Ominous Predictions
Megyn Kelly has some dire predictions for Donald Trump, the movement he created and the nation. Kelly and Glenn Beck were some of the moderators at the fourth and final Republican primary debate. Kelly told Beck that there would be violence in the streets if Trump were to be convicted and imprisoned before the 2024 election occurs next November. In addition, Kelly predicted that Trump will be convicted in multiple jurisdictions.
“I'm starting to worry,” Kelly told Beck. “He definitely will get convicted, in multiple jurisdictions. But [former chief assistant US attorney] Andy McCarthy, who is very smart on these things, was pointing out that Judge [Tanya] Chutkan in DC, in the federal case, on [January 6], you know she hates him. In DC, the jury is going to hate them.”
Megyn Kelly says ‘America will burn’ if Trump is jailed before election (msn.com)
Does anyone doubt this is likely to happen? Convictions are likely and if they can, they will jail him before the election. The rhetoric is about as far as they can go. They claim he wants to be a dictator and might start WWIII. Did anyone catch "Face the Nation" last week? Kristen Welker echoed what the leftist spin machine has been saying. In her interview with Gov Ron DeSantis (loaded with Gotcha questions), Welker asked how DeSantis felt about Trump's use of the word "vermin," which according to Welker & the left is a word that only Hitler used. Does anyone think that had Biden used that word in his famous Philadelphia "MAGA" speech, that anyone would be claiming the word is restricted to the vocabulary of Adolph Hitler?
We are just approaching a year of campaigning and the left has Trump compared to Hitler and want him campaigning from a jail cell. Where can they go from there?
In other news:
The administration continues to list Iran proxies, when it is clean that Iran is at war with Israel and the US. Biden fears war with Iran. Thus US forces have to keep their heads down.
On the Israeli front in Gaza things are going well:
JERUSALEM — Israel said it had tightened its grip on Hamas strongholds across Gaza with heavy airstrikes and ground fighting overnight Sunday, as its forces race to deliver a decisive blow to the militant group before international outrage over civilian deaths and a humanitarian collapse compels it to ease its attacks.
The Israel Defense Forces struck more than 250 sites across Gaza and was “fighting fiercely” in Khan Younis, the largest southern city, and in the northern neighborhoods of Shejaiya and Jabalya. The attacks have forced tens of thousands of displaced civilians into overwhelmed pockets near the Egyptian border and driven Gazan medical systems into a “catastrophe,” according to the World Health Organization.
But IDF officials said Hamas was beginning to buckle under the onslaught. Recent leaked videos of captured Gazans purported by officials to be surrendered Hamas fighters were seen in Israel as evidence that the group’s forces are beginning to throw down their weapons. Several Gazans, however, described seeing family members and children being held who had no connection to Hamas.
Israel claims progress against Hamas as humanitarian crisis worsens (msn.com)
Tags
Who is online
458 visitors
Good morning
This should be an interesting week for the Biden family. Hunter is facing a House Subpoena should he not appear for a private deposition on Wednesday as his father Joe has to negotiate with House Republicans in order to get foreign aid for Israel and Ukraine. In the meantime, Pro-Palestinian protestors continue to label the president as "Genocide Joe." It may not be justified, but it does have a nice ring to it.
So does "Traitor Trump" though it is justified.
The smirk is gone:
The "argument" against Trump going to jail is not that he is innocent, it is that some people won't like it.
Trump has had almost three years to tell everyone WHY he is innocent, and has never done it. All he does is proclaim he is a matryr.
Even the most basic concept of American justice escapes the left.
Trump does not have to prove his innocence. Those radical prosecutors have to prove his guilt.
Oh they will prove his guilt.
But he does have to explain his acitivities from Nov 20 through Jan 6 , 2021, or be forever deemed unfit to hold office. In three yrars he has never done so. Six weeks or so ago he was asked point blank by Meet The Press what was he doing on the afternoon of Jan 6th while the riot at the Capitol was raging - Trump said "I'm not going to tell you that". He cant tell us what he was doing because he knows it was cowardly and self serving. Testimony to the J6 committee by people WHO WERE THERE demonstrates this.
Will they? Or will the Trump hating juries in NYC, DC and Fulton County simply go along with the openly biased prosecutors?
But he does have to explain his acitivities from Nov 20 through Jan 6 , 2021, or be forever deemed unfit to hold office.
Oh yes, the American people think like that / S. You had him unfit the day he announced he was running in 2016.
