fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
lol this might be my best quote ever. Love Mitt Romney here:
“I think everybody has made their own assessment of President Trump’s character,” Romney told CNN’s Manu Raju. “And, so far as I know, you don’t pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you.”
www.huffpost.com
LOL!!!
It’s interesting how Trump has whined nonstop for years now about election interference. Like everything he does, it’s all projection. He and David Pecker of the National Inquirer had a deal to bury stories that could damage Trump and plaster stories that could damage his opponents. Pecker working to hush stories like the Stormy Daniels one clearly was election interference. Had that story come out, it really could’ve hurt his election chances in 2016.
Good article about this:
“I think everybody has made their own assessment of President Trump’s character,” Romney told CNN’s Manu Raju. “And, so far as I know, you don’t pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you.”
Donald Trump Will Hate What Mitt Romney Just Said About The Hush Money Trial
"So far as I know, you don't pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you," the Utah senator remarked about the ex-president's payments to Stormy Daniels.
LOL!!!
It’s interesting how Trump has whined nonstop for years now about election interference. Like everything he does, it’s all projection. He and David Pecker of the National Inquirer had a deal to bury stories that could damage Trump and plaster stories that could damage his opponents. Pecker working to hush stories like the Stormy Daniels one clearly was election interference. Had that story come out, it really could’ve hurt his election chances in 2016.
Good article about this:
Last edited by a moderator:
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
It's just obvious how guilty he is in all of these cases. This one is obvious. The classified documents one is obvious. The one where he tried to overturn an election and then tried to obstruct the electoral vote count by using his followers as he sat and watched on TV is obvious.lol this might be my best quote ever. Love Mitt Romney here:
“I think everybody has made their own assessment of President Trump’s character,” Romney told CNN’s Manu Raju. “And, so far as I know, you don’t pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you.”
Donald Trump Will Hate What Mitt Romney Just Said About The Hush Money Trial
"So far as I know, you don't pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you," the Utah senator remarked about the ex-president's payments to Stormy Daniels.
LOL!!!
It’s interesting how Trump has whined nonstop for years now about election interference. Like everything he does, it’s all projection. He and David Pecker of the National Inquirer had a deal to bury stories that could damage Trump and plaster stories that could damage his opponents. Pecker working to hush stories like the Stormy Daniels one clearly was election interference. Had that story come out, it really could’ve hurt his election chances in 2016.
Good article about this:
The man has a history of this type of behavior going back decades. This is who he is. A cheater, a liar, a thief, a criminal, and above all else a scummy douchebag.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
SteakNEggs
Well-Known Member
Even Trump hating New York Times knows this is nothing more than a witch hunt. There's a blatant reason why Democrats waited until the election to rig it.
I Thought the Bragg Case Against Trump Was a Legal Embarrassment. Now I Think It’s a Historic Mistake.
In Monday’s opening argument, the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo still evaded specifics about what was illegal about influencing an election, but then he claimed, “It was election fraud, pure and simple.” None of the relevant state or federal statutes refer to filing violations as fraud. Calling it “election fraud” is a legal and strategic mistake, exaggerating the case and setting up the jury with high expectations that the prosecutors cannot meet.
www.nytimes.com
Here's Stormy literally admitting it never happened.
View: https://x.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1779584740795789794
Here's Cohen literlly admitting it never happened.
View: https://x.com/texan_maga/status/1779907376394436612
I Thought the Bragg Case Against Trump Was a Legal Embarrassment. Now I Think It’s a Historic Mistake.
In Monday’s opening argument, the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo still evaded specifics about what was illegal about influencing an election, but then he claimed, “It was election fraud, pure and simple.” None of the relevant state or federal statutes refer to filing violations as fraud. Calling it “election fraud” is a legal and strategic mistake, exaggerating the case and setting up the jury with high expectations that the prosecutors cannot meet.
Opinion | I Thought the Bragg Case Against Trump Was a Legal Embarrassment. Now I Think It’s a Historic Mistake.
It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up. But it’s still a highly flawed case.
View: https://x.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/1779584740795789794
Here's Cohen literlly admitting it never happened.
View: https://x.com/texan_maga/status/1779907376394436612
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Haley still captured over 100,000 Republican votes despite ending her campaign two months ago. Perhaps even republicans are seeing Dump as the scumbag that he truly is? All Biden needs is a few of these voters and he’ll win in a blowout this fall. Bye bye MAGA!!!
View: https://x.com/meridithmcgraw/status/1782966469589970971?s=46
View: https://x.com/meridithmcgraw/status/1782966469589970971?s=46
Sardines
Well-Known Member
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
In the past 30 days, there has been only one poll showing Biden ahead of Trump in a head-to-head match-up in Pennsylvania but Biden doesn't need any of Haley's voters to blow Trump out. That race won't be close. Pennsylvania is one of the states who used the COVID pandemic as an excuse to most closely duplicate what California did. Trump cannot win there. It doesn't matter how many people in Pennsylvania support Trump because the system in place will not allow Trump or any Republican to win a statewide race there.
John Fetterman had a stroke, couldn't campaign, and was mostly incapacitated but still won under this new system. No Republican, regardless of how popular they are, can win a statewide race for Presidential nomination, Governor, or Senator of Pennsylvania. Statewide elections in Pennsylvania are now only for show.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
You have never explained why ballot harvesting can only help democrats.
I mean if you can't explain it as well as 2000 mules I get it. Maybe you need to watch it again to get the talking points down.
Last edited:
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
2,000 Mules is about fraud. That isn't what I'm saying. The changes made to the system advantage population density. The bias introduced by the changes is strong enough that exurbs and rural areas might as well not have votes at all. A voter in the suburbs is worth about a third as much as a voter in urban areas. Voters in places like apartment buildings and dormitories are the most valuable.
The names, addresses, and party affiliations of voters are known. If ballot harvesting is allowed then it becomes a race of how many of your voters, as identified on the list printed out for you, can you reach per hour. There will be pockets here and there that could go the other way but across an entire state, the party of the urban centers will win that race 100% of the time.
Sardines
Well-Known Member
So ballot harvesting has helped rebalance the unfair advantage that rural communities and more rural states have enjoyed my entire life?
That's sad... for someone I'm sure but not for me.
I'm kidding, though. I think you're wrong about this issue all the way around. To me it sounds like a bunch of copium so that you can explain to yourself why the country you live in largely does not agree with your outlook.
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
In a nutshell, yes. That is exactly what it has done.
The founders put a lot of thought into crafting a bicameral legislative branch where one side advantaged urban centers while the other advantaged rural areas. The idea was that both sides had to gain some advantage to proceed. The system worked more or less for a quarter of a millennia, but California figured out a way to subvert it so their super-conservative central valley and northern third could ever challenge the Bay Area or Los Angeles. ...And they can't. The Bay Area and Los Angeles run the state with super-majorities in all branches.
I'm oddball enough that it doesn't bother me if a majority thinks I'm wrong. I've always been a much bigger fan of the individual freedoms provided by the structures of our republic than the ability to vote for my chosen candidate.
My concern is more along the lines of what happens when one side has no use for keeping the current system in place because that system guarantees they'll lose every time?
Sardines
Well-Known Member
It didn't work for 250 years. It was skewed heavily in favor of letting the rural minority rule the urban majority. It is broken, unfair, stupid and should be changed officially.
I'm not scared of a rural uprising. Oh no, they have some guns and they use them regularly. A relatively small percentage of urban people have guns and use them regularly. That still means that there are a lot more urban people with guns, who use their guns than there are rural people who do the same. If the rural people can't cope with sharing this country with the majority of people in this country on terms that work for urban communities then let them throw whatever little baby fit they feel like throwing.