Post: He's Dead Meat

Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage

Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (26 comments) [1294 views]

The silent Trump voter
Politics by HatetheSwamp     April 28, 2024 7:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (3 comments) [101 views]

Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (13 comments) [452 views]

James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [140 views]

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [56 views]

The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [110 views]

Trump, Giuliani, Meadows are unindicted co-conspirators in Michigan fake elector case, hearing reveals
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 4:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [66 views]

Turley: The "haymaker" in Supreme Court arguments. Chief Justice Roberts. "Openly mocking of DC Circuit."
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 5:59 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (8 comments) [194 views]

The latest general election polls from this weekend reveal something interesting.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 22, 2024 11:03 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (10 comments) [424 views]

So Ukraine got money.
Military by oldedude     April 24, 2024 3:58 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (6 comments) [99 views]

Final Fantasy selectors, pages, etc.

He's Dead Meat

By Ponderer
August 2, 2023 9:25 am
Category: Final Fantasy

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

I just finished reading the indictment. It reads like a novel. The timeline of events, all backed up by sworn testimonies of Trump's people, lays it all out plain and clear. I can't wait to see this trial begin.

I highly recommend that everyone reads it. Especially the MAGA Republicans in residence here. I've included a link to the pdf file of it for your convenience.

Read it and weep, Maga Hats.

Cited and related links:

cnn.com

Comments Start Below

The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.

Comments on "He's Dead Meat":

by Curt_Anderson on August 2, 2023 10:01 am
Pence will be a witness for the prosecution. At least his testimony will be.

In one conversation on January 1, 2021, Pence told Trump that he didn’t think there was a constitutional basis for Trump’s claims and that the vice president lacked the authority to change the results. “In response, the Defendant told the Vice President, ‘You're too honest,’” according to the indictment.

by Indy! on August 2, 2023 10:05 am

Pence should get behind the prosecution 100% - might be the only way to inject some life into his presidential campaign. 👍

by Donna on August 2, 2023 11:27 am

Well, as what usually happens the day after another political bombshell is dropped on MAGA Messiah, we temporarily lose a couple of our friends as they await instructions from their trusty sources on how to respond to what just happened. But don't worry. They'll be back tomorrow with plenty of talking points they got from their MAGA Messiah Media sources.

by Ponderer on August 2, 2023 11:41 am

I loved how they showed that he was told he lost over and over again, and each time he was told or even admitted it, that day or the next he was right out there flogging the Big Lie in public again.

Bill, a trial isn't about presenting evidence of what the defendant believes. It's about what the defendant did. It doesn't matter a damn whether Trump believed he didn't lose. He's totally free to believe whatever he wants to and talk about it even. But he's not allowed to break laws based on his erroneous belief. It doesn't matter that he might have thought he was in the right.

The fact is he wasn't right, he knew he wasn't right, and he admitted he wasn't right in private.

He has got literally nothing to defend himself with at all. Because he blatantly plowed ahead against everyone's advice and broke whatever law was in his way to regain the Oval Office.

by Indy! on August 2, 2023 12:30 pm

Okay ladies... I'm not going to do a deep dive on this and I'm not trying to be sarcastic or patronizing - just asking a question...

If you were going to pick ONE CRIME that Trump is being charged with here - what is it? What's the one that's most likely to do some actual damage in court?

Just wondering... 🙂

by Ponderer on August 2, 2023 12:59 pm

Geez. That's not really a fair question, Indy!. It's hard to look at the historically momentous seventy eight felonies he currently stands charged with and pick just one that we think is the most "slam dunk". I mean, they are all "slam dunk" in their own ways, it's hard to compare.

Plus, there's no telling how many more felonies he's going to be charged with in the near future yet. I'd hate to pick a favorite and then have to change when the new flock of indictments comes flying through.

Of the newest set of indictments, I think I like Count #4 the most. The others are more about crimes he committed against government and the Congress. Count #4 is about the various and sundry crimes he committed against the American People. So maybe it's just personal.

by Ponderer on August 2, 2023 1:01 pm

You ought to read it, Indy!. I'd love to hear your take on it. I can't see a hole in it. But you of course should be able to tear it to shreds.

by Indy! on August 3, 2023 12:54 am

Well thanks for the ego boost, but I have not been following this the way you folks have. Not sure I could bring much to this table.

by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2023 4:01 am

Bill, a trial isn't about presenting evidence of what the defendant believes.

