Liberal Forum

GHETTOBLASTER » 28 Aug 2023, 11:51 am » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 11:51 am

Still think MAGA almost overthrew the US Goverment, murdered 5 cops, injured 140 more cops and could have dragged Pence to "The Gallows" in front of 100s of well armed Capitol Cops...?

I know they tried, and, as I stated, and as is documented in the RICO indictment, the elements of the crime were much more pervasive and widespread than the events of January 6th.

GHETTOBLASTER » 28 Aug 2023, 10:11 am » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 10:11 am

Find an article that states a Senate majority voted to convict Trump.

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impe ... %20convict.

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 8:01 am » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 8:01 am

The crime was their attempt to do so. 
 

Yet...after all that criminal investigation (by a demonrat led DOJ) absolutely NOBODY was charged with insurrection.

I wonder why?
 

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 11:55 am » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 11:55 am

https://www.npr.org/sections/trump-impe ... %20convict.

Nice find...but Barbara's post is not the whole truth when it comes to official Senate business. 
If she was reporting about what their favorite brand of whiskey is..then yes all it takes is 51 votes to make her claim 100% true.

GHETTOBLASTER » 28 Aug 2023, 11:59 am » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 11:59 am

Nice find...but Barbara's post is not the whole truth when it comes to official Senate business. 
If she was reporting about what their favorite brand of whiskey is..then yes all it takes is 51 votes to make her claim 100% true.

https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/ ... ent-trial/

"By joining all 50 Democrats who voted against Trump, the seven GOP senators created a clear majority against him and provided a bipartisan chorus of condemnation of the former president."

game set match.  

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 12:05 pm

https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/ ... ent-trial/

"By joining all 50 Democrats who voted against Trump, the seven GOP senators created a clear majority against him and provided a bipartisan chorus of condemnation of the former president."

game set match.

WRONG.
If it was A CLEAR MAJORITY then their mission to convict Trump would have been a success..!
Game, set, match.    

GHETTOBLASTER » 28 Aug 2023, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 12:20 pm

WRONG.
If it was A CLEAR MAJORITY then their mission to convict Trump would have been a success..!
Game, set, match.  

Wrong.  A clear majority does not guarantee success.  

According to the constitution, it takes two-thirds of the senators present to convict, and two-thirds is, by definition, some amount greater than a clear majority.  For example... 51-49 would be a clear majority.... nowhere near the 67 required. 

I bet the GED instructor who taught you arithmetic and ESL must be rolling over in her grave!

Now...go lick your wounds.  You misused the word, and then, you challenged me to find an article where a journalist said a majority of senators voted to convict.  A quick google search turned up two.  

Now you're just looking pathetic with your back peddling and tap dancing whereas you could have scored style points by simply admitting you were wrong from the jump and moved on.

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 12:54 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 12:54 pm

Wrong.  A clear majority does not guarantee success.  

According to the constitution, it takes two-thirds of the senators present to convict, and two-thirds is, by definition, some amount greater than a clear majority.  For example... 51-49 would be a clear majority.... nowhere near the 67 required. 

I bet the GED instructor who taught you arithmetic and ESL must be rolling over in her grave!

Now...go lick your wounds.  You misused the word, and then, you challenged me to find an article where a journalist said a majority of senators voted to convict.  A quick google search turned up two.  

Now you're just looking pathetic with your back peddling and tap dancing whereas you could have scored style points by simply admitting you were wrong from the jump and moved on.

NOPE.
When it comes to OFFICIAL SENATE BUSINESS they need to have  2/3rds of the members in agreement with the issue in order to have a CLEAR MAJORITY.  

GHETTOBLASTER » 28 Aug 2023, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 12:57 pm

NOPE.
When it comes to OFFICIAL SENATE BUSINESS they need to have  2/3rds of the members in agreement with the issue in order to have a CLEAR MAJORITY.

you're like the tar baby.  

amf

maineman » 27 Aug 2023, 9:39 pm » wrote: ↑

27 Aug 2023, 9:39 pm

the majority of senators is working fine for me.  And the indictments by federal and state prosecutors are also working fine for me as well, hot plate.

I wonder how many of those 18 co-defendants in Fani's indictments will plead guilty.... and turn state's evidence against the clown.  Fun times ahead.  Keep sitting on that hot plate so your IQ rises above that of the average asparagus stalk and you might have a CHANCE of absorbing some of the **** your clown is in for.