Six weeks or so ago he was asked point blank by Meet The Press what was he doing on the afternoon of Jan 6th while the riot at the Capitol was raging - Trump said "I'm not going to tell you that".
Which means what????????
Testimony to the J6 committee by people WHO WERE THERE demonstrates this.
For some reason that committee did the unthinkable: they destroyed their records.
Please.
TDS suffering morons (mainly Democrats and lefts; but a few Never Trumpers as well) had Trump convicted before charges were ever even announced. The DOJ; FBI; and Democrats at the federal, state, and local levels have done everything in their power to bring charges- most of them so full of shit it isn't even funny.
They are counting on Democrat appointed judges; and juries from predominantly Democrat areas to make sure the predetermined verdicts are carried out.
Either the law applies equally to everyone or no one. Democrats are quickly bringing about the day when laws will not longer apply. They will also be the ones screaming the loudest when it comes.
I can see that you have never looked seriously at all this.
We are already living under a two-tier justice system. The DOJ is blatantly corrupt and many big cities have social justice DAs who refuse to enforce laws against those they consider "the oppressed."
You have proven over and over that you have next to no knowledge about the matters associated with "Jan 6th". The explanation for that is simple, you dont want to know. The truth upsets your applecart too much.
Trump declined to testify today at his fraud trial. Although he is an idiot, he is intelligent enough to know that he would lie so many times on the witness stand the prosecutors might be obliged to indict him for perjury.
You mean deemed by people that already think he is unfit for office or others that currently think he is fit that will somehow change their mind if he does not explain his activities to your satisfaction?
There is no "thinking" about it. Trump is unfit for office...
It is amazing that anyone deems Trump fit for office after his attempt to steal the 2020 election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. How can one deem a traitor who violated his oath of office by attempting to subvert the CotUS and undermine the foundation of our democracy (the vote of the electorate) to be fit to hold the office of the presidency?
If only you could convince the millions of people that seem to think otherwise.
Do you believe the charges outlined in the indictment for Jan 6th are without merit?
And yet millions do not share your opinion and think he is fit. And millions more seem to question if brain dead Joe is fit for office while millions think he is. It is a wild and wonderful country we live in.
But at least you got to list your grievances.......again.
I suppose it is when people feel a traitor is fit for office. There are also people who think Trump always tells the truth, respects women, and graduated first in his class.
I have not met one of them. Is there a club?
Do you think Trump is fit for office?
Neither Biden nor Trump is fit for the presidency. Biden due to age, Trump due to age and his traitorous acts.
You probably dont want to know the answer to that.
Some (core MAGA) are so deluded that they do not believe Trump did anything wrong.
Others know he engaged in traitorous acts but do not care because they will always vote for the GOP nominee.
Flat earthers have a right to their opinion as well. It doesnt mean that everyone else should take them seriously. The same with Trump voters.
The problem is voting for Trump has actual ramifications for the country , whereas flat earthing is just a game.
You are welcome to your opinion.
No doubt.
So elections have consequences. I seem to recall some folks saying voting for Trump would mean WW3 and a stock market collapse. Why should anyone believe a list of consequences from the same people now?
There may also be many that know Trump did something wrong but believe it does not raise to the level of disqualification from office.
And looking at how other attempts have gone, they aren't fairing too well.
He's a fucking traitor who tried to steal the 2020 presidential election. When people vote for Trump they will be voting for someone who is a traitor and tried to steal the presidential election.
There was a day when that used to mean something.
If Trump is elected again we should stop teaching US history , particularly about the ideals of the founding fathers, to our kids. They dont deserve such blatant hypocrisy. At that point the US will no longer be the greatest nation on earth.
OH THE HUMANITY!!! Maybe they should indict him for exercising his 5th Amendment Rights.
And that is all speculation and opinion.
Didn't the democrats try the same thing in 2016 with their "Russia Collusion" hoax? Why are you all are silent about that?
Trump has SAID that people who take the fifth amendment are guilty.
Donald Trump Pleads the Fifth After Saying Only Guilty People Do
Web Aug 10, 2022 · On Wednesday, former President Donald Trump said he had "absolutely no choice" but to invoke his Fifth Amendment right during his deposition with New York …
-
Trump once testified in a civil case where he was suing the writer Timothy O' Brien for slander. The video of the deposition shows Trump lying 32 times. Needless to say Trump lost the slander suit.
Your comment is not worthy of a response.