C'mon po. Gimme a break. You're the self-proclaimed constitutional scholar here.

What a person thinks is undoubtedly critical to convicting a person of a crime...in the United States of America...where there still an effin Bill of Rights!

Ever hear about "not guilty by reason of insanity?" Ever hear that the prosecution need to establish effin INTENT!

To get this luny indictment past the Supreme Court, Jack Smith is going to have to prove that he is a mind reader.

You need to slow down, po. You are not this stupid! Your TDS has taken over. Baha.

by islander on August 3, 2023 6:19 am

“Trump says he didn’t believe he lost the election” therefor he cant be guilty of the crimes he committed !!! LoL !!!

What a genius defense !! 🤣

That won’t fly in any courtroom and the indictment makes it perfectly clear why.

I'd urge everyone, no matter what your political persuasion, to read the indictment itself...Don't let someone else interpret it for you or tell you what what it says.

Here it is.
storage.courtlistener.com

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 9:02 am

"What a person thinks is undoubtedly critical to convicting a person of a crime..." -Hate

Well then even if that was the case, Trump is dead meat. Because there is quite a lot of evidence that he absolutely knew that he lost the election, and that he knew full well that pretty much everything he was doing was illegal. It doesn't matter a damn how much he believes.

Bill it doesn't take a law degree to understand that believing that you aren't committing a crime while you absolutely know it's a crime and are making every effort to hide it from everyone isn't going to matter a damn in court. It's about the lamest excuse for a defense I've ever heard.

And I am stocking up on popcorn to watch him try to use it. It's going to be hysterical.

The other thing he is going to try to use as a defense is "Freedom of Speech". He's going to try to make a case that he was allowed under that First Amendment to lie to anyone he wanted to.

Like when he called that election official in Georgia and tried to get him to commit a felony for him...? To just "find" him 11,780 votes...? That was Trump simply exercising his constitutional right to free speech. He wasn't trying to interfere with any election! Heavens forfend!

Yeah, that one is gonna be a laugh riot too.

by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2023 10:45 am

Well then even if that was the case, Trump is dead meat. Because there is quite a lot of evidence that he absolutely knew that he lost the election...

You're reading minds...AGAIN!!!!!?

I don't see a way you can provide any evidence that he knew he lost. But. Please. Try.

by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2023 10:51 am

Charlie Kirk:

"Turley suggests Trump push for a speedy trial so he can get the case to the Supreme Court as quickly as possible, where it will likely be overturned in time for the election."

That's the ticket!
twitter.com

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 11:08 am

"You're reading minds...AGAIN!!!!!?" -Hate

No. I'm asserting it based on all the evidence that I have seen and testimonies given under oath by many people who told him that he lost, along with testimonies of the several people who heard Trump himself admitting that he lost. Likewise, people who heard him admitting that what he did was wrong.

Have you heard (I doubt it) about what Pence said under oath? He said that while he was in a conversation with Trump and trump kept urging him to break the law for him, Pence kept telling him he had no legal authority to do what Trump wanted him to do. And when Trump got the most frustrated with him Trump said to him, "You're too honest".

Pence kept very good notes apparently.

Does that sound like someone who thinks what they are doing is legal? Or someone who knows what they are trying to do is illegal?

"I don't see a way you can provide any evidence that he knew he lost. But. Please. Try." -Hate

I don't have to. I'm not the prosecutor or your civics teacher.

Read the transcript of the indictments, Bill. You'll be saved from asking so many stupid questions if you do. Or is 45 pages too great a strain on what little brain material still fits in your skull with all that solid bone stuffed in there...?

by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2023 11:10 am

Andy McCarthy with the gay Guy Curt never heard of:

"As far as the four charges are concerned, you know, it was only in May of so we’re talking about less than three months ago now that the Supreme Court held in the two cases involving cronies of Andrew Cuomo, whose political corruption convictions were thrown out by the Supreme Court, that the Supreme Court unanimously reminded everyone that fraud in federal law means a scheme, a deceptive scheme to bilk somebody out of money or property, and that it’s not supposed to be expanded and extended by prosecutors in order to enforce somebody’s idea of what good governance is. There are a lot of deceptive schemes that are reprehensible. As you could tell from the indictment, there’s a surfeit of information there of what I regard as deceptive conduct by Trump. But under federal law, if you’re going to bring something is a fraud, It’s got to be in order to bilk somebody out of money or property, which this obviously is not as far as the obstruction counts are concerned..."

