Liberal Forum

Neo » 12 Sep 2023, 12:35 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:35 pm

How many blm riots interfered with government business functions? I know city blocks were occupied, justice centers fire bombed. Government business was halted or interrupted on literally hundreds of occasions. Not one suggestion of insurrection or sedition or interference with government business for blm. We don't have royalty. Congress is no more sacred than a local justice center or a small business auto repair shop. Neither should be attacked by rioters, the penalties should be equal.

the 14th Amendment has nothing to do with attempting to disrupt government.  It has to do with rebelling against the CONSTITUTION.

maineman » 12 Sep 2023, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:08 pm

Reread my reply #2. I think the story about Trump offering 10K troops and being denied by Pelosi is anecdotal, unsubstantiated **** and my links alluded to that fact. 
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ization-2/

BLM demonstrations differed from 1/6/21 in one significant way:  The latter was a rebellion intent on disrupting the constitutionally mandated certification of the Electoral College results.  The former was not trying to attack the Constitution or to overthrow the government.

Naturally, all the FACTS are "****" when they interfere with your liberal lies!:
Well, take your blinders off and read those facts you deny right here:

Trump gave order to 'make sure' Jan. 6 rally was 'safe event,'
Pentagon memo shows Gen. Milley’s recollection undercuts months-long effort by Democrats to suggest Trump wanted to incite violence: many key questions left unanswered.
Just the News by John Solomon July 21, 2022

 House Democrats' marquee summer show of primetime investigative hearings ended Thursday night where it began: unable or unwilling to answer essential questions about the Jan. 6 Capitol breach. Chief among them: If Donald Trump wanted to incite violence that fateful day, as his critics suggest, then why did he order the Pentagon to have a large military force ready to quell a disturbance? And why did a Democrat-led Congress turn down the assistance of pop National Guard troops in the face of intelligence warnings about violence? By their own admission, Democrats set up the hearings to evade such scrutiny. They declared any questions about what House Speaker Nancy Pelosi knew about the potential for Jan. 6 violence and when she knew it were off limits. Secret Service agents were never called to testify in public about whether former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson's story about Trump trying to force his limousine to go to the Capitol were true. And questions about how those in charge of Capitol security responded to FBI and Homeland Security pre-event warnings about potential violence were never asked, much less answered. Instead, the Jan. 6 committee put on hearsay testimony from Hutchinson and released partial transcripts or video snippets of testimony without allowing Republicans or Trump's own lawyers to cross-examine witnesses or challenge the narrative offered to the American public.

A Capitol Police timeline obtained by Just the News shows the Trump Pentagon first offered National Guard troops to the Capitol Police on Jan. 2, 2021, four full days before the event. The police turned down the offer but then began to have second thoughts. The Capitol Police then asked their political minders — the House sergeant at arms chief among them — for permission to accept the troops on Jan. 4 but were turned down on the ground that such a show of force would create bad "optics," the records show.

 
 

Zeets2 » 12 Sep 2023, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:47 pm

Naturally, all the FACTS are "****" when they interfere with your liberal lies!:
Well, take your blinders off and read those facts you deny right here:

An op-ed by John Solomon is not "factual".

And if the last sentence is true, show them, by all means!

Neo » 12 Sep 2023, 12:30 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:30 pm

Questionable election integrity. Both sides dispute the results of elections. 

Persecution of political rivals using the criminal justice system. 

Incendiary rhetoric labeling rivals as subhuman. 

We are closer than you think. 


 

Humanity is a banana republic of generation gaps pretending nobody knew or knows how evolving specifically keeps life never same totals sum population individually added twice among the 8 billion evolving forward, here now.

civil law of the land, criminal courts of geography, international court of economic values doesn't intend on correcting it ever since rank gets privileges the gornerned are required to die for regardless moral grounds, legal precedence ancestrally established, ethical ways to protect previous 4 generations from their replacements debunking any reality left.

maineman » 12 Sep 2023, 12:08 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:08 pm

Reread my reply #2. I think the story about Trump offering 10K troops and being denied by Pelosi is anecdotal, unsubstantiated **** and my links alluded to that fact.  And, regardless, McConnell bore equal responsibility for Capitol security.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ization-2/

BLM demonstrations differed from 1/6/21 in one significant way:  The latter was a rebellion intent on disrupting the constitutionally mandated certification of the Electoral College results.  The former was not trying to attack the Constitution or to overthrow the government.