Except he didn't plead the fifth............FFS just decided, with advice from his lawyers, not to take the stand.
After 7 years of "Trumps a liar" you suddenly you believe what Trump says. And you expect to be taken seriously?
I doubt the people that vote for Trump will share that opinion.
IMO that is more than a little melodramatic but you are welcome to your opinion.
Yes it is. But you won't answer it. It would bruise your sensibilities.
Yet here you are responding. So, why are you silent about it John? Afraid of being called out on the hypocrisy you all are displaying?
Is that your position?
This seed and these comments are a good example of why people have given up on MAGA.
Why would I want to go down the same rabbit hole again, especially when you did not except my response any other time?
Funny how you shy away from taking a stand. I think we can all assume by your refusal to answer a simple question that you: "know Trump did something wrong but believe it does not raise to the level of disqualification from office" (RdTC@3.1.23).
Pretty pathetic that some still consider Trump fit for office after his attempt to steal the 2020 election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement. What more must this traitor do beyond violating his oath of office by attempting to subvert the CotUS and undermining the foundation of our democracy (the vote of the electorate) before they recognize he is wholly unfit to hold the office of the presidency?
Funny how I said I have taken a stand before and you just didn't accept it and then you not only ignore that but fail to answer why I would want to go down that rabbit hole again.
I don't know who "we all" are assuming anything but it would be more accurate to say "you all" will just make up what you want if you don't get the answer you want or any answer at all. And "you all" are welcome to your opinions, it is not like "you all" haven't already made up your minds. Do you really think I care what a half dozen people here think?
Have anything better than ad hominem attacks?
Nope and SOSDD …..
It’s called cherry-picking and not the kind I did in my youth in Northern Michigan orchards.
Exactly.
This is why I rarely read any of these seeds or articles.
There is rarely anything new to discuss.
Smart
You write quite a few words claiming you have taken a stand rather than simply express your position.
Your position is obvious: you "know Trump did something wrong but believe it does not raise to the level of disqualification from office".
It is your choice to not deny this and, in result, affirm it.
It is intellectual dishonesty (and a bit juvenile) to to conclude that something is affirmed because it is not denied again and again and again. But you are welcome to your opinion.
What more must this traitor do beyond violating his oath of office by attempting to subvert the CotUS and undermining the foundation of our democracy (the vote of the electorate) before people like you recognize he is wholly unfit to hold the office of the presidency?
Ignoring my comment and still making assumptions of what kind of person I am based on intellectual dishonesty and then expecting an answer or defense of the assumption you make.
No thanks
[deleted]
[She is not the topic]
[deleted]
The former 'president' has always been unfit to be President. He didn't truly win in 2016, as far as I'm concerned.
He was never fit and never will be. He's not fit to be dog catcher.
Anyone that says that for the 2016 or the 2020 election could be considered an election denier.
Election fraud conspiracies' from the left?
Of course they did.
Silent because, well, Democrats.
And don't call them out on it. You just get more of the hypocrisy.
You refuse to answer any direct question about your own position (something you clearly know) and then complain when one ( naturally ) assumes the affirmative based on dodging the question.
If you have a problem with people drawing the most obvious conclusion from your dodging of the question, then you can easily solve that problem by stating your position.
But it does not matter to me, your position is obvious. What is not obvious, however, is what more Trump must do beyond violating his oath of office by attempting to subvert the CotUS and undermining the foundation of our democracy (the vote of the electorate) for you to recognize he is wholly unfit to hold the office of the presidency. But you dodge this question too.
Groundhog Day here in that regard …..
I have no problem and am surely not complaining about anyone drawing any conclusion they feel the need to from what I might or might not say. In fact I find it entertaining. And the further they try to push their narrative the more entertaining it becomes. Even my wife of almost 40 years does not pretend to know me as well as some folks here.
And to be honest I am not dodging some questions, I am ignoring them (or I have answered them before and don't feel the need to revisit that particular rabbit hole), just like you ignore many of my comments and questions.
In my case I just feel some questions are not worth answering since based on past experience the answers are going to be misinterpreted, not accepted or spun and incorrect assumptions and conclusions will be made. Then there will be an expectation that I defend things I never said or meant. Pretty boring to tell you the truth.
In your case I will just assume you don't want to comment or answer some of my questions or comments because I am correct and you know it.
It's always groundhog day with them.
They are only fooling themselves …. Well and maybe a few useful idiots
Exactly!
There is nothing useful about them. Look at how they're pitching fits because somebody won't play their games, personal attacks and nonsense.
