Well now I guess it's down to the DoJ to act on the committee's recommendation and prosecute Trump: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/64006557...wned&at_medium=social&at_campaign=Social_Flow Will they?
So unsure people would know which was which they had to put a hat on one of them! So insecure! Classic. Nice one BW!
The comedy genius bit comes from the assumption that you thought Pelosi was probably a good choice for speaker
Raskin? If he was a politician in any other country, he would not be a politician any more. I wish they would actually prosecute Trump. If he did any serious wrongs, then get on with it and put him away!! But what they are doing is making America look like a lost cause, and I suspect that, whether it is a deliberate ploy of foreign powers, the machinations of the far left, or the last pathetic death throws of a nation that has lost its way, this ludicrous country needs to roll over and let the next generation get on with it. I fancy the Chinese or Far East over the Europeans though, because the American disease is something we are already infected by (Briton's cheering on people like Raskin, choosing what they know to be a pack of lies over truths, and calling for their political opponents to be shut up). New blood may be the answer. It certainly isn't the US though. If the west continues on this path towards fascism (the European influence that the powerful cannot see beyond), then maybe it is time for a real change.
Meanwhile, Trump mouthpiece might have been "...economical with the actualité..." in his CV: https://twitter.com/AdamKinzinger/status/1605206206771269639 From CNN:
S Well, they didn’t mention or discuss the reduced security present on the day, or the reasons why Pelosi, overseeing security on the day, turned down Trump’s offer of National Guard troopers. They didn’t discuss the FBI agents and informers who were involved on the day (evidence of this is their exemption from prosecution, which can be seen in their participation in prosecutions, without charges against themselves, and anonymous references to them). And the police are on video opening doors and barriers, ushering people in. I’d say three uncontested home runs is fair indication that he is not entirely incorrect in his accusations. Of course, the committee could have cleared these things up by addressing the very pressing points that Trump identified, but for some reason they ignored them (or, it is fair to suggest, covered them up). Just because he’s a nob, doesn’t mean he’s wrong. But not including all the evidence because it is inconvenient is a sign of a fascist government drunk on its own power. Which side do you take on that? Are you with 88 (your words, not mine) or against him? Or have you blurred the issue so much that it is impossible for you, or anyone else, to tell which side you are on, in terms of anti-fascism.
Interesting to compare how the same thing is reported by the XRW and liberal media. Take Kari "Loser" Lake (puhleeeeese!!!!!!!!!!!). Here's it was reported by the 'author' of such worthy tomes as: "The Enemy At Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11"; "The Roots of Obama's Rage"; "Obama's America: Unmaking the American Dream"; "Stealing America: What My Experience with Criminal Gangs Taught Me about Obama, Hillary, and the Democratic Party"; "The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi Roots of the American Left"; "Death of a Nation: Plantation Politics and the Making of the Democratic Party" and "United States of Socialism: Who's Behind It. Why It's Evil. How to Stop It". https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza/status/1607752356464103425 (the link contains a stupendous piece of word salad / legalese about the judge's ruling). Whereas the 'facts' (and lack of soft focus photo) are slightly different: https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1607862855508033536
Really BW? The judge , quite correctly, ordered the losing party to pay costs. As you might expect. But he also denied Hobbs $500,000 in sanctions against Lake because.... The court denied Hobbs’ request for sanctions against Lake, saying the claims presented in litigation were not groundless or brought in bad faith. So I would have to agree with you, when you say it is... Have a think about that mate. Neither groundless nor bad faith, says a judge. But we know you would have had it thrown out. Just which side are you on here? Due process or authoritarian suppression of citizens rights? And does that make you a Good guy or a bad guy? Are you not at all concerned that you may be sleep walking here? I am asking you, not accusing you. 88 (your words, not mine)
Clips of Santos mentioning his 'expertise' on Russia have caused many eyebrows to be raised: https://twitter.com/petestrzok/status/1608218999535304704 The attack by MTG is spectacularly unhinged (even by MTG standards): "...elite minded education..." WTF is that?