Bingo.

This indictment is, as McCarthy said elsewhere, is "demagogic." Jack Smith is an, as po'd say, EFFIN demagogue.

pb wants to remind you TDSers. None of these people pb shows trashing the indictment: McCarthy, Dershowitz, Turley, the gay Guy, pb:

None are Trump supporters. All do possess, however, a commitment to justice.

radio.foxnews.com

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 12:12 pm

Yeah. He's wrong. And non sequitur to boot.

Bill, you really need to understand that there is nothing keeping the people you listen to from having whatever lame-brained notions they want to have and lying to you about them. They are even free to espouse their nonsense if they want to on programs masquerading as news.

It's quite obvious to see that what Trump was doing by trying to get others to break election laws for him, thereby interfering with the election, and what he was trying to do by getting voters' legitimate votes thrown out couldn't possibly be legal.

Whatever you want to call it, what he did was illegal and why there is Count #4 of the indictment:

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Trump trying to get Michigan to not include all the votes from Detroit in their final vote total because he says those votes were fraudulent, was Trump trying to interfere with those people's right to vote and have their votes counted by trying to get them thrown out, based on bogus and entirely flaming bullshit.

It didn't matter what he believed as he was trying to take those voters' votes away. What matters is that he actually tried to get those voters' right to have their vote counted taken away.

And it also applies to the aspects of the case regarding his call to the Georgia election official and election officials in other states. He was trying to threaten and intimidate them into helping him in his conspiracy to just make up, or "find" him, votes that didn't count. Thereby overturning the correct vote count and preventing or hindering voters' free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured by 18 U.S. Code § 241.

And hey thanks, olde dude, for posting the text of that statute. I didn't even have to look it up! 😁

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 12:51 pm

Bill, are you actually suggesting that if a person totally convinces themself that they are allowed to rob a liquor store... to the point that they actually believe... 100% that they are perfectly free to hold up a liquor store, that their belief is a defense against being convicted of robbing a liquor store after they do it?

Because that is really what it sounds like you are suggesting.

by Indy! on August 3, 2023 1:02 pm

I don't think I robbed that bank. 🤔

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 1:06 pm

I believed that I was going the legal speed limit when I ran over that pedestrian.

by HatetheSwamp on August 3, 2023 3:53 pm

Bill, are you actually suggesting that if a person totally convinces themself that they are allowed to rob a liquor store... to the point that they actually believe... 100% that they are perfectly free to hold up a liquor store, that their belief is a defense against being convicted of robbing a liquor store after they do it?

No.

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 6:31 pm

"No." -Hate

Okay then. Great.

So what does Trump's belief got to do with anything? His beliefs don't change the fact that his actions were felonious. He can't say, "I didn't believe what I was doing was illegal" as a defense with the result being anything other than muffled guffaws.

And again, they aren't going to have much trouble showing, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he knew what he was doing was wrong and illegal.

by oldedude on August 3, 2023 7:55 pm
Po- Especially in this set of charges, they actually do. The dims are "assuming" (and you know what that is) they know what's in trumpsters mind at the time. I dare you to know what's in my mind right now, or for me to know yours (other than hatred of the right and trumpster).

by oldedude on August 3, 2023 7:58 pm
And being the "defense," I would automatically bring up your thread title.

i.e. You're not credible. Period. end of story. unless you're proving him a victim.

by Indy! on August 3, 2023 8:56 pm

Trump should go with the Bush 43 defense...

"We made some mistakes. Rather than dwell on the past - we should look forward"

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 10:52 pm

"The dims are "assuming" (and you know what that is) they know what's in trumpsters mind at the time." -olde dude

Ya gotta understand, od, that not everyone is as willfully oblivious to the testimonies and evidence in this case as you are. I'm not bragging. When you pay attention to it all and read the evidence for yourself that was provided under oath, it really doesn't take a clairvoyant to know what was in his head.

It merely takes reading the transcript of the indictments.

You and Hate even know what is in his mind, od. You know full well what we've all been talking to you about in here. You know we're always totally right about him. You know.

But with your egos, you can't possibly face it. You can't come to full grips with what it really was that you voted for and supported and defended all these years. So you go on like you haven't the vaguest clue as to what's in that overripe pumpkin of a head of his. Oh my golly gee how could you ever know?