Useful to their masters pushing the agenda.
Well said and not a damn thing incorrect.
You could always lose your moral compass and just give the answers being demanded.
In some cases, you will be told what you think anyways, so not really sure why all the oft- repeated questions.
You are far from alone. Anyone who has the temerity to disagree with some folks here and tries to have a fair and reasonable debate with them, understands what a fools errand that can be.
He's been indicted HOW many times?
Like Bill Clinton they are trying to redefine is.
Even in normal times they could indict a ham sandwich.
He's been indicted HOW many times?"
He's been convicted of a crime how many time?
You mean other than rape?
If you truly believe that Trump has been convicted of the crime of rape, please link your source.
I need to read something funny.
Then I'd be just as wrong as they are.
I think these repetitive questions are a result of a few things.
1. More than likely, they have short memories and can't remember what they ask. So they ask again and again and again.
2. They can't accept somebody with a different view of the world. They were brow beat into thinking everybody should think alike. And when somebody doesn't, it triggers them. And as a result we see games, personal attacks and nonsense.
3. Opposing opinions make them cry.
One of the key precepts of our legal system is justice. True justice is blind, unbiased and should not be based on outside influences. That horse left the barn starting on November 3rd 2020 for many on the left. Trump will never get a fair trial in most of the venues he is being charged.
Not a chance but that works for the biased. For the TDS ridden.
These claims circulated while he was in office. And oh look at that. He's no longer in ofice doing away with the "dictator" nonsense and no wars started until Biden took office. Wonder why that is.
There is a word for that. It's "Hypocrisy".
"They" manage to voice many such unsupported proclamations.
Yawn, SOSDD.
And so you proclaim, without support...
It happens so often it's become expected.
And exactly what has he "proclaimed without support"?
I'd ask you for a link but see no point in wasting time asking for something never coming.
I merely pointed out the truth.
Apparently the truth doesn't sit well with all.
See your comment above for evidence...
It makes them cry.
I can take the crying.
It's the incessant whining that gets me.
Thats exactly how I feel about aggressive stupidity.
That's nice.
Do you prefer passive stupidity?
And then during that whining, they actually expect to be taken seriously.
When have Republicans or conservatives engaged in violence in the streets? Remember that Democrats and liberals loot and burn cities. Remember that it is Democrats who kneel in the Capitol rotunda in solidarity with liberal violence against the civil population.
These neoliberal socialists predicting revolutionary violence by Republicans or conservatives isn't supported by history. A Trump conviction will cause a firestorm against government and Joe Biden. But that firestorm likely will not be any more violent than the J6 riot.
If Trump is not convicted, liberals will loot and burn cities. If Trump is not convicted there will be violence against the civil population. A failure to convict Trump will give Democrats and liberals an excuse to destroy businesses, burn cities, and violently attack civil society. Right now Democrats and liberals are using that threat of extreme violence to coerce the courts into convicting Trump on any trumped up charge.
Projection to the nth degree.
From the linked article:
Bring it. Let all the traitorous bastards who put any person above the Constitution show themselves.
And then what?
Then they can be dealt with in the lawful and Constitutionally prescribed manner. Like the morons and traitors of January 6, 2021.
I don't think altered evidence the the lawful and Constitutional way to handle those things. You may want to think of a better example
Yeah, who do we believe? The gop cover-up or our own eyes?
Contrary to your opinion, no, I think that example is fine. I saw what the traitorous bastards did to and in the Capitol that day, as did the rest of America. Only the foolish discount what happened.
parts of this threadworm move for no value [PH]
Hmmmm they should be treated the same as the thousand's of rioters, looters, and violent protestors that our friends on the left remained silent about.
That is to say ….. get off scot-free ……
You're eyes? You mean you are gullible enough to buy what the J6 Shit show was selling? LMAO.
from the linked article -
it's easy to tell when reality is starting to set in with the alt-right, the threats start...
from the trump supporters participating in the discussion here -
...like constitutional due process concept escapes the right?
funny, that's not the impression I'm getting from trump supporters here...
as evidenced by a person that willfully retained classified documents and obstructed the process to return them, and isn't in jail awaiting trial
looks like there's a lot of slow learners among the maga...
so what's the threshold? having a family member that made past bad choices in their life?
almost continuously demonstrated by the right...
here's a question for the trump brain trust. based upon past rwnj rhetoric, what's to keep biden from declaring the insurrection act if maga terrorists take to the streets?
personally, I'm hoping for a trump perp walk on the anniversary of kent state...
