Elections Trump Indicted On 91 Counts

[Super_Nintendo]

twas the year before dems steal 2024
like they tried with '16 and definitely