*

Offline crutonius

  • *
  • Posts: 676
  • Just a regular guy. No funny business here.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10220 on: March 31, 2023, 04:27:23 PM »
https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-new-york-indictment-election-027d0e5ac1881a4c55c6379deae75faa

what a cuck



Why in God's name does anyone watch Tucker Carlson anymore?  He doesn't believe a word he says and he has more contempt for Trump than most of us do.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10221 on: March 31, 2023, 05:11:47 PM »
https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-new-york-indictment-election-027d0e5ac1881a4c55c6379deae75faa

what a cuck



Why in God's name does anyone watch Tucker Carlson anymore?  He doesn't believe a word he says and he has more contempt for Trump than most of us do.

Every bit as much, anyway. I think a lot of us have a lot of contempt for Trump.

People either watch him because they're locked into their little bubbles and don't know any better or because he's such a slimy scumbag with such a ridiculous amount of influence that they want to see what he has to say and may even be morbidly entertained by it.

On the plus side for Tucker if you need a politician to give an unbiased opinion about politicians being arrested does it get better than Rod Blagojevich?
« Last Edit: March 31, 2023, 05:14:15 PM by Roundy »
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3583
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10222 on: March 31, 2023, 05:16:33 PM »
I had to search for the clip because I can't believe Blago, a Dem, served 8 years on federal charges of public corruption, actually said that. He did.

Equating DJT being indicted/arrested to the opening salvo of the Civil War? He must have been super high on something quite potent. Even if you don't agree with the actions, Civil War? Really? We should lock him up for another 8 years just for being an idiot. Maybe throw Tuck in the joint too just for having him on. No wonder the country is so fucked up with pundits like this in lofted positions influencing public opinion, all just for ratings and stock prices.

*

Offline crutonius

  • *
  • Posts: 676
  • Just a regular guy. No funny business here.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10223 on: March 31, 2023, 05:59:16 PM »
I don't know if most people remember this but Donald Trump pardoned Blago.

*

Offline Roundy

  • Abdicator of the Zetetic Council
  • *
  • Posts: 4202
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10224 on: March 31, 2023, 07:07:36 PM »
I don't know if most people remember this but Donald Trump pardoned Blago.

Heh. Like I said, completely unbiased.
Dr. Frank is a physicist. He says it's impossible. So it's impossible.
My friends, please remember Tom said this the next time you fall into the trap of engaging him, and thank you. :)

*

Offline honk

  • *
  • Posts: 3393
  • resident goose
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10225 on: March 31, 2023, 07:17:00 PM »
I had to search for the clip because I can't believe Blago, a Dem, served 8 years on federal charges of public corruption, actually said that. He did.

Equating DJT being indicted/arrested to the opening salvo of the Civil War? He must have been super high on something quite potent. Even if you don't agree with the actions, Civil War? Really? We should lock him up for another 8 years just for being an idiot. Maybe throw Tuck in the joint too just for having him on. No wonder the country is so fucked up with pundits like this in lofted positions influencing public opinion, all just for ratings and stock prices.

Of course he doesn't really believe that. He's a grifter talking to another grifter, trying to rile up the rubes who support yet another grifter. They know that Trump is guilty. In fact, I'm sure that most of Trump's fans know he's guilty as well. They just don't care. Undoubtedly many of them envy and admire Trump for his affair with a porn star, while simultaneously believing that the affair never happened, because Trump is a pious and respectable family man who would never cheat on his wife - and also because Trump is such an awesome stud who scores all the time that Daniels was far below his very high standards for women. As I've said before, Trumpism is inherently contradictory.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2023, 05:26:48 AM by honk »
ur retartet but u donut even no it and i walnut tell u y

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10695
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10226 on: March 31, 2023, 08:52:54 PM »
Your source is a porn star. One step up from the illegal profession of prostitution. Hardly the best source. Stormy Daniels even went on Jimmy Kimmel and lied that it wasn't her signature on the denial letter when it was. Recall where AATW said:

In the "Took me 30 seconds" in getting us the video did AllAroundTheWorld even bother watching the Jan 2018 Jimmy Kimmel interview?
I watched the bit where she said that wasn’t her signature and she didn’t know where that statement had come from.
I was responding specifically to that.
I neither know nor care if they had an affair.

