Liberal Forum

ROG62 » 04 Aug 2025, 5:43 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 5:43 pm

welcome to the democratic states of tyranny.

ROG62 » 04 Aug 2025, 5:48 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 5:48 pm

brown, flaunt your ****** elsewhere and answer...do you even have a strong suit?

jerra » wrote:

01 Feb 1970, 11:12 pm

*Huey » 04 Aug 2025, 2:57 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 2:57 pm

Mrs B, with respect, I feel compelled to point out the difference between you and I.  I am consistent.  If those republicans were threatened with arrests to compel them to return and they were given fines I am fine with.

Civil obedience is fine as long as the people practicing understand the consequences.  It is not a free pass to break the law.  Something lefties can't wrap their mind around.

The Texas Constitution requires the legislature to redistrict Texas house and senate seats during its first regular session following publication of each United States decennial census (Section 28, Article III). After each census, State Board of Education seats also must be redistricted to bring them into compliance with the one‐person, one‐vote requirement.

-------------------------------that would  be 2020  five **** years ago.

not only are you dumb as a nail but you are a  criminal as well

 

ROG62 » 03 Aug 2025, 6:05 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Aug 2025, 6:05 pm

Texas Democrats left the state Sunday in an attempt to prevent the state House from holding a vote Monday on new congressional maps that Republicans hope will net them several additional U.S. House seats in the 2026 midterm elections.

 The dramatic move could expose Democrats to fines and other penalties — with the state’s attorney general having previously threatened to arrest them if they took such an action. Refusing to attend legislative session is a civil violation, however, so Democrats legally could not be jailed and it’s unclear who has the power to carry out the warrants. 

 Democrats have cast the decision to leave the state as a last-ditch effort to stop Republicans who hold full control of the Texas government from pushing through a rare mid-decade redrawing of the congressional map at the direction of President Donald Trump.

 “This is not a decision we make lightly, but it is one we make with absolute moral clarity,” said Gene Wu, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, in a statement.

https://taylorvilledailynews.com/local- ... 005a467e45

**** democrats... they will stop at nothing to obtain power...

*Huey » 04 Aug 2025, 7:42 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 7:42 pm

Don't you find it funny that the Texas Dems ran to Illinois to avoid voting on a district map?  Holy ****, this maps looks like a **** snake trail:


You don't give a **** about redistricting if it benefits democrats.  Get the **** outta my face.

jerra b » 04 Aug 2025, 2:07 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 2:07 pm

trump is supporting this and his robots do what he wants.
 

TwoIfByTea » 04 Aug 2025, 11:07 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 11:07 pm

Question is if Texas does go thru with this will California and New York redistrict their states to write out the last afew remaining republicans in those states.

Gavin Newsom has as much as "threatened" already and has already held hearings.

https://apnews.com/article/california-t ... cffac15aa2

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

Blackvegetable » 04 Aug 2025, 7:04 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 7:04 pm

You've got a great "first step"...

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

JohnnyYou » 04 Aug 2025, 6:01 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 6:01 pm

Hang Mike Pence.. Hang Mike Pence... Hang Mike Pence

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

jerrab » 04 Aug 2025, 12:04 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 12:04 pm

poor trump, he  has to cheat so he can keep the house.

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

ROG62 » 05 Aug 2025, 5:24 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:24 am

a proverbial drop in the bucket when comped to the vile hate filled democratic nationalist socialist fascist pahtee....

Blackvegetable » 04 Aug 2025, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 12:23 pm

I have something even better....

The words of the presiding judge in response to your feeble protest..

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

 He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Blackvegetable » 04 Aug 2025, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 12:23 pm

*Beekeeper » 04 Aug 2025, 11:52 am » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 11:52 am

That would be easy to prove since JURY VERDICTS are publicly available and usually online to view and post from.

Do you have that??

I have something even better....

The words of the presiding judge in response to your feeble protest..

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

 He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

*Beekeeper » 05 Aug 2025, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 6:27 am

Blackvegetable » 04 Aug 2025, 12:23 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Aug 2025, 12:23 pm

I have something even better....

The words of the presiding judge in response to your feeble protest..

“The finding that Ms. Carroll failed to prove that she was ‘raped’ within the meaning of the New York Penal Law does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape,’ ” Kaplan wrote.

 He added: “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Doesn't count. His opinion is his opinion, not a jury verdict that found NOT GUILITY of rape under Kaplan's very own jury instructions.

Easy enough to prove you and Kaplan are wrong. Want to see the verdict form again?

JohnnyYou » 05 Aug 2025, 5:28 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:28 am

J6 is a drop in the bucket?   You momma must have dropped you on yo head.

