Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Donald Trump - MAGAtwat news and discussion

So far Trump's lawyer has gotten a softball question from far right Justice Thomas, mild probing from 'moderate' conservative Chief Justice Roberts, a grilling from two of the liberal justices, an attempt by Trump appointee Justice Barrett to try and moderate the Trump lawyer's argument. Far right Justice Alito clearly gunning for the Trump side.
 
Seems all three liberal Justices also more sympathetic to the Trump side, they're really grilling the other side. This may be a unanimous win for the rapist.
 
I predict either we'll get a unanimous ruling - probably written by Roberts + at least one deranged concurrence written by Thomas (trying to rule out any possible alternative form of getting Trump off the ballot) and maybe some liberal concurrences as well (exploring other possible legal routes to excluding a president under section 3) or we get a plurality ruling where all judges rule in favour of Trump but for different reasons.
 
One of the justices suggested that Trumps's legal argument might be "gerrymandered".* Which seems to suggest both that they don't know what "gerrymamdered" means, and also that they don't understand the concept adversarial legal proceedings.

* What they really meant to suggest is that it is an argument of convenience.
 
“Think about the right of the people to elect candidates of their choice, of letting the people decide, because your position has the effect of disenfranchising voters to a significant degree," Kavanaugh told Murray.

Murray offered a blunt reply: "The reason we're here is that President Trump tried to disenfranchise 80 million Americans who voted against him, and the Constitution doesn't require that we be given another chance.“

 
This whole case is a classic example of rightwing cry-bullying. Trump actually engaged in insurrection, but a court cannot exclude him from a state ballot on that basis basically because rightwing loon judges will retaliate against the Democratic nominee by excluding them from the ballot on some utterly spurious claim of insurrection. That liberals themselves seem to have internalised this cry bullying (or at any rate feel powerless in the face of it) explains the wild asymmetry between the shit that Conservatives can get away with and what they can.
 

"Even though there are different pastors giving these prayers at each rally, the theme generally remains the same — that there are dark, satanic, sinister forces who have taken over the government behind the scenes (the Deep State), and these forces are threatened by the only man capable of defeating them — Donald Trump," wrote Filipowski, who has watched every Trump rally, interview and speech since January 2021. "Attendees are then typically asked to pray to put a 'hedge of protection' around Trump and his family, or to 'put the Armor of God' on him to safeguard him, because the agents of the Deep State will stop at nothing to destroy him."

:eek:
1707498957332.png
 



:eek:

Reminds me of when Trump's spiritual adviser tried summoning "angels from Africa and South America" to help his campaign in 2020

 
this lot if jesus returned they be the first lot to call him woke and nail his ass back on the cross

what the book says mean very little to them
Pretty sure at some point in revelation jesus casts these false prophets into the lake of eternal fire...
 
One of my favourite podcasts (Behind the News with Doug Henwood) covered the insurrection case a few weeks ago. TLDL: The case against trump will most likely fail. The disqualification clause of the 14th amendment has very little jurisprudence dealing with it and basically hasn't been invoked since the civil war. There are seven legal hurdles the prosecution has to get past to make their case and trump only has to beat them on one. The first amendment is one, another is that the clause in the 14th amendment requires congress has to act to implement the clause/section in question and it hasn't. The fact that Trump hasn't been charged in any court with insurrection (rather than being disqualified for alleged insurrection) is another problem. There is also the question of whether the case is wise strategically. The democrats/liberals once again are showing their preference for legal work-rounds rather than popular appeal.

Skip to 5:14 for the relevant part. The segment ends at 30:30
 
I truly fear for the world a lot more than when it looked like Trump might become president for the first time. We're going to have an unhinged, corrupt maniac obsessed with getting even with everyone he believes wronged him the first time around in the White House.
 
I truly fear for the world a lot more than when it looked like Trump might become president for the first time. We're going to have an unhinged, corrupt maniac obsessed with getting even with everyone he believes wronged him the first time around in the White House.

On the other hand, he didn't prove to be terribly competent or any good at holding his mob together. Pence, Pompino, or de Santos or any of those Tea Party Cunts might be more capable of getting wickedness done.
 
Back
Top Bottom