Defendant Trump Will Reveal Classified Info That Demonstrates One Way Democrats Cheat.

a reply to: frogs453

No, never did, I used a chess analogy, but I'm sure you can tell the difference? Maybe you can't. You see the word chess and you go high and wide. Context my friend!

But he's been right more than wrong.

What revolutionaries in the airports are you spewing that he was spewing about? I either missed that in the past, or have been out of routine and away from news more recently.

I remember Obama thinking there were 57 or some such number of states. Yeah, he has to travel alot and multiple states have him coming and going to court. Sheesh.

I woke up the other day and didn't know what state I was in either. Long road trips can do that.

originally posted by: MoreCoyoteAngels
a reply to: 31331Dos

Trump discovered, like Obama before him, there are no bugs on the golf course!

LOL, the POTUS is always at work. A better question is how long did he sit on the porcelain throne and do social media? Im sure you will begrudge him that time too.

LOL They have SCIF's for that.

Trump was just goofing off.

a reply to: chr0naut

Yes, they do have SCIFs for classified handling and meetings.

Not all presidential conversations are classified, and maybe some are very private.

But the point he played golf while being next to the football and followed around by aids is really a stupid thing to get worked up about. Even when he criticized Obama for doing it.

originally posted by: 31331Dos
a reply to: tanstaafl

Trump played golf more than any president in history.

All while getting more done in one term that any other President ever accomplished in two terms, all while being vilified and attacked 24/7 by people like you.

originally posted by: IndieA
a reply to: frogs453

I feel bad for that one female representative from Georgia who was accused of being on the counting floor during the election and for having her hands on ballots, along with her assistant.

Although, it definitely looked like them, we were assured by other officials, that it definitely wasn't them. We were never told who it was instead, but it definitely wasn't those two women.

Also, this whole thing has nothing to do with a government protecting it's officers, so pay no attention to this and move along.

If for some reason these are the same two women, I wonder if there are classified reasons for their election night activities.

If the government found ways to manipulate elections, is it possible they would secretly covet and use that power for themselves at home and abroad?

a reply to: chr0naut

Trump was "a conservative", but his right-wingedness did not mean his fiscal policy was particularly balanced or sustainable.

Mate Trump was no Conservative nor Republican , Trump was a life long Democrat and Business man . He ran as a Republican because he knew he could win and He Ran on Conservative Ideals because again he knew he had to .

Once in office Trump neither stuck to Conservative Ideals nor Progressive Ideals he simply did what he thought was best, did it always turn out to be Best ? of course not but what POTUS can say it does ?

Many of Trumps Decisions were based on the Chaotic situation created by the " PANDEMIC " . I'm sure you know my feelings on that Charade as I am well aware of yours

a reply to: matafuchs

America is not a business, it's a country.

I do kinda see your point though, corporations own our politicians so in that way it kind of IS a business at this point. No wonder corporations got away with highway robbery with the plandemic that started under Trump, he was doing his due diligence and rewarding all the hard work the rich have put into undermining our democracy. He's the face of corporate America, the rich only got richer under his watch thanks to his response to COVID.

"But... Biden!" Right?

a reply to: tanstaafl

Too bad everything he did amounted to nothing and was immediately nullified when Biden got into office. No effort at all to enact any lasting changes, he just put up window dressing that was immediately taken down as soon as he lost in 2020.

What an absolute legend, he did literally nothing that lasted past his time in office other than his disastrous response to COVID, a response that he made with the guidance of Black Rock and Larry Fink. That's what you call a winner, someone who does the bare minimum and passes EO's that he knows for a fact will be repealed as soon as he leaves office. Such a forward thinker!

If only he was able to do something that actually had lasting impact. The only thing he did that lasted was his response to COVID and the vaccine rollout that he was integral in bankrolling, a vaccine that he called the greatest achievement in the history of mankind. He STILL hasn't denounced the vaccine despite most of his followers thinking it's poison. What a genius.

Big pharma loves Trump, he gave them the keys to kingdom. Great businessman for sure, and as we know what's good for business is usually bad for the average Joe. He really stuck it to the man didn't he? We are seeing the fruits of his labors with sky high inflation and people supposedly dying daily from the vaccine. What a friggin' hero that man is.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: chr0naut

Trump was "a conservative", but his right-wingedness did not mean his fiscal policy was particularly balanced or sustainable.

Mate Trump was no Conservative nor Republican , Trump was a life long Democrat and Business man . He ran as a Republican because he knew he could win and He Ran on Conservative Ideals because again he knew he had to .

Once in office Trump neither stuck to Conservative Ideals nor Progressive Ideals he simply did what he thought was best, did it always turn out to be Best ? of course not but what POTUS can say it does ?

Many of Trumps Decisions were based on the Chaotic situation created by the " PANDEMIC " . I'm sure you know my feelings on that Charade as I am well aware of yours

The pandemic was only a 'thing' for the last year of Trump's administration.

From the get go (in 2017) Trump was claiming things that he could not possibly have done.

Although Obama had tried quantative easing, raising taxes for the wealthiest, and a number of other initiatives to stimulate the economy and reduce national debt, Trump did nothing of that.

Trump also overturned several of Obama's successful fiscal policies that had already shown a positive outcome for the majority of Americans in pulling them out from the results of the Great Recession and the Sub-Prime Mortgage crisis.

Economic policy of the Barack Obama administration - Wikipedia

Economic policy of the Donald Trump administration - Wikipedia

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: chr0naut

Trump was "a conservative", but his right-wingedness did not mean his fiscal policy was particularly balanced or sustainable.

