people that it's going to be a sham trial. If they are, then it is grounds for a mistrial.

Yes, if it were real, then it would be major, just like any of the thousands of troll posts about serious subjects that are made every day would be major if they were true. It's baffling why anyone is taking this one seriously.
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16135
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11447 on: June 12, 2024, 07:01:52 AM »
How was I supposed to know it was a slogan?
lol. lmao, even.

You could have easily copied the wikipedia link in your post
Should I provide a Wikipedia link for every common word and phrase I use? Where do you draw the line? Am I OK to use the word "chair", or should I automatically assume you won't know that one either?

You're an adult. Take responsibility for your own education. If you don't know something, look into it instead of spewing judgemental garbage based on nothing but your imagination.

Choose reality.

Perhaps you should consult a dictionary on the meaning of "crime".
That's really funny. You should have done that yourself, y'know. I guess the "chair" joke above wasn't even far off.

You have easy access to the world's greatest repository of knowledge, unprecedented in its vastness. You also have the right instinct - one could use a dictionary here. All that's missing is a tiny bit of self-awareness that would let you out the pieces together.

Sigh. Very well. For your benefit: crime.

Christ on a bike.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2024, 07:16:32 AM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2897
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11448 on: June 12, 2024, 10:48:23 AM »
i will instantly believe anything i read on facebook so long as it supports the red team

yeah fam we know, you don't have to keep convincing us
This has nothing to do with Facebook as far as I am concerned.

Nor a red team.
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11449 on: June 13, 2024, 11:13:52 AM »
Huh...

https://www.propublica.org/article/donald-trump-criminal-cases-witnesses-financial-benefits#:~:text=Nine%20witnesses%20in%20the%20criminal,cash%20from%20Trump's%20media%20company.

Basically: Trump tried to buy positive witnesses who work for him or silence them from cooperating volunterily from law enforcement.

Credible?  Maybe.  Not sure.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10710
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11450 on: June 13, 2024, 03:32:14 PM »
Huh...

https://www.propublica.org/article/donald-trump-criminal-cases-witnesses-financial-benefits#:~:text=Nine%20witnesses%20in%20the%20criminal,cash%20from%20Trump's%20media%20company.

Basically: Trump tried to buy positive witnesses who work for him or silence them from cooperating volunterily from law enforcement.

Credible?  Maybe.  Not sure.

Where does it say that they got those things after they were contacted by the court to be witnesses?

It doesn't say that. And obviously they would want to bring in high ranking witnesses closest to Trump at the top, so top people getting benefits in their job means nothing here.

This is like calling in the CEO of Microsoft to testify against the alleged crimes of Bill Gates and declaring that the witness was given wage increases and a promotion to CEO prior to being called as a witness, which is evidence of witness tampering. Nonsense.
« Last Edit: June 13, 2024, 03:43:32 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11451 on: June 14, 2024, 04:25:11 AM »
Huh...

https://www.propublica.org/article/donald-trump-criminal-cases-witnesses-financial-benefits#:~:text=Nine%20witnesses%20in%20the%20criminal,cash%20from%20Trump's%20media%20company.

Basically: Trump tried to buy positive witnesses who work for him or silence them from cooperating volunterily from law enforcement.

Credible?  Maybe.  Not sure.

Where does it say that they got those things after they were contacted by the court to be witnesses?

It doesn't say that. And obviously they would want to bring in high ranking witnesses closest to Trump at the top, so top people getting benefits in their job means nothing here.

This is like calling in the CEO of Microsoft to testify against the alleged crimes of Bill Gates and declaring that the witness was given wage increases and a promotion to CEO prior to being called as a witness, which is evidence of witness tampering. Nonsense.

Except some of them aren't top offficials.

One is an Aide who got a salary doubling.  Which doesn't happen normally.  When was the last time your boss gave you a pay raise that doubled your salary.

One got a 2 million severance (we don't know who) under the condition they can't cooperate with police voluntarily.


This is like calling the CEO of Microsoft to tewtify against the crimes of Bill Gates and finding out the CEO was given the job as soon as they were marked as a witness.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2897
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11452 on: June 14, 2024, 06:39:16 PM »
LD, are you going to address Tom's point or not?
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11453 on: June 14, 2024, 06:49:12 PM »
LD, are you going to address Tom's point or not?

Is he making a point?

Also, Tom didn't read.

Quote
One aide who was given a plum position on the board of Trump’s social media company, for example, got the seat after he was subpoenaed but before he testified.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8622
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11454 on: June 14, 2024, 07:08:26 PM »

Re: Trump
« Reply #11455 on: June 15, 2024, 06:46:27 PM »
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11456 on: June 15, 2024, 08:32:17 PM »


A guy from MIT does not know how a battery behaves in water?  Talk about tall tales.  Or lowest GPA.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16135
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11457 on: June 16, 2024, 10:10:28 AM »
To be fair, the MIT guy was likely right - I imagine no one did ask that question before
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6552
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11458 on: June 16, 2024, 07:26:40 PM »
Holy shit.
And the hilarious thing is the cult members will defend that complete ramble with a straight face while saying that Biden is incoherent.
Tom: "Claiming incredulity is a pretty bad argument. Calling it "insane" or "ridiculous" is not a good argument at all."

TFES Wiki Occam's Razor page, by Tom: "What's the simplest explanation; that NASA has successfully designed and invented never before seen rocket technologies from scratch which can accelerate 100 tons of matter to an escape velocity of 7 miles per second"

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7750
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #11459 on: June 16, 2024, 08:08:00 PM »
Holy shit.
And the hilarious thing is the cult members will defend that complete ramble with a straight face while saying that Biden is incoherent.
In fairness... What else is Trump gonna do?  Go over his vague revenge policies for the 200th time to the people who've heard it 200 times?
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.