What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.65: I'm Just Here For The Lincoln Project Ads

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is there a chance Al Gore and Hillary Clinton get prosecuted for what they did in 2000 and 2016? Now that the precedent has been set they could be in trouble.
 
Drew S. said:
Is there a chance Al Gore and Hillary Clinton get prosecuted for what they did in 2000 and 2016? Now that the precedent has been set they could be in trouble.
Click to expand...

Did they go and get fake electors? Did they encourage the VP to invalidate the election?

What did they do that was the same as your worship?
 
Drew S. said:
Is there a chance Al Gore and Hillary Clinton get prosecuted for what they did in 2000 and 2016? Now that the precedent has been set they could be in trouble.
Click to expand...

Are you really this dumb?

That was free speech. They did not execute criminal acts in furtherance of their beliefs.
 
The GQP excels at getting all its brand name people spouting the same message. Why are they all claiming the indictment is about Trump's first amendment rights, when the indictment makes it clear that's not the case?

1) No Trump supporters will ever read the indictment nor are they being encouraged to do so by Fox, Newsmax, OAN--unlike CNN.
2) It's a simple claim to make and easily grasped by a cult ready to light its hair on fire yet again.
3) Months of repetition will make the claim gospel on the right and keep those donations pouring in.
 
Rogie21 said:
The GQP excels at getting all its brand name people spouting the same message. Why are they all claiming the indictment is about Trump's first amendment rights, when the indictment makes it clear that's not the case?

1) No Trump supporters will ever read the indictment nor are they being encouraged to do so by Fox, Newsmax, OAN--unlike CNN.
2) It's a simple claim to make and easily grasped by a cult ready to light its hair on fire yet again.
3) Months of repetition will make the claim gospel on the right and keep those donations pouring in.
Click to expand...

This is what makes me so angry. I'm sick of the cult. I'm sick of willful blindness. I'm sick of what only can be called utter stupidity.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
That's not against the law and there is no charge for that in the indictment.
Click to expand...

This.

Drew is predictable, as simplistic beings are, so he's probably going to bring up some House members challenging results during the 2000 and 2016 EC meeting, which as you point out a) not against the law and b) not what Trump is being charged for. Trump is being charged for trying to assemble fake electors through non-legal means, trying to get states to alter their results by fabricating votes, and conspiring to obstruct the EC meeting through non-legal means, none of which Gore or Clinton even gave a seconds thought to.
 
From Dump's Truth Social post last night:
The latest Fake “case” brought by Crooked Joe Biden & Deranged Jack Smith will hopefully be moved to an impartial Venue, such as the politically unbiased nearby State of West Virginia! IMPOSSIBLE to get a fair trial in Washington, D.C., which is over 95% anti-Trump, & for which I have called for a Federal TAKEOVER in order to bring our Capital back to Greatness. It is now a high crime embarrassment to our Nation and, indeed, the World. This Indictment is all about Election Interference!!!
Click to expand...

Isn't that what got him in trouble in the first place?



And you know what? I'm tired of his p*ssyfooting around. Just call on every MAGA to do their thing so we can get this over with.
 
Handyman said:
Are you going to get put in a home because you are too stupid to be allowed to live on your own without putting yourself and others in danger?
Click to expand...

They did take Dakota Fanning away from Sean Penn in that movie, so there's precedent.

#nevergofulldrewtard
 
aparch said:
From Dump's Truth Social post last night:


Isn't that what got him in trouble in the first place?



And you know what? I'm tired of his p*ssyfooting around. Just call on every MAGA to do their thing so we can get this over with.
Click to expand...

Legal question:

With this, why wouldn't Smith call him to the stand to elaborate on the highlighted part?

I'm sure that Dump will just plead the 5th, but that would leave the impression needed on the jury. Seems like a TRIAL 101 type scenario.
 
aparch said:
From Dump's Truth Social post last night:


Isn't that what got him in trouble in the first place?



And you know what? I'm tired of his p*ssyfooting around. Just call on every MAGA to do their thing so we can get this over with.
Click to expand...
Uhhhh...Federal takeover? The federal government already runs DC.

Section 8: "The Congress shall have the power to....exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States"
 
French Rage said:
This.

Drew is predictable, as simplistic beings are, so he's probably going to bring up some House members challenging results during the 2000 and 2016 EC meeting, which as you point out a) not against the law and b) not what Trump is being charged for. Trump is being charged for trying to assemble fake electors through non-legal means, trying to get states to alter their results by fabricating votes, and conspiring to obstruct the EC meeting through non-legal means, none of which Gore or Clinton even gave a seconds thought to.
Click to expand...

If anything, Gore didn't go far enough because he was so fucking terrified of what challenging the schedule (and manner) of transfer of power might have meant.
 
RaceBoarder said:
Legal question:

With this, why wouldn't Smith call him to the stand to elaborate on the highlighted part?

I'm sure that Dump will just plead the 5th, but that would leave the impression needed on the jury. Seems like a TRIAL 101 type scenario.
Click to expand...

You have to choose to testify in your trial you cannot be compelled. In theory he could be subpoenaed for a separate trial though he would just take the fifth.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
If anything, Gore didn't go far enough because he was so ****ing terrified of what challenging the schedule (and manner) of transfer of power might have meant.
Click to expand...

Yup. There were votes in Flo(R)ida that were never counted because the GOP ran out the clock. If there had been a few more weeks Gore likely "wins" and then all hell breaks loose.

Hell Nixon knew what went on in Chicago (and other places) and didn't challenge. That is how awful what Trump did was.
 
Handyman said:
You have to choose to testify in your trial you cannot be compelled. In theory he could be subpoenaed for a separate trial though he would just take the fifth.
Click to expand...

Ah. Gotcha. That makes sense given that the whole preceding would fall under the 5th.

Like I said, TRIAL 101, lol...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top