06 Sep 23
@wildgrass saidThen why were the alternate electors allowed to do it in 1960? They were not charged with a crime. Is the election result the only reason?
The "alternate" electors were fake and clearly illegal since they only existed because of the lies.
Al Gore was not arrested because he didn't commit crimes. Trump did. It's got nothing to do with free speech.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Hawaii
Al Gore conceded. Trump didn't. It has nothing to do with crimes. All you have are allegations of crimes, no convictions. Besides, Al Gore is another establishment stooge. He worked to spread lies about global warming that uninformed people continue to spread to this day. He said CO2 drives temperatures when the opposite is true in ice core samples. That is just another propaganda tactic to scare people into wanting to be taxed and controlled. The Rockefellers are behind the global warming movement along with their cohort Maurice Strong.
@averagejoe1 saidListen to the phone call dummy.
Threatened them with what? What was the threat? With a gun which he acquired by falsifying an application, for which he was sent to prison for the adjudicated 10 years?
I find lib arguments to be,,,,,how do you say....out of balance?
Much like when a mob boss contacts you and says if you do not comply there will / may be CONSEQUENCES, hell Joe maybe the jury will agree with you and mb when they hear the perfect phone call and everything will be fine.
06 Sep 23
@kevcvs57 saidOnce again you prove it is about speech. You want to outlaw political speech that questions election integrity. Saying there would be consequences is not a threat. It is a reality if the election was stolen. The consequences would be no democracy and his reputation could suffer if history proved Trump right.
Listen to the phone call dummy.
Much like when a mob boss contacts you and says if you do not comply there will / may be CONSEQUENCES, hell Joe maybe the jury will agree with you and mb when they hear the perfect phone call and everything will be fine.
You are imagining threats when he clearly was not specific about what the consequences would be. You all have nothing. You were cow towed into thinking it had to be a threat with left wing propaganda.
@metal-brain saidThe head of the US Executive Branch, which includes the Department of Justice which prosecutes Federal crimes, told the Georgia Secretary of State that the latter was committing a "criminal offense" and that it he didn't "find" Trump enough votes to win the election (AFTER there had been a hand count of every ballot) he and his lawyer were "at risk".
Once again you prove it is about speech. You want to outlaw political speech that questions election integrity. Saying there would be consequences is not a threat. It is a reality if the election was stolen. The consequences would be no democracy and his reputation could suffer if history proved Trump right.
You are imagining threats when he clearly was not specific a ...[text shortened]... all have nothing. You were cow towed into thinking it had to be a threat with left wing propaganda.
And you idiots are pretending that wasn't a "threat"?
I bet a jury finds differently. And "freedom of speech" doesn't include threats designed to make someone do illegal acts for your benefit.
EDIT: And I realize MB is too much of a deranged conspiracy nut who has been carrying Trump's water for 7 years to admit this and Joe is too stupid to understand it because it contradicts what Fox News is telling him.
06 Sep 23
I guess the main question is now: should Trump plead insanity?
"It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under any Federal statute that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts."
Assuming he actually believed his absurd assertions that he won Georgia "by hundreds of thousands of votes" even after there had been a hand count of every single ballot showing him the loser by about 12,000, was he laboring under "a severe mental disease or defect," which made him unable to distinguish between fantasy and reality?
@metal-brain saidAs already explained to you, Kennedy had already pulled ahead of Nixon in Hawaii in a court ordered recount by the time those electors were chosen.
Then why were the alternate electors allowed to do it in 1960? They were not charged with a crime. Is the election result the only reason?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_United_States_presidential_election_in_Hawaii
Al Gore conceded. Trump didn't. It has nothing to do with crimes. All you have are allegations of crimes, no convictions. Besides, Al Gore is anothe ...[text shortened]... led. The Rockefellers are behind the global warming movement along with their cohort Maurice Strong.
They were the electors actually chosen by the People of Hawaii.