Mate Trump was no Conservative nor Republican , Trump was a life long Democrat and Business man . He ran as a Republican because he knew he could win and He Ran on Conservative Ideals because again he knew he had to .

Once in office Trump neither stuck to Conservative Ideals nor Progressive Ideals he simply did what he thought was best, did it always turn out to be Best ? of course not but what POTUS can say it does ?

Many of Trumps Decisions were based on the Chaotic situation created by the " PANDEMIC " . I'm sure you know my feelings on that Charade as I am well aware of yours

True, Trump was all about Trump.

a reply to: chr0naut

Trust the plan or get sent back to Old Zealand.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: chr0naut

Trust the plan or get sent back to Old Zealand.

There is no plan, Q make stuff up as they go.

... and 'zeal' means great enthusiasm or eagerness. In either case, it would be a land of great enthusiasm or eagerness because both new and old zeal are probably much the same.

a reply to: chr0naut

One hast more crust.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: chr0naut

One hast more crust.

And a scrabble score of 13 (for a four letter word, not too bad).

a reply to: MoreCoyoteAngels

Rule 2.11: Disqualification


(A) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in any proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality* might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to the following circumstances:

(1) The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer, or personal knowledge* of facts that are in dispute in the proceeding.

(2) The judge knows* that the judge, the judge’s spouse or domestic partner,* or a person within the third degree of relationship* to either of them, or the spouse or domestic partner of such a person is:
(a) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, general partner, managing member, or trustee of a party;
(b) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(c) a person who has more than a de minimis* interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding; or
(d) likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

(3) The judge knows that he or she, individually or as a fiduciary,* or the judge’s spouse, domestic partner, parent, or child, or any other member of the judge’s family residing in the judge’s household,* has an economic interest* in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding.

(4) The judge knows or learns by means of a timely motion that a party, a party’s lawyer, or the law firm of a party’s lawyer has within the previous [insert number] year[s] made aggregate* contributions* to the judge’s campaign in an amount that [is greater than $[insert amount] for an individual or $[insert amount] for an entity] [is reasonable and appropriate for an individual or an entity].

(5) The judge, while a judge or a judicial candidate,* has made a public statement, other than in a court proceeding, judicial decision, or opinion, that commits or appears to commit the judge to reach a particular result or rule in a particular way in the proceeding or controversy.

(6) The judge:
(a) served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or was associated with a lawyer who participated substantially as a lawyer in the matter during such association;
(b) served in governmental employment, and in such capacity participated personally and substantially as a lawyer or public official concerning the proceeding, or has publicly expressed in such capacity an opinion concerning the merits of the particular matter in controversy;
(c) was a material witness concerning the matter; or
(d) previously presided as a judge over the matter in another court.
(B) A judge shall keep informed about the judge’s personal and fiduciary economic interests, and make a reasonable effort to keep informed about the personal economic interests of the judge’s spouse or domestic partner and minor children residing in the judge’s household.
(C) A judge subject to disqualification under this Rule, other than for bias or prejudice under paragraph (A)(1), may disclose on the record the basis of the judge’s disqualification and may ask the parties and their lawyers to consider, outside the presence of the judge and court personnel, whether to waive disqualification. If, following the disclosure, the parties and lawyers agree, without participation by the judge or court personnel, that the judge should not be disqualified, the judge may participate in the proceeding. The agreement shall be incorporated into the record of the proceeding. m


IMO , there has been not one Judge in Any of Mr. Trumps Court Cases that has not been Immune from Conflict of Interest or Guilty of Associating with 3rd Party Influencers . A Fair Trial is Impossible under those Circumstances .

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

IMO , there has been not one Judge in Any of Mr. Trumps Court Cases that has not been Immune from Conflict of Interest or Guilty of Associating with 3rd Party Influencers . A Fair Trial is Impossible under those Circumstances .

With so many members of the public holding biases with regards to Trump, how can you select an impartial jury? The public has been jaded from ongoing information warfare and psychological operations regarding Trump. How is that fair?

Further more, advances in technology are making myself and others concerned about jury pool selection.

Statistically speaking, if someone can skew a jury pool to have a bias that favors an outcome, they might be able to increase the odds of the selected jury's final decision.

I imagine that things like the massive amount of data that has been collected on people, intelligent algorithms, and artificial intelligence could help facilitate such an endeavor. Some have even suggested that shadownet technology may already be able to accomplish this.

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

You are absolutely correct. It's clear what is going on. But they are too far gone to turn back now.

They don't CARE that we see it. And that scares me more than anything else they've done.

They don't plan on leaving power.

originally posted by: 31331Dos
a reply to: matafuchs

America is not a business, it's a country.

I do kinda see your point though, corporations own our politicians so in that way it kind of IS a business at this point. No wonder corporations got away with highway robbery with the plandemic that started under Trump, he was doing his due diligence and rewarding all the hard work the rich have put into undermining our democracy. He's the face of corporate America, the rich only got richer under his watch thanks to his response to COVID.

"But... Biden!" Right?

why would businesses want to invest and work if government works against them?

a reply to: 31331Dos

like the trump policies that got reversed by the biden administration and turned into disasters, the original covid vax that worked got nullified and screwed by new vaccine formulas, and then nationwide disaster policies by local and state government authoritarian experiments.

a reply to: chr0naut

if so true, why are biden long term policies failing?