And all rioting disturbs me.  ANYONE who resorts to violence should be held criminally liable.  I wonder why Trump's DOJ did not do so for the perpetrators of the BLM riots, don't you?

Need more proof?
Here you go:

Before Mob Stormed the Capitol, Days of Security Planning Involved Cabinet Officials and President Trump
A Pentagon memo offers one version of events — six days of preparation for a rally that quickly spiraled out of control.
by Joshua Kaplan  Jan. 9, 2021 
President Donald Trump met with top military officials and gave his approval to activate the D.C. National Guard three days before he encouraged a mob of angry protesters to take their grievances to the U.S. Capitol.A Pentagon memo released Friday offers these insights, as well as the first detailed timeline of the bungled law enforcement response to Wednesday’s insurrection. The timeline shows that the planning started at least as far back as Dec. 31 and included discussion with select Cabinet members of the potential need for Pentagon reinforcements.

And if you're stubborn enough to STILL disbelieve it, you can read that memo here:
Because we KNOW you Trump-hating liberals would NEVER bother to learn the truth on your own, not when you allow fellow Trump haters like Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg to do your thinking for you! 
DODIG-2022-039 V2 508.pdf

You've made it quite clear that the limits of your intelligence require that you claim all statements of FACT regarding Trump are "unsubstantiated ****", while every lie offered by Trump haters like you is happily believed and becomes the reality in your feeble mind.

CONTINUED
 
 

Zeets2 » 12 Sep 2023, 1:13 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 1:13 pm

Need more proof?
Here you go:

And if you're stubborn enough to STILL disbelieve it, you can read that memo here:
Because we KNOW you Trump-hating liberals would NEVER bother to learn the truth on your own, not when you allow fellow Trump haters like Rachel Maddow, Joe Scarborough, Joy Behar and Whoopi Goldberg to do your thinking for you! 
DODIG-2022-039 V2 508.pdf

You've made it quite clear that the limits of your intelligence require that you claim all statements of FACT regarding Trump are "unsubstantiated ****", while every lie offered by Trump haters like you is happily believed and becomes the reality in your feeble mind.

CONTINUED

Now tell me, genius.  If as you claim that "all rioting disturbs you", why do you suddenly go mute when the riots of Trump-hating rabble do the same?  Did you pen a single response to that effect in 2020 when BLM and Antifa attacked the White House and spent months burning down major cities?  And the reason Trump's DOJ did not send more security to those cities is because THE DEMOCRAT GOVERNORS OF THOSE STATES REFUSED IT!
Here are THOSE facts you've likely believed to be unsubstantiated **** as well, right?:

Governors Push Back On Trump's Threat To Deploy Federal Troops To Quell Unrest
NPR June 2, 2020  By Scott Neuman

Democratic Governors Reject Trump’s Threat to Deploy Military
Governors from around the country criticized the president for acting outside his authority in proposing to send the military into states seeing protests.
US News By Lauren Camera  June 2, 2020

"I reject the notion that the federal government can send troops into the state of Illinois," Gov. J.B. Pritzker said not even an hour after Trump's remarks Monday at the White House, adding that the president has no legal footing to send military troops into states.The president's historic remarks came during a press conference in the Rose Garden while outside the White House gates the U.S. Park Police, Secret Service, National Guard and other federal and local law enforcement officials dispersed a crowd of protesters using what appeared to be tear gas, batons and rubber bullets."The president has repeatedly proven he is incapable of governing and shown nothing but false bravado throughout the chaos that has accompanied his time in office," Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington state said in a statement, calling Trump's announcement a "reckless fit."Inslee has activated the National Guard but has not deployed it, as has Democratic Gov. Kate Brown of Oregon, who said she was concerned their appearance would cause more damage by escalating an already tense environment."Trump wants governors to deploy the National Guard as a show of force to intimidate the public," Brown said after the president's call with governors on Monday. "I want to ensure that the public can safely raise their voices in this much-needed call for reform."Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York had the same message for the president: "I say thank you but no thank you," he said in an interview on CNN.

No doubt you were completely unaware of this information, or you wouldn't act like such a horse's *** to ask such a stupid question as you did! 
 

maineman » 12 Sep 2023, 12:58 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:58 pm

An op-ed by John Solomon is not "factual".

And if the last sentence is true, show them, by all means!