Huh. As it turns out, it's not that hard to know what's in your heads either.

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 10:55 pm

"You're not credible. Period. end of story." -olde dude

I've never expected you to take my word for anything.

That's why I'm begging you to read the freaking indictments.

Read the freaking indictments.

by Ponderer on August 3, 2023 10:58 pm

olde dude, how do you expect anyone to consider you a credible member in this discussion when you pass judgement on these trials when you won't even

READ THE FREAKING INDICTMENTS!

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 12:45 am

READ THE FREAKING INDICTMENTS!...

...because a one-sided account of fact is the absolute truth so long as it trashes Donald Trump...

...and pretends away the Bill of effin Rights! Bahahahahahahahahahaha baha baha!

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 12:47 am

Jonathan Turley:

"The arraignment appears to be wrapping up. For most people this would be called a life-changing moment, for Trump it is called "Thursday.""

Might as well laugh.

by Donna on August 4, 2023 7:08 am

Obviously you have to read the indictments to be able discuss them.

by Ponderer on August 4, 2023 7:45 am

Donna is right. There's no reason whatsoever to give your opinions on this case the time of day if you can't even be bothered to look into what you are cavalierly and pig-ignorantly ignoring by at least reading thefucking indictments and knowing what thefuck you are arguing against.

Bill, until you read the freaking transcript of the indictment, your opinion on this is worthless. You blatantly don't know what you are talking about.

What is it that you think is that's making you too pants-pissing, existentially terrified to read it?

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 9:14 am

po,

Unlike you, I ain't a constitutional scholar nor a legal authority so my reading of an indictment wouldn't be really useful...

Still, I know what an indictment is. In an of itself it's nuthin more than prosecutorial propaganda.

Over many years, I've learned that the legal analysis of Alan Dershowitz, Jonathan Turley and Andy McCarthy has, in the end, proved to be prescient. As hard as it might be to imagine, they're probably better informed about legal issues even than you.

by Ponderer on August 4, 2023 9:29 am

Bill, you idiots keep pushing this notion that we think we're legal scholars and I keep telling you that no one with an average IQ should have any problems understanding the criminality of Trump's crimes if they've been following the legal aspects of these cases. It doesn't take a law degree to understand the details of these indictments and how bad a time Trump is going to have in court just on the face of them and what we already know.

"Still, I know what an indictment is. In an of itself it's nuthin more than prosecutorial propaganda." -Hate

Umm, I challenge that assertion of your knowledge. You're saying that the normal arraignment of an alleged criminal is nothing more than propaganda...? Yeah, I don't think you know what you think you know.

"Over many years, I've learned that the legal analysis of Alan Dershowitz, Jonathan Turley and Andy McCarthy has, in the end, proved to be prescient." -Hate

Yeah and you've also believed that Biden stole the election from Trump. So we all know how stupid you are capable of being. You believed that Trump actually won the election because he told you he did. And you simply believed him.

You have proven yourself to be a rather poor judge of where to get your information.

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 9:38 am

Yeah and you've also believed that Biden stole the election from Trump.

I have never, ever made that claim...

...but you've repeated your lie, what?, a dozen times?, two dozen!!!!!?

by Donna on August 4, 2023 9:50 am

You believed or used to believe that the Democratic Party stole the election from Trump.

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 9:55 am

No. Never.

I've always said:

1. There was significant vote fraud in the election. And,
2. It will never be possible to know who would have won if we'd had an honest election.

That's what I say to this day.

by Curt_Anderson on August 4, 2023 10:08 am
HtS,
There is some muddled thinking! You claim you never said the election in the stolen (I think you really did), but you think that there was significant voter fraud, and that it was a dishonest election.

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 10:12 am

Yeah?

by Donna on August 4, 2023 10:39 am

Quotes by Hts:

"What's coming from Elon Musk is proving that, for all practical purposes, that Trump has been bang on all along. The election in 020 was rigged. And people who've not lost their integrity to TDS will care."

*

"Huh! You are the gang in favor of false and fraudulent elections."

*

(Quoting me:)"Hts is among a shrinking group of die-hards who still believe that the election was stolen from Trump. Olde Dude to his credit doesn't believe the Big Lie either."

"Ho hum." - Hts

*

(Quoting me:) "In the weeks after President Donald J. Trump lost the 2020 election, the Fox Business host Lou Dobbs claimed to have “tremendous evidence” that voter fraud was to blame."