I don't know. How about the threshold outlined by law. You know - PROOF. Instead of shrieking every day "Trump this" and "Trump that" provide actual proof of criminal activity. And make sure you take a good look around to make sure that those you are protecting aren't don't the same things. You wouldn't want to be outed as a hypocrite. You know like this stupid ass remark:
Or did you forget that the sitting POTUS has done the same thing, but for some reason you all are silent about that. Like, I don't know, hypocrites.
Proof is the evidence grand jurors in DC, Florida, Georgia and New York saw that induced them to issue 91 indictments against Trump. Which really must have been a hella lot of evidence and proof...
So you are going to go with evidence that has NOT been put up against a defense team. LMAO. You do realize that an indictment is nothing more than an accusation don't you?
7 years of "investigations" and this is all the further you all got? That's fucking hilarious.
You said there was no evidence, no proof, of Trump's crimes.
Moving the goalposts huh? Trump still faces 91 indictments!
What more proof do you need that Trump willfully held classified documents at Mar-a-Lago than his own admission? What proof do you need that he obstructed returning these documents?
What more proof do you need that Trump tried to steal the 2020 election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement? What would you consider proof that Trump attempted to undermine the CotUS and violate the foundation of democracy: the votes of the electorate?
No matter how much evidence is uncovered you predictably ignore it and blindly demand 'proof'.
In one breath you demand proof on top of overwhelming evidence and in the next breath you deem Biden to have done the same thing as Trump? Same what? What did Trump do wrong that you believe Biden has also done wrong?
What I said is in 7.1.2. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Thank you for providing the hypocrisy I was talking about.
Indictments are not convictions---something still required by US law.
If indictments were convictions, I suppose Hunter Biden and Senator Menendez would be rotting in a cell somewhere.
You dodged the questions.
An indictment is earned when a grand jury that has seen the evidence votes to proceed with charges against accused criminals. Ninety one indictments would require a huge amount of evidence...
Why won't Trump testify in his defense?
You do realize a grand jury determines if they believe there is enough evidence for an indictment and do not determine guilt or innocence don't you?
But it did make me interested in chances of conviction. According to PEW:
In fiscal year 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of the latest available statistics from the federal judiciary . Another 1,379 went to trial and were found guilty (1.9%).
The overwhelming majority of defendants in federal criminal cases that year did not go to trial at all. About nine-in-ten (89.5%) pleaded guilty, while another 8.2% had their case dismissed at some point in the judicial process, according to the data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
That is no defense for 91 indictments...
You can indict a freaking ham sandwich.......
Because he doesn't have to. Do you need him to testify?
Name one ham sandwich that earned 91 criminal indictments in 4 jurisdictions...
Thank you for clarifying that you really have NO IDEA what is happening.
Can't right now sorry, I have to research how to explain common phrases to folk.
Why would he. There is no requirement for it. Especially if the defense lawyers have can poke holes in the ever growing pile of bullshit. One thing you (and the rest of the TDS crowd) are constantly forgetting is that the evidence provided to the Grand Jury, ANY grand jury has not faced a defense team. It's all what the DA picked to present.
Generally speaking, these people have no idea what the evidence is. They didnt watch the Jan 6 committee hearings and have read and watched next to nothing about it.
They just "know" that Trump is being treated unfairly. .
No dodge. Just don't care enough to play your game. But thanks [removed]
Does he need to defend the quantity of indictments? Is he sentenced based on the number of indictments?
I think some do indeed know, but are determined to vote for whoever is the GOP nominee and thus they will avoid answering any probative questions since they know they have no argument.
I find it rather funny that anyone thinks indictments need defending outside a courtroom.
Is it your position that the Trump indictments are without merit?
I have never heard any of them demonstrate that they know anything at all about the evidence.
Right wing media doesnt discuss the evidence against Trump.
Oh, that isn't necessary for those already convicting Trump only because he has been indicted multiple times.
Isn't it funny how now indictments are equal to guilt?
I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that is exactly how some folks think the justice system should act in regards to Trump.
On the other hand, they seem familiar with trials and evidence as shown by how they talk about the foreign money that flowed into first Hunter Biden's business account and then into Joe Biden's account.
Maybe it's all different because, well,.....................Trump.
Have you reviewed all the evidence for each of the 91 indictments and concluded that all 91 have merit?