Here's the link to the full text of the DoD memo:You can read that full memo here:File
DODIG-2022-039 V2 508.pdf

And here's the most pertinent lines from it DENYING THE NEED TO DEPLOY ADDITIONAL SECURITY FOR J6th!:

The DCNG executed its approved mission as directed on the morning of January 5, 2021.  Additionally, on January 5, 2021, Mayor Bowser sent a letter to both the DoD and DoJ advising that no other Federal law enforcement support personnel were required and discouraged the deployment of any additional Federal law enforcement personnel without first consulting with MPD leadership.13 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 
Conclusions on DoD Actions Before January 6, 2021   We looked for a role or responsibility for the DoD to act preemptively to prevent or deter what later happened at the Capitol.  We found none.  On the contrary, we found restrictions that limited the DoD’s roles and responsibilities in planning and providing support for domestic civil disturbance operations (CDO).  These restrictions, set forth in statutes and implementing DoD directives, do not limit what civil authorities can request, but rather mandate what support DoD can provide to civilian authorities by setting strict limits. 

Isn't it amazing what you can learn when you previously counted on nothing but left-wing fake news sources, and need to be educated and informed by anonymous posters on social media?

Not that I'd ever expect you to learn from such debasing humiliation, and I have no doubt you'll continue to expose yourself as a left-wing shill who's nothing but a mindless puppet that cares nothing about the truth! 

maineman » 12 Sep 2023, 12:43 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 12:43 pm

the 14th Amendment has nothing to do with attempting to disrupt government.  It has to do with rebelling against the CONSTITUTION.

There was no rebellion against the constitution. There was a bunch of angry and unarmed Trump supporters who wanted to petition congress for a redress of grievances. Peaceful civil disobedience was the plan, end ot story. Some individuals committed violence and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Most took guided tours and remained out of private areas. Progressives wanted a rebellion, the protesters wisely didn't bite. 
 

Unfortunately, I can foresee a day when the dim-0-craps regain control of the House and reinstitute the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) (maybe under a different name): “Are you or have you ever been a member of the Republican Party” ?

Presumed innocent until proven Republican.
 

Neo » 12 Sep 2023, 1:44 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 1:44 pm

There was no rebellion against the constitution. There was a bunch of angry and unarmed Trump supporters who wanted to petition congress for a redress of grievances. Peaceful civil disobedience was the plan, end ot story. Some individuals committed violence and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Most took guided tours and remained out of private areas. Progressives wanted a rebellion, the protesters wisely didn't bite.

cool story.  Trump told them that Mike Pence needed to do the right thing.  The lynch mob was chanting hang Mike Pence.  They broke into the capitol and disrupted the CONSTITUTIONALLY mandated counting of electoral college votes.

Willis is an ignorant *** ****!!!!

"Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her leftist comrades moan about “Donald Trump’s fake-electors scheme” as if it were a cutting-edge conspiracy concocted at his Mar-a-Lago compound in the wee small hours of the morning. In fact, “fake electors” are neither new nor nefarious. And they are not fake, either. Believe it or not, a Congressional Research Service paper discusses how to proceed when a state sends to Washington two separate slates of presidential electors — as has happened in the past! CRS spelled this out on December 8, 2020 in a 13-page document titled “Counting Electoral Votes: An Overview of Procedures at the Joint Session, Including Objections by Members of Congress.” Indeed, beneath the bold-faced heading below, this report includes an entire section about how to handle what Willis and other Democrat liars deceitfully call “fake electors”:

Receipt of Two Certificates From the Same State

As the CRS study declares:

“Influenced by its historical experience prior to 1887, Congress was particularly concerned in the statute of 1887 with the case of two lists of electors and votes being presented to Congress from the same state.”

The relevant law is the Electoral Count Act of 1887, particularly 3 U.S. Code § 15."

https://spectator.org/this-just-in-comp ... ed-before/
 

maineman » 12 Sep 2023, 2:20 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 2:20 pm

cool story.  Trump told them that Mike Pence needed to do the right thing.  The lynch mob was chanting hang Mike Pence.  They broke into the capitol and disrupted the CONSTITUTIONALLY mandated counting of electoral college votes.

Disruption of a vote is not insurrection or sedition.  How many government votes did blm activities disrupt? January 6th was a mostly peaceful demonstration. Those that rioted had no intention or capacity to take over the government. 
 

Hawaii "disallowed" 108 ballots for Nixon, and "Found" 68 ballots for Kennedy.

Keep also in mind that it was the VERY FIRST Presidential election Hawaii participated in.

One of the Key Points in this story is that, Alternative counts must be determined to be the one MOST closely following a States Election Laws/Rules, and if still sent to Congress, "First, between a state’s two competing slates of electors, Congress must count the one most consistent with that state’s laws on post-election challenges".