Yeah, this was a lie:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/30/adult-film-star-stormy-daniels-issues-new-denial-of-affair-with-trump

    Hours before she was set to appear on the show, Daniels issued a surprise statement in which she flatly denied the affair in 2006. But on the show, Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, cast doubt on the authenticity of the statement, only to be contradicted by her attorney moments after the interview concluded.

    “She was having fun on Kimmel and being her normal playful self,” her attorney, Keith Davidson, told the Guardian in an email.

    “The signature is indeed hers as she signed the statement today in the presence of me and her manager, Gina Rodriguez.”

She lied in an interview, contradicted by her own attorney. Positive evidence that your porn star fav is making lies on this subject.

Even according to the alleged events, the claim is that Trump paid her to shut her up. This suggest that she was making actions to extort him. It is hardly believable that someone would randomly give hush money to someone they had sex with decades ago, and hadn't spoken with since. Stormy Daniels is an extortionist in that scenario.

According to DT, he didn't have sex with her and she was extorting him for money, and that her only proof is a picture with Trump where he is dressed in full golf gear. This is believable, considering that she is a porn star, a liar, and an extortionist in either version of the events.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2023, 09:10:56 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10227 on: March 31, 2023, 09:55:53 PM »
Tom, I wouldn't be too concerned about what she said on a talk show where she may or may not be bound by an NDA.  I'd be more concerned about what she said in court and under oath in front of a judge and the grand jury where any NDA would not apply.
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3583
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10228 on: April 01, 2023, 12:20:29 AM »
Your source is a porn star. One step up from the illegal profession of prostitution. Hardly the best source. Stormy Daniels even went on Jimmy Kimmel and lied that it wasn't her signature on the denial letter when it was.

Actually, I think the star witness here is going to be Michael Cohen, not Stormy. I don't know that Stormy's testimony really matters. I'm guessing they have "receipts" for all of these transactions through that National Enquirer guy and maybe Trump Corp's CFO and such. It's basically how they got to Cohen in the first place. Stormy saying she slept with DJT or not is almost inconsequential, especially considering there are something like 30 charges they have to wade through.

Now when it comes to Cohen, probably equally problematic in terms of truthiness.

All in all, a grand jury decided whether there was enough there to indict. Apparently they felt there was and the rule of law prevails.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 3583
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10229 on: April 01, 2023, 12:23:36 AM »
I had to search for the clip because I can't believe Blago, a Dem, served 8 years on federal charges of public corruption, actually said that. He did.

Equating DJT being indicted/arrested to the opening salvo of the Civil War? He must have been super high on something quite potent. Even if you don't agree with the actions, Civil War? Really? We should lock him up for another 8 years just for being an idiot. Maybe throw Tuck in the joint too just for having him on. No wonder the country is so fucked up with pundits like this in lofted positions influencing public opinion, all just for ratings and stock prices.

Of course he doesn't really believe that. He's a grifter talking to another grifter, trying to rile up the rubes who support yet another grifter. They know that Trump is guilty. In fact, I'm sure that most of Trump's fans know he's guilty as well. They just don't care. Undoubtedly many of them envy and admire Trump for his affair with a porn star, while simultaneously believing that the affair never happened, because Trump is a pious and respectable family man who never cheat on his wife - and also because Trump is such an awesome stud who scores all the time that Daniels was far below his very high standards for women. As I've said before, Trumpism is inherently contradictory.

I'm just surprised that Blago raced to DJT's defense when he was fired by him on The Apprentice...But as Crout mentioned, Trump did pardon him. That certainly would make up for being axed on national television. Grifters will grift.


Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #10230 on: April 01, 2023, 12:48:20 AM »
Tom is deflecting away from the fact that this case does not hinge on whether or not Stormy Daniela told the truth or not. What matters is whether or not the hush money he paid her was illegally expensed.

She could be walking around telling the world that she is Jesus and she pegged him and it would be irrelevant to the criminal charges Trump is facing.

*

Offline crutonius

  • *
  • Posts: 676
  • Just a regular guy. No funny business here.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10231 on: April 01, 2023, 03:56:19 AM »
I recall reading that Stormy didn't actually testify in this trial.  They volunteered to but they haven't requested it unless I've misread it.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10232 on: April 01, 2023, 06:22:44 AM »
I recall reading that Stormy didn't actually testify in this trial.  They volunteered to but they haven't requested it unless I've misread it.
Writing about a trial that hasn't occurred yet...

Not only do we see revisionist history, but we are treated to revisionist pre-history...
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 7723
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10233 on: April 01, 2023, 07:24:35 AM »
I recall reading that Stormy didn't actually testify in this trial.  They volunteered to but they haven't requested it unless I've misread it.
Writing about a trial that hasn't occurred yet...

Not only do we see revisionist history, but we are treated to revisionist pre-history...
Well... They did have a trial.  To see if they should indite Trump.  Which involves witnesses, a judge, and a jury.
The conviction will get overturned on appeal.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6534
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10234 on: April 01, 2023, 08:16:53 AM »
Your source is a porn star.
Your source is the only ex-President to be impeached twice and the only President in history to be charged with a crime.
But you really are clinging on to this “did they have an affair” thing. That is no longer the issue.
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"

Rama Set

Re: Trump
« Reply #10235 on: April 01, 2023, 02:00:14 PM »
I recall reading that Stormy didn't actually testify in this trial.  They volunteered to but they haven't requested it unless I've misread it.
Writing about a trial that hasn't occurred yet...

Not only do we see revisionist history, but we are treated to revisionist pre-history...

Someone said trial instead of Grand Jury! Get ‘em!

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 2871
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10236 on: April 01, 2023, 04:58:12 PM »
I recall reading that Stormy didn't actually testify in this trial.  They volunteered to but they haven't requested it unless I've misread it.
Writing about a trial that hasn't occurred yet...

Not only do we see revisionist history, but we are treated to revisionist pre-history...
Well... They did have a trial.  To see if they should indite Trump.  Which involves witnesses, a judge, and a jury.
I can see why the US no longer wanted you within its borders.
To be honest I am getting pretty bored of this place.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10695
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10237 on: April 01, 2023, 05:27:01 PM »
Your source is a porn star.
Your source is the only ex-President to be impeached twice and the only President in history to be charged with a crime.

This is fairly weak, considering that he is also the only president to be acquitted twice:

NPR - Senate Acquits Trump In Impeachment Trial — Again

Quote from: AllAroubdTheWorld
But you really are clinging on to this “did they have an affair” thing. That is no longer the issue.

Actually it is. I was responding to the post immediacy prior that was alleging that the affair occured. This is on topic to the discussion. You are trying to claim that it somehow no longer matters and doesn't need to be discussed. This is clearly a form of concession from you.

*

Offline AATW

  • *
  • Posts: 6534
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10238 on: April 01, 2023, 05:30:58 PM »
This is fairly weak, considering that he is also the only president to be acquitted twice
lol.
Yeah, it’s a real scratcher why the party with the majority didn’t convict their own president.
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: 10695
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Trump
« Reply #10239 on: April 01, 2023, 05:59:34 PM »
This is fairly weak, considering that he is also the only president to be acquitted twice
lol.
Yeah, it’s a real scratcher why the party with the majority didn’t convict their own president.

No more mysterious than a majority of radical democrats in the other chamber voting to impeach.