Do you mean the only place you are getting your information regarding the indictments is the left wing media?
It almost seems that the higher the quantity of indictments the more guilty he must be. Maybe if they get to 100 trials will no longer be needed and the game is proclaimed over, kinda like the mercy rule in kids baseball.
No, not all . But I have reviewed sufficient evidence to conclude that most of the charges are, in aggregate, clearly with merit. I suspect they ALL are with merit, but that would require more work for me to conclude 100% and 100% is not necessary.
You ignored my question:
The natural assumption when a direct question is ignored is that the answer is something the ignorer cannot defend. Thus the conclusion is that you hold that the indictments are without merit.
Rather than list the entire indictment for Jan 6, ...
Is it your position that these charges are without merit?
And as for the willful retention of classified documents, are you not aware that Trump has inadvertently admitted that he knew he had classified documents. Are you aware that the evidence is overwhelming that he obstructed the return of same? Is it your position that Trump did not willfully retain and obstruct the return of classified documents?
I expect if you do answer it will be your typical ' I do not know '; dodging the question.
That might be your natural assumption and like an opinion you are welcome to your assumptions.
To paraphrase what I said above with regards to dodging/ignoring a question
"to be honest I am not dodging some questions, I am ignoring them (or I have answered them before and don't feel the need to revisit that particular rabbit hole), just like you ignore many of my comments and questions.
In my case I just feel some questions are not worth answering since based on past experience the answers are going to be misinterpreted, not accepted or spun and incorrect assumptions and conclusions will be made, just like the ones you are doing above and are telling me how you will interpret a non answer. Then there will be an expectation that I defend things I never said or meant. Pretty boring to tell you the truth. Or in some cases I just would rather not play a game I feel is being played.
And since I too am welcome to my assumptions in your case I will just assume when you don't comment or answer some of my questions or comments it is because I am correct and you know it. In that case you have admitted twice to being guilty of intellectual dishonesty above since you ignored the statement and did not deny it. "
I do not know is actually an answer to a question
As predicted.
Ignoring lies from you does not make the lies true. But here is my response: your aforementioned claims are lies.
If you ask a thoughtful question, I will answer. I have no problem supporting my positions.
Never said that was my answer, only that saying you don't know is an answer and not a dodge. It also gives you the opportunity to assume anything you want.
You might think they are lies, I am not sure everyone reading agrees with that. But if you don't deny it how am I supposed to know you think it is a lie? It was your decision to not deny it so it can be considered and affirmation of what I said. I would not have said anything I thought was a lie so a non answer as far as I am concerned allows me to assume what I feel to be true.
I asked you three questions in one post on another seed yesterday. You answered one and avoided the other two.
Would you consider that hypocrisy?
name one of trump's indictments that hasn't been thru the grand jury process
false equivalency. compare both candidates time frames and all compelling legal processes, if any, involved from discovery of the missing documents to when they were returned to gov't custody.
Why don't you describe when indictments started being the same as convicting.
If you asked a thoughtful question, I would have answered it.
Ditto
Making a (false or stupid) claim is different from asking a direct question.
Ask a direct, thoughtful question and I will typically answer.
Make a false or stupid claim and I will often ignore it.
And you determine what is thoughtful, stupid or direct for you and i will determine what is thoughtful, stupid or direct for me. And you will assume what you want and I will assume what I want.
right after you answer my inquiry.
Your 'inquiry' had nothing to do with the post you responded to.
Mine dealt directly to your post.
right after you answer my inquiry.
Yes.
Name one that's been through the scrutiny of a Defense team. Oh, wait. You can't because none have made it that far.
You're right. Biden had his far longer and didn't return them. But lets not dwell on facts like that and "but Trruuummmmppppp!!!!!!"
"chaos in the streets" "MAGA is going to rise up" "It will burn"
See how their first resort is violence? To the former 'president', that monumental turd, if he faces justice, there will be "chaos in the streets" "MAGA is going to rise up" "It will burn"
Kinda like BLM huh.................
No, not at all, huh ...........................
And those antifa pussies ..
So you don't think the chaos in the streets will reach the one billion dollars the BLM riots cost either. Good call.
Right? I mean how dare someone oppose fascism!!!!!! Those bastards! LMAO!!!
Just because they call themselves antifa does not mean they actually are anti fascist. IMO they are more fascist than the people they are complaining about.
Antifa is comprised of thugs.
Anti
F-First
A-Amendment
So is the GOP.
[deleted]
generous
[removed]