"There is "tremendous evidence," as the felony convictions of Dems in Arizona and Texas for vote fraud suggest. There's also the Pennsylvania whistle-blower that I've mentioned numerous times. And, more." - Hts

selectsmart.com
selectsmart.com
selectsmart.com

by HatetheSwamp on August 4, 2023 10:57 am

Bang on. The election absolutely was effin rigged.

And, while y'nes have often accused pb of claiming that the Dems stole the election, pb's never said that...nor believed it.

Based on the way the Dems cheated, it's impossible to know what the honest vote was.

by Indy! on August 4, 2023 12:05 pm

Ds didn't steal the election from Trump - they stole it from Bernie.

by islander on August 5, 2023 6:20 am

Pondy wrote: READ THE FREAKING INDICTMENTS!

Here's why our local Maga Hats won't read the indictments LoL !!

by HatetheSwamp on August 5, 2023 6:22 am

So, why, do you suppose woke, white, limousine lib progressives choose to pretend away the analysis of Alan Dershowitz?

by islander on August 5, 2023 7:35 am

I've never mat any "woke, white, limousine lib progressives [who] choose to pretend away the analysis of Alan Dershowitz"

I think you just made that up.

by HatetheSwamp on August 5, 2023 7:38 am

Two tasks for you.

1. Look in the mirror.
2. Splain why you reject the Dershowitz take on the latest indictment.

Thanking you in advance.

by islander on August 5, 2023 8:07 am

I looked in the mirror and didn't see anyone who owns a limousine, I saw a Straight shooting, white, working class, American male who doesn't "choose to pretend away the analysis of Alan Dershowitz"...I simply disagree with Dershowitz.

by HatetheSwamp on August 5, 2023 8:45 am

Presbyopia. Bahahahahahahahahahaha baha!

by Donna on August 5, 2023 8:55 am

Sitting here on a leisurely Saturday morning sipping my coffee, catching up on the news, reading social media posts, getting a kick out of watching Hts and od avoid reading the transcript of the indictment but opining on its contents via commentators on Fox News, which recently lost a lawsuit for deliberately lying to its viewers - LOL! I gotta say, it doesn't get any funnier than this here.

by Ponderer on August 5, 2023 9:16 am

"I have never, ever made that claim..." -Hate

Oh you didn't make it for long. As there actually was still some brain material left in your bone-filled skull (sadly, it's gone now), it didn't take you long to realize that saying Trump really won the election and Biden "stole" it with the help of those Democrats in their "smoke filled room" was a bit too asininely stupid a thing for you to assert, even for you, and you backed off to this current fence-sitting posture you've taken as you are wont to do.

There was no voter fraud of any consequence in the 2016 election. Period. And with a gun to your head, you couldn't present anything even indicating that there was, Bill. Nothing more than the all too common handful of dead voters or voters voting more than once that happens in every single election that you never raised a brow about.

And the truly funny thing is, when they do catch those rare few vote frauds as they always do, they are almost always Republican.

Biden won the election fair and square, Bill. There is no evidence whatsoever to the contrary, which is why you can't present any proof at all in your defense of Trump's Big Lie.

by HatetheSwamp on August 5, 2023 9:20 am

Enjoy the day as you, among our other woke TDS sufferers, imagine that you can grasp the legal nuance as well as...or effin better than...Ivy League profs and experienced federal prosecutors!

So typically sancti...well, you know. Baha.

Carpe diem!!!!!

by HatetheSwamp on August 5, 2023 9:24 am

...with a gun to your head, you couldn't present anything even indicating that there was, Bill. Nothing more than the all too common handful of dead voters or voters voting more than once that happens in every single election that you never raised a brow about.

Nuh uh.

Bahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahaha hoohoohoohoohoohoohoo heeheeheeheeheeheehee hahahahahahahahaha hoohoohoohoohoohoo heeheeheeheeheeheehee hahahahahahahahaha hoohoohoohoohoohoo heeheeheeheeheeheehee hahahahahahahahaha, ahhhhhhhhhhh. Baha!

by Ponderer on August 5, 2023 9:34 am

"Enjoy the day as you, among our other woke TDS sufferers, imagine that you can grasp the legal nuance as well as...or effin better than...Ivy League profs and experienced federal prosecutors!" -Hate

Bill, you idiots keep pushing this notion that we think we're legal scholars and I keep telling you that no one with an average IQ should have any problems understanding the criminality of Trump's crimes if they've been following the legal aspects of these cases. It doesn't take a law degree to understand the details... of...