If they weren't suing him, he wouldn't get to grift, would he? Good luck to them. And good luck to Rittenhaus. May the one with the best argument win. I suspect justifying the presence of those affected will be a major part of it. I think Rittenhause was more of a local than two of them, and I suspect a deeper insight into their characters will also be key (two of them have extremely violent backgrounds, and one of them a fellon who lied in court about his medic status, and illegally carried his gun across county lines to point it at Rittenhaus, who could have been prosecuted, bang to rights, on similar charges to KR if he hadn't been forgiven as a government witness). Yep. Looking forward to it.
And on the subject of grifting, didn’t Gaige Grosskreutz‘ Civil claim for $10 million fall apart after it turned out he hadn’t declared in court that he was armed with a Glock that had a higher calibre than Rittenhaus’s AR? Grosskreutz, as you will all remember (being so on the ball with the details) is one of the three white guys who attacked Rittenhaus, getting himself shot in the arm that was holding the gun he was pointing at KR. You know. The guy who said in court that KR didn’t fire until the Glock was pointing towards him? Seems that particular grift got started in Jan 2021, so it would appear that Rittenhaus’s own grift is years behind those of the guys that attacked him.
Sorry. I was asleep. Did I miss all your responses to the damning release of Trump's tax returns? Did we get another glorious "This could be the one that finally gets him" vibe from them? Or was it just another "Mueller Moment"? No, there's no evidence of anything, but an anonymous lawyet who just resigned minutes after reading them says he is certain he could get a conviction if he stayed on, but he didn't.
This A hole is nearly as bad as Biden at BSing his backstory. Biden dropped out of his first presidential bid in the 80s because he got caught out using Neil Kinnock's family history as his own (I'm not kidding), lied entirely about his high school and University history, and openly admitted on video to doing to the Ukraine what Democrats attempted to impeach Trump for doing to the Ukraine. Seems he's competing with Michael Avanetti for being the highest qualified Biden type candidate for a 2024 run. Only Avanatti isn't likely to be available, despite having been a hotly tipped 2020 Democrat Presidential candidate during his Stormy Daniels case (oh, that didn't go so well did it, they really thought that could be the one to get Trump), but since those glory days, he has spent his time in court and in gaol for wire fraund and theft from Nike, Stormy Daniels, a disabled man from whom he swindled $4m, etc.. Santos is disgusting, and no one is defending him, except a few loons cheering him on for playing the Democrats own game against them. In these days of American politics though, where intrigues that make Watergate look like a bunch of guys that accidentally walked into the wrong hotel room go without any discussion on some media (Oh no, Hooter's been watching Fox again - a claim as revealing as it is incorrect). I mean, you don't have to believe, but you could at least take the trouble to explain why, rather than pretend it is just the result of an extreme right wing lunatic taking over Twitter.
Ha. Just realised you've been following Peter Strzok on Twitter. Hilarious. Doesn't have any negative impact on your righteous work highlighting Santos's twattery, but you are not exactly encouraging anyone to take you any more seriously! Are you? Having twitter as your primary source is bad enough, but following Peter Strozk? It's a bit like citing Goebels as proof that 88 wasn't all bad.
Does anyone else think that Kyle Rittenhouse looks a bit like the kid that was always on the cover of the US 'comedy' magazine, Mad? Or have I overdone the cheese again?
The irony being, of course, that they were both wrong. Or both half right, if you want to be more charitable. It was the crazy Trump-endorsed candidates, AND the pro-life overreach.
I always thought he was more like this guy... Sorry Lloyd. But I think I may have edged it there. Just imagine Pob with an AR shooting up the streets of Bushey (it was filmed in Bushey).
Sorry. Is there a seperate "Trump's Tax Returns: the one that will finally get him" thread? Can someone link to it please, or could we merge threads maybe? All that juicy stuff that was being promised. Must be a doozy. Can't wait to hear you guys' comments...
