Liberal Forum

jerrab » 22 Dec 2023, 2:09 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 2:09 pm

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-t ... 8e653ed08d\

WASHINGTON (AP) — The House impeachment debate on Wednesday heard a distorted account of President Donald Trump’s remarks to his supporters a week ago when he exhorted them to “fight like hell” before they swarmed the Capitol.REP. GUY RESCHENTHALER, R-Pa.: “At his rally, President Trump urged attendees to, quote, unquote, peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. There was no mention of violence, let alone calls to action.”THE FACTS: Trump’s speech was a call to action — a call to fight and save the country.“Our country has had enough,” he told those who went on to stage the violent siege of the Capitol.“We will not take it anymore and that’s what this is all about. To use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal.”

Yesterday you people were calling Trump's speech a "CALL TO ARMS"....which is totally ridiculous since MAGA used absolutely no firepower and had no firepower on the Capitol Campus.
The only firepower [a couple pistols IIRC] were confiscated from MAGA  away from the Capitol Campus.
Anyone who isn't Terminally Gay realizes that MAGA was not equipped to execute any sort of seizure or control of the Federal Government.
They were badly out gunned by the Capitol Cops approximately 500 to Zero 
So the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump's speech was a "CALL TO ARMS".

Now I notice today you people have changed you story and now you are calling Trump's words a "CALL TO ACTION"
Trump actually told MAGA to demonstrate peacefully.
THIS IS THE WHOLE TRUTH THAT LITTLE QUEER BITCH LIARS LIKE YOU DELIBERATELY OMIT WHEN IT COMES TO TELLING THE FULL STORY
You people have had well over 3 years to get YOUR STORY STRAIGHT..so why all of a sudden are you people changing your story...?
Isn't this always the way with children who tend to be liars...?
People who have a solid case  don't  need to play "words games" like this.
 

R.Suave » 22 Dec 2023, 5:02 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:02 pm

He pointed out that this will be determined, not on facts, but procedure. The existing procedure in Colorado was followed.  SCOTUS will have to determine it contrary to the US constitution.

The original process was validated, with respect to Colorado law, by the recent decision.

The comment about "hearsay" is complete, and condescending, ****. As you have been repeatedly told, the hearings featured testimony from people present at events, reporting first hand experience. Colorado jurists are perfectly competent to sort hearsay from corroborated 1st hand accounts.

As you dutifully averted your eyes from it, don't presume to suggest anything to the contrary.

He also pointed out the precedence this will set if the Supreme Court does not overturn it.  Remember, even you have been running around whining that due process is not needed.  

So, the Supreme Court of Fl could rule that Biden was a traitor to his country based on his Chinese money problems.  Remember, due process is not needed. 

You frogs NEVER say "Ok, what happens next"and then you whine to high heaven when it is turned around on you.

R.Suave » 22 Dec 2023, 5:03 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:03 pm

No...those are the Objective Facts, Toady.

The objective facts are 4 democrat appointees made the ruling in a 4-3 ruling.  You left that part out.  

 

Huey » 22 Dec 2023, 5:08 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:08 pm

The objective facts are 4 democrat appointees made the ruling in a 4-3 ruling.  You left that part out.

No, Toady...that, too, is completely uninformed crap you made up on the spot...the identified democrats split 2-2.

R.Suave » 22 Dec 2023, 5:10 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:10 pm

No, Toady...that, too, is completely uninformed crap you made up on the spot...the identified democrats split 2-2.

Leave it to a Habitual Liar like you to fail to mention that a couple of the judges FAIRLY RECENTLY decided to declare themselves independent instead of Democrat....[obviously for optics]
Nothing that comes out of your mouth can be taken at face value or trusted to be the whole truth.
You think you're clever but all you are is a mentally ill POS LIAR
 

R.Suave » 22 Dec 2023, 5:10 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:10 pm

No, Toady...that, too, is completely uninformed crap you made up on the spot...the identified democrats split 2-2.

The majority was 2 unaffiliated voters and 2 democrats.

The dissent was 1 republican, 1 democrat, and I unaffiliated.

https://www.cpr.org/2023/12/20/how-colo ... mp-ruling/

Z09 » 22 Dec 2023, 5:11 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:11 pm

Did you notice that?

4 Democrats made the ruling....

2 dems and two unaffiliated.  I wonder which way the vote?  LOL!

GHETTOBLASTER » 22 Dec 2023, 5:06 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:06 pm

Yesterday you people were calling Trump's speech a "CALL TO ARMS"....which is totally ridiculous since MAGA used absolutely no firepower and had no firepower on the Capitol Campus.
The only firepower [a couple pistols IIRC] were confiscated from MAGA  away from the Capitol Campus.
Anyone who isn't Terminally Gay realizes that MAGA was not equipped to execute any sort of seizure or control of the Federal Government.
They were badly out gunned by the Capitol Cops approximately 500 to Zero 
So the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump's speech was a "CALL TO ARMS".