JuCo 5 percenter...72 “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” ~ LAVRENTIY BERIA "Try to get past your passionate ignorance and learn to accept what actually happened." ~ brown's unheeded words of wisdom If gender is not sex, why should a gender claim change what sex you shower with? "Libruls are often fascists on vacation..."

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 8:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 8:48 am

Also, please note the jury instructions.  I understand that reading is not in your wheelhouse but it is the last sentence of the citation.

Verdict and aftermath (May 2023–present)

The jury reached a decision on May 9, 2023, after deliberating for less than three hours.[132] Considering the preponderance of the evidence, the jury delivered a verdict that first stated that Carroll had not proven that Trump raped her, and next stated that Carroll did prove that Trump was responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse,[133] and also stated that Trump defamed Carroll with false statements made with actual malice in the October 2022 Truth Social post; thus the jury awarded Carroll a total of $5 million in damages from Trump.[54][134][135] The judge had given the jury "the narrow, technical meaning" of the term rape under New York law as it existed at that time, defining rape as forcible penetration with the penis as alleged by Carroll.[136][137][138][139]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_Carroll_v._Donald_J._Trump#Verdict_and_aftermath_(May_2023–present)

Johnny » wrote:

01 Feb 1970, 11:14 pm

ROG62 » 05 Aug 2025, 5:24 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 5:24 am

a proverbial drop in the bucket when comped to the vile hate filled democratic nationalist socialist fascist pahtee....

J6 is a drop in the bucket?   You momma must have dropped you on yo head.

 

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 8:59 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 8:59 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 8:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 8:48 am

Also, please note the jury instructions.  I understand that reading is not in your wheelhouse but it is the last sentence of the citation.

Verdict and aftermath (May 2023–present)

The jury reached a decision on May 9, 2023, after deliberating for less than three hours.[132] Considering the preponderance of the evidence, the jury delivered a verdict that first stated that Carroll had not proven that Trump raped her, and next stated that Carroll did prove that Trump was responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse,[133] and also stated that Trump defamed Carroll with false statements made with actual malice in the October 2022 Truth Social post; thus the jury awarded Carroll a total of $5 million in damages from Trump.[54][134][135] The judge had given the jury "the narrow, technical meaning" of the term rape under New York law as it existed at that time, defining rape as forcible penetration with the penis as alleged by Carroll.[136][137][138][139]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_Carroll_v._Donald_J._Trump#Verdict_and_aftermath_(May_2023–present)

Stop.

You suck at this....you have no idea what you're yapping about. 


 

 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 9:04 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 9:04 am

No, Trump was not found liable of Rape according to the definition given to the Jury by the judge.

I accept your surrender and respectfully request you never bother me with your rapist felon crap again.

Blackvegetable » 05 Aug 2025, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 9:17 am

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 9:04 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 9:04 am

No, Trump was not found liable of Rape according to the definition given to the Jury by the judge.

I accept your surrender and respectfully request you never bother me with your rapist felon crap again.

This is about the verdict, not the "special verdict".
There is no ambiguity in this statement 

 “Indeed, as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Whar, in fact, did the jury "EXACTLY" find?


Now demonstrate why engaging you is a complete waste of time.

 

*Huey » 05 Aug 2025, 8:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Aug 2025, 8:48 am

Also, please note the jury instructions.  I understand that reading is not in your wheelhouse but it is the last sentence of the citation.

Verdict and aftermath (May 2023–present)

The jury reached a decision on May 9, 2023, after deliberating for less than three hours.[132] Considering the preponderance of the evidence, the jury delivered a verdict that first stated that Carroll had not proven that Trump raped her, and next stated that Carroll did prove that Trump was responsible for a lesser degree of sexual abuse,[133] and also stated that Trump defamed Carroll with false statements made with actual malice in the October 2022 Truth Social post; thus the jury awarded Carroll a total of $5 million in damages from Trump.[54][134][135] The judge had given the jury "the narrow, technical meaning" of the term rape under New York law as it existed at that time, defining rape as forcible penetration with the penis as alleged by Carroll.[136][137][138][139]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Jean_CarrollThe jury's unanimous verdict in Carroll II was almost entirely in favor of Ms. Carroll. The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law – a section that provides that the label “rape” as used in criminal prosecutions in New York applies only to vaginal penetration by a penis. Forcible, unconsented-to penetration of the vagina or of other bodily orifices by fingers, other body parts, or other articles or materials is not called “rape” under the New York Penal Law. It instead is labeled “sexual abuse.”1_v._Donald_J._Trump#Verdict_and_aftermath_(May_2023–present)