It's hilarious how scared of Trump you idiots still are. 
Fani's court case is a joke, and everyone knows it.  

Good to see that my calling out your Room Temp IQ hurts so badly.
 

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 12:05 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 12:05 pm

https://www.newsnationnow.com/politics/ ... ent-trial/

"By joining all 50 Democrats who voted against Trump, the seven GOP senators created a clear majority against him and provided a bipartisan chorus of condemnation of the former president."

game set match.

What did that clear majority do for you, *******?
Not a damn thing. 

game. set. match.   Room temp.
 

There is actually a law against participation in insurrection: 18 U.S. Code § 2383
Strange that with ALL these indictments, no one charged Trump with violating that law.

golfboy » 28 Aug 2023, 6:51 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 6:51 pm

What did that clear majority do for you, *******?
Not a damn thing. 

game. set. match.   Room temp.

it didn't need to do anything.  The clown got his *** kicked and now is hobbled by indictments.  The indictment parade may energize the MAGA base, but they are, at best, less than 40% of the electorate. That won't get you to 271.   Hot plate.

golfboy » 28 Aug 2023, 7:12 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 7:12 pm

There is actually a law against participation in insurrection: 18 U.S. Code § 2383
Strange that with ALL these indictments, no one charged Trump with violating that law.

so many laws to indict for breaking, so little time.  Wise prosecutors pick the ones that they can easily make the case for.  

Can you imagine how many of those 18 co-defendants in the Georgia case are being offered plea deals?

If YOU were Rudy, would YOU risk going to prison for a **** clown who stiffed you on your legal fees?    

golfboy » 28 Aug 2023, 6:50 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 6:50 pm

It's hilarious how scared of Trump you idiots still are. 
Fani's court case is a joke, and everyone knows it.  

Good to see that my calling out your Room Temp IQ hurts so badly.

EVERYBODY?  you talk really big with nothing to support your ****.

Room temp hurts?  

I consider the source and it just makes me chuckle.  You are a certifiably brain-damaged aphasic dyslexic idiot who gets lost in word soup all the time.  I love to write long posts in response to you because I know you never get to the last line.  I can't begin to count the many many times I have added a little easter egg for you to find in a post of mine that you could claim and get me self-banned...and you never caught it.  EVER.  funny stuff.  I'll try it again sometime soon, so, maybe this time, you'll find it!  If so, it'll be a first.    

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 7:44 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 7:44 pm

EVERYBODY?  you talk really big with nothing to support your ****.

Room temp hurts?  

I consider the source and it just makes me chuckle.  You are a certifiably brain-damaged aphasic dyslexic idiot who gets lost in word soup all the time.  I love to write long posts in response to you because I know you never get to the last line.  I can't begin to count the many many times I have added a little easter egg for you to find in a post of mine that you could claim and get me self-banned...and you never caught it.  EVER.  funny stuff.  I'll try it again sometime soon, so, maybe this time, you'll find it!  If so, it'll be a first.  

If it doesn't hurt, why so much reaction to it?   Me thinks you protest too much.

 

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 7:36 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 7:36 pm

so many laws to indict for breaking, so little time.  Wise prosecutors pick the ones that they can easily make the case for.  

Can you imagine how many of those 18 co-defendants in the Georgia case are being offered plea deals?

If YOU were Rudy, would YOU risk going to prison for a **** clown who stiffed you on your legal fees?  

Weird that no one bothered to charge Trump with the actual law you claim he committed. 

 

golfboy » 28 Aug 2023, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 8:00 pm

Weird that no one bothered to charge Trump with the actual law you claim he committed.

he committed a law?

how does someone do that?

maineman » 28 Aug 2023, 8:03 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 8:03 pm

he committed a law?

how does someone do that?

Poor Room Temp... You need a little Mexican boy to explain it to you?
 

golfboy » 28 Aug 2023, 8:00 pm » wrote: ↑

28 Aug 2023, 8:00 pm

If it doesn't hurt, why so much reaction to it?   Me thinks you protest too much.

I only "react" by calling you "hot plate".  It really doesn't take a lot of effort.

And it's cute to see you try to look all intellectual by using the rather arcane word, "methinks" but **** up the spelling.  Brain damage.  "hot plate".