Now I notice today you people have changed you story and now you are calling Trump's words a "CALL TO ACTION"
Trump actually told MAGA to demonstrate peacefully.
THIS IS THE WHOLE TRUTH THAT LITTLE QUEER BITCH LIARS LIKE YOU DELIBERATELY OMIT WHEN IT COMES TO TELLING THE FULL STORY
You people have had well over 3 years to get YOUR STORY STRAIGHT..so why all of a sudden are you people changing your story...?
Isn't this always the way with children who tend to be liars...?
People who have a solid case  don't  need to play "words games" like this.

trumo only wanted the national guard to protect trump supporters. why is that?

Z09 » 22 Dec 2023, 5:23 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:23 pm

Since these people are supportive of courts they should be excited to have the Supreme Court review it...

fine and remember the supreme court ruled against trump many times and that is after he had appointed 2 judges and basically a republican court,

jerrab » 21 Dec 2023, 7:00 pm » wrote: ↑

21 Dec 2023, 7:00 pm

my cat thanks you for your vote for the presidency.

побрей свою кошку и обрызгай себе лицо булавой       
 

Z09 » 22 Dec 2023, 4:52 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 4:52 pm

"March peacefully"..

Since you support courts then you should be happy about the Supreme Court reviewing it.

this applies to everyone 
-----------------------------------------------------

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req ... nder%20the

What is the insurrection and Sedition Act?
Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the ..

---------------------------------------

do you think the supreme court does not know about this??
 

Z09 » 22 Dec 2023, 5:43 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:43 pm

Since you support courts then you must be pleased that it will be reviewed by another court...

§2383. Rebellion or insurrectionWhoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United State

Bidencrimefamily » 19 Dec 2023, 6:43 pm » wrote: ↑

19 Dec 2023, 6:43 pm

I don't think trump would of won Colorado anyways.

Would HAVE...

Public schools let us down.

jerrab » 22 Dec 2023, 5:41 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:41 pm

trumo only wanted the national guard to protect trump supporters. why is that?

GHETTOBLASTER » 54 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
54 minutes ago
Yesterday you people were calling Trump's speech a "CALL TO ARMS"....which is totally ridiculous since MAGA used absolutely no firepower and had no firepower on the Capitol Campus.
The only firepower [a couple pistols IIRC] were confiscated from MAGA  away from the Capitol Campus.
Anyone who isn't Terminally Gay realizes that MAGA was not equipped to execute any sort of seizure or control of the Federal Government.
They were badly out gunned by the Capitol Cops approximately 500 to Zero 
So the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump's speech was a "CALL TO ARMS".

Now I notice today you people have changed you story and now you are calling Trump's words a "CALL TO ACTION"
Trump actually told MAGA to demonstrate peacefully.
THIS IS THE WHOLE TRUTH THAT LITTLE QUEER BITCH LIARS LIKE YOU DELIBERATELY OMIT WHEN IT COMES TO TELLING THE FULL STORY
You people have had well over 3 years to get YOUR STORY STRAIGHT..so why all of a sudden are you people changing your story...?
Isn't this always the way with children who tend to be liars...?
People who have a solid case  don't  need to play "words games" like this.

Huey » 22 Dec 2023, 5:20 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:20 pm

The majority was 2 unaffiliated voters and 2 democrats.

The dissent was 1 republican, 1 democrat, and I unaffiliated.

https://www.cpr.org/2023/12/20/how-colo ... mp-ruling/

So it was uninformed crap you made up on the spot...

There weren't, according to your source, enough Democrats to provide a majority.
 

Z09 » 22 Dec 2023, 5:59 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:59 pm

It's been a few years...

Why no conviction?

You know how there was no rape conviction, yet a jury concluded that he's a rapist?

It's like that.

Huey » 22 Dec 2023, 5:06 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 5:06 pm

He also pointed out the precedence this will set if the Supreme Court does not overturn it.  Remember, even you have been running around whining that due process is not needed.  

So, the Supreme Court of Fl could rule that Biden was a traitor to his country based on his Chinese money problems.  Remember, due process is not needed. 

You frogs NEVER say "Ok, what happens next"and then you whine to high heaven when it is turned around on you.

That's a bunch of total **** garbage.

As all your legal spew has always been.
.

Because you're a moron.
 

R.Suave » 22 Dec 2023, 6:04 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 6:04 pm

So it was uninformed crap you made up on the spot...

There weren't, according to your source, enough Democrats to provide a majority.

I was wrong.  I corrected it.  Never ever say Never admit when I am wrong, Legless Wonder.  But, you were wrong as well,  Now admit it or be charged with making up uninformed crap on the spot.

Z09 » 22 Dec 2023, 6:09 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 6:09 pm

3 years...

5-6 years...
Russian Collusion
Pee tapes
Secret deals with Russia
Civil trials
Criminal trials 
2 phony impeachments

And now this even though he's never been convicted of an "insurrection"..

Don't forget the rapist thingy...

R.Suave » 22 Dec 2023, 6:09 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Dec 2023, 6:09 pm

That's a bunch of total **** garbage.

As all your legal spew has always been.
.

Because you're a moron.

You got nuttin', Stumpy.  Now go back to the jail and babysit the prisoner.