Under many states pre-existing election Rules and Laws, things were done in 2020 that had NEVER been done before, nor even contemplated by the legislatures, some HAD been contemplated by state legislatures and not approved. Since then, over a dozen State Legislatures have passed Laws that forbid such actions from every taking place in the future..."Affirming/Confirming that those actions were in fact UNLAWFUL".

In Wisc. both the State Supreme Court and the Legislature declared its election was unlawful, illegal...and Void!!!

In Ga. while much is currently being made of Trump's statements about "finding Votes", in the same call he was also asking for a "Finding" about the validity of the election itself under Georgia Law, if, faithfully interpreted and followed, it was/is a "Failed Election". Requiring either a NEW election, or an election held in the Legislature, the outcome determined only by votes of the Elected Representatives within it.

PS: The 1876 electoral kerfuffel, was 5 States sending alternative slates, if I recall several states sent more than simply two alternative slates. After days of voting and arguing, over which to accept...dim-0-craps demanded and received a promise to "Remove all troops from the Reconstruction South, abandon all election rights enforcement's there, and grant dim-0-craps the right to implement Jim Crow" It ended with the Repub winning the Presidency, but almost 100 years of lost voting rights for blacks in the South, as well as the loss of ALL Republican seats there, in legislatures, as well as Congress, most of those seats held by black Republicans. It also led to the rise of the Klan, cross burnings, lynchings, riots, sunset laws, land seizures, church burnings.

Neo » 12 Sep 2023, 3:37 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 3:37 pm

Disruption of a vote is not insurrection or sedition.  How many government votes did blm activities disrupt? January 6th was a mostly peaceful demonstration. Those that rioted had no intention or capacity to take over the government.

It is rebelling against the CONSTITUTION which is EXACTLY what the 14th is talking about.  Can you read?

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof
 
 

maineman » 12 Sep 2023, 3:53 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 3:53 pm

It is rebelling against the CONSTITUTION which is EXACTLY what the 14th is talking about.  Can you read?

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof

STFU YOU CHINK COCKSUKER

NO one has any hard evidence fo voter fraud because there is no significant activity///////.........

Remember the Trump agenda, MAGA agenda, ALEC agenda and platforms are based on lies ............ the most reliable sources of lies lies lies and misinformation.........

Meet the libertarian party pretending to represent the republican party = liars of the century!

http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/alec-t ... ures#Voter

https://www.rightwingwatch.org

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof .......
 

Republican J. Michael Luttig and Democrat Laurence Tribe make the case for Trump’s disqualification from public office

In a new article for The Atlantic, retired former federal judge J. Michael Luttig and top legal scholar Laurence Tribe make the case that the Constitution includes a provision that disqualifies Donald Trump from holding public office again.

Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment is also known as the “disqualification clause.” It’s only two sentences long but it could doom Trump’s bid to return to the White House.

The disqualification clause “forbids the former president from holding the office of the presidency again because of his conduct in and around January 6, 2021,” says Judge Luttig.

And as Tribe points out, it’s not a sanction against an individual. “The framers of the 14th Amendment took great care not to treat this as a punishment … Nobody has a right to be president without meeting the qualifications.”

https://www.msnbc.com/ali-velshi/watch/ ... 1177797850
 

J Michael Luttig is a republican also the Federalist came out in support of the above = hardly a liberal publication

All who participated in Jan 6th are subject to Amendment 14 Article 3

Yes even Mark Meadows : Mark Meadows had to know what he was doing was against the law yet he did it anyway. Nobody made him break the law .....he chose to break the law. He could have quit his job then reported the activities to the FBI.

Prosecute him in Georgia. Just like the other criminals.

He is also subject to the 14th Amendment Article 3

razoo » 12 Sep 2023, 9:51 pm » wrote: ↑

12 Sep 2023, 9:51 pm

NO one has any hard evidence fo voter fraud because there is no significant activity///////.........

Remember the Trump agenda, MAGA agenda, ALEC agenda and platforms are based on lies ............ the most reliable sources of lies lies lies and misinformation.........

Meet the libertarian party pretending to represent the republican party = liars of the century!

http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/alec-t ... ures#Voter

https://www.rightwingwatch.org

I edited your post with one word getting a strike through that changes your entire post. Reasonable doubt is as much a psychological weapon as it is a intellectual tool used against each ancestor alive now.