06 Sep 23
@kevcvs57 saidYeah, one of many ways to interpret the word threaten. You better hope that it does not keep Trump from becoming president.
Listen to the phone call dummy.
Much like when a mob boss contacts you and says if you do not comply there will / may be CONSEQUENCES, hell Joe maybe the jury will agree with you and mb when they hear the perfect phone call and everything will be fine.
06 Sep 23
@no1marauder saidHere is smething you fellers havent touched on.....WHAT was Trump suggesting would 'happen' to the Sec of State? I mean, is Trump saying somebody woudl get him, get his family, paint his front door, crash into his car??
The head of the US Executive Branch, which includes the Department of Justice which prosecutes Federal crimes, told the Georgia Secretary of State that the latter was committing a "criminal offense" and that it he didn't "find" Trump enough votes to win the election (AFTER there had been a hand count of every ballot) he and his lawyer were "at risk".
And you idiots are ...[text shortened]... mit this and Joe is too stupid to understand it because it contradicts what Fox News is telling him.
Tell us what would have been done to the Sec of State. Something physical? What?
06 Sep 23
@averagejoe1 saidNo you moron, that he and his lawyer would be prosecuted for a "criminal offense" by Trump's DOJ.
Here is smething you fellers havent touched on.....WHAT was Trump suggesting would 'happen' to the Sec of State? I mean, is Trump saying somebody woudl get him, get his family, paint his front door, crash into his car??
Tell us what would have been done to the Sec of State. Something physical? What?
06 Sep 23
@no1marauder saidSorry, cannot for the life of me buy such a plan of action against the sec of state for just doing nothing. You imply that Trump at that time could tell him 'what to do'. Our pres is not a king, marauder.
No you moron, that he and his lawyer would be prosecuted for a "criminal offense" by Trump's DOJ.
I have never seen so much dead air on the forum.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147483
06 Sep 23
@no1marauder saidare you pretending the DOJ isnt corrupt? idiot!
The head of the US Executive Branch, which includes the Department of Justice which prosecutes Federal crimes, told the Georgia Secretary of State that the latter was committing a "criminal offense" and that it he didn't "find" Trump enough votes to win the election (AFTER there had been a hand count of every ballot) he and his lawyer were "at risk".
And you idiots are ...[text shortened]... mit this and Joe is too stupid to understand it because it contradicts what Fox News is telling him.
06 Sep 23
@mott-the-hoople saidMarauder says above that DOJ 'told the sec that he was committing a crim offense....." Marauder dares give credence to a government department that is up to its ears in miscues, to say the least.
are you pretending the DOJ isnt corrupt? idiot!
What a laugh. The Forum is abound with dead air.
06 Sep 23
@no1marauder saidWhy do you think it was a threat?
The head of the US Executive Branch, which includes the Department of Justice which prosecutes Federal crimes, told the Georgia Secretary of State that the latter was committing a "criminal offense" and that it he didn't "find" Trump enough votes to win the election (AFTER there had been a hand count of every ballot) he and his lawyer were "at risk".
And you idiots are ...[text shortened]... mit this and Joe is too stupid to understand it because it contradicts what Fox News is telling him.
At risk of what? You don't have any specifics.
It seems like you just want to believe that. That was the narrative you were fed from your party so you defend the nonsense. Who did Trump threaten and with what? Just being on the wrong side of history would have consequences. Right?
06 Sep 23
@no1marauder saidThat is not true. Nixon was declared the winner before those electors were chosen as I proved to you. You never posted your source of information. How about doing that?
As already explained to you, Kennedy had already pulled ahead of Nixon in Hawaii in a court ordered recount by the time those electors were chosen.
They were the electors actually chosen by the People of Hawaii.
06 Sep 23
1 edit
@metal-brain saidI did to, you lying POS. Over a month ago on page 1 of your "Democrats hate Freedom of Speech" thread.
That is not true. Nixon was declared the winner before those electors were chosen as I proved to you. You never posted your source of information. How about doing that?