Wait a second... I already just explained this to you! It was already explained to you why you are so stupid for suggesting that's what we think.

*sigh*

Bill, the sources I am watching have plenty of Ivy League profs and experienced federal prosecutors too ya know. And I'll put any one of them up against your entire assortment of legal propagandists any day of the week.

by HatetheSwamp on August 6, 2023 9:02 am

What I know, po, is that I've been a student of court decisions for decades. Dershowitz, Turley and McCarthy are the most reliable analysts I know of...

...and, when they agree? Well, there you are.

Curt and isle and you repeatedly consult sources to agree with...to feed your subjectivity. I don't.

Remember writing term papers back in the day?, being told to use primary, not secondary, sources? For these issues, I know that I'm best off searching reliable secondary sources. My guess is, if you care about truth, and not sharpening the preferences and prejudices you take with you every moment of your life, you'd best better do the same.

by islander on August 6, 2023 5:15 pm
Hate wrote: "What I know, po, is that I've been a student of court decisions for decades. Dershowitz, Turley and McCarthy are the most reliable analysts I know of...

...and, when they agree? Well, there you are.

Curt and isle and you repeatedly consult sources to agree with...to feed your subjectivity. I don't."

"Dershowitz, Turley and McCarthy are the most reliable analysts I know of."

LoL !!! You obviously don't know much, do you, Hate !!

If you really were a "student" of court decisions for decades you would get a failing grade each and every year LoL !!

The difference between you, Curt, Pondy, and me is that we post the actual arguments our sources make and you can't refute them. You don't like that.
Try posting what your sources actually say...you won't because you know you'll get blown right out of the water !!! 😁

by HatetheSwamp on August 7, 2023 1:14 am

Try posting what your sources actually say...you won't because you know you'll get blown right out of the water !!! 😁

Ba!

I've entered numerous videos of Dershowitz, Turley and McCarthy in the past few weeks.

by Ponderer on August 7, 2023 7:33 am

Bill, you've already proved that you are a terrible judge of lawyers.

I remember how totally stoked you were when Sidney Powell got involved and started asserting all the flaming malarkey she was making up. You thought she was the cat's meow. I remember you saying something to the affect of it won't be long now, now that she's on the case. The BAHAHAHAHAs were flowing like a flooded river.

So your esteemed analysis of lawyers has been shown to be rather lacking in credibility.

by HatetheSwamp on August 7, 2023 7:51 am

I remember how totally stoked you were when Sidney Powell got involved and started asserting all the flaming malarkey she was making up.

Yeah. For about a week.

But, you have to know that freakin Alan Dershowitz and former MSNBC honcho Jonathan Turley have creds.

by Ponderer on August 7, 2023 8:01 am

Even believing her for a week was you being the personification of gullible, Bill. There was never ever a single reason to ever believe her or Giuliani about any of the blithering nonsense they are now getting their asses sued off over.

But you reflexively jumped on board like it was the slam-dunk scoop of a lifetime. You automatically chose to be willfully ignorant of how totally idiotic their libelous bullshit was.

But then that's your standard operating procedure.

by Ponderer on August 7, 2023 8:27 am

Well of course Donald Trump did nothing wrong!

by HatetheSwamp on August 7, 2023 8:33 am

po,

Maybe I've never said this. I think I have, though.

I THINK THAT TRUMP IS DESPICABLE! pb doesn't defend Trump but he regularly attacks the Biden Banana Republic.

by Ponderer on August 7, 2023 8:45 am

"I THINK THAT TRUMP IS DESPICABLE!" -Hate

Oh you've said it before. Rest assured.

The thing is though that this mantra of yours has nothing at all whatsoever to do with the way you support and defend him, Bill. You excuse and defend every single despicable act he perpetrates. All you are doing is stating a fact that pretty much everyone agrees with. You then go on as if being despicable is in no way a deal breaker for you.

Given the way you support and defend him all the time, it's as if you admire him for how despicable he is. If he is truly despicable in your eyes and being "despicable" is a bad thing to you, then why do you always defend all despicable acts he commits?

Let's try something.

Relate to us one despicable thing that Trump has ever done that you use in your formulation to find him "despicable". What's the most despicable thing on your list of despicable things he has done that makes him despicable?

by Curt_Anderson on August 7, 2023 9:00 am
Ponderer,
We may missing some context when HTS says that Trump is despicable. What he’s really saying is that Trump is despicable…not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Good cartoon, btw. 😀

by HatetheSwamp on August 7, 2023 10:00 am

po [Curt],

I've been asked that some form of that question several times since Trump handed Hillary her head in 016. And, I've always answered. In fact, I recall being asked by both of you...and isle...and by some who are no longer active on SS.

So. Just curious. Why do you ask? AGAIN?

by islander on August 7, 2023 11:14 am

Hate wrote: "I've been asked that some form of that question several times since Trump handed Hillary her head in 016. And, I've always answered. In fact, I recall being asked by both of you...and isle."

No, you didn't answer me. Your only response to the question is the one you always give any time you've been asked... I've already answered the question which is not an answer.

by Ponderer on August 7, 2023 1:38 pm

I didn't ask you anything. I told you to do something. That's a lot different than a question. I'm sorry that you are having such cognitive difficulties.

I said, "Relate to us one despicable thing that Trump has ever done that you use in your formulation to find him "despicable".

So would you mind relating to us one despicable thing that Trump has ever done that you use in your formulation to find him "despicable"?

(That was my request in the form a question, btw. See the "question mark" at the end of the sentence? So you can feel free to treat it like a question and answer it, please.....)

by HatetheSwamp on August 8, 2023 4:27 am

No, you didn't answer me. Your only response to the question is the one you always give any time you've been asked... I've already answered the question which is not an answer.

Bullfernerner

by HatetheSwamp on August 8, 2023 4:28 am

I didn't ask you anything. I told you to do something. That's a lot different than a question. I'm sorry that you are having such cognitive difficulties.

I said, "Relate to us one despicable thing that Trump has ever done that you use in your formulation to find him "despicable".

Bullfernerner.

In the past, po.

by Ponderer on August 8, 2023 7:03 am

Bill, I know you may have said something about this in the past, but would you mind relating to us one despicable thing that Trump has ever done that you use in your formulation to find him "despicable"? The pain medications I am on has played hell with my memory. So I mean, could you be a pal and answer that question again please?

I mean 'cuz otherwise I am afraid that at this point, I am going to have to finally deduce that your assertion that you believe he is despicable is nothing but a fuckingbald-faced lie.

Look Bill, I understand that even saying he is despicable has got to be causing you great distress, since as he is your cult's leader, you aren't supposed to say anything negative about him at all. And you know how skilled your brethren can be at ostracization. You would surely be shunned by the MAGA cult faithful were they to discover that you said that about him. The anxiety it must cause you to have strayed from the flock even that much must be eating you alive with guilt. But don't worry. I don't think anyone here is going to out you.

But in fairness, if you truly are serious about believing that he is despicable, which most of the rest of the country also believes with you, then you should at least be able to come up with a single example of a despicable act or thing he said that made you believe him to be despicable.

Like, when was the first time you realized that he was despicable? What was it he did or said that was just too egregious for you to blindly go along with?

by Ponderer on August 8, 2023 7:14 am

Never mind, Bill. I just saw your post about it.

by Ponderer on August 14, 2023 10:30 pm

RICO indictment.

The meat he is just got deader.

by Curt_Anderson on August 14, 2023 10:58 pm
There about 80 different charges within these four indictments. Trump needs to win them all to avoid possible prison time. The anticipation of what's to come must be nerve wracking. He must be wondering who might flip and what evidence the prosecutors have.

He must be kicking himself over the times he has blatantly violated the law and when he's incriminated himself. Of course he'll appeal any convictions. But an appeal is not a do-over trial. His attorneys need to find some mistake in the trial or the conduct of the judge or prosecutor.

Not an easy task.

by Indy! on August 15, 2023 2:17 am

Genuinely surprised god and Jesus received top billing over Trump in that meme. 😌

by HatetheSwamp on August 15, 2023 3:57 am

There about 80 different charges within these four indictments.

Penthouse quality political porn! No doubt! This is what Bob Guccione would have come up with had he published political porn!

This is waaaaaaaaaay too much fun for ol pb!

Go To Top

Comment on: "He's Dead Meat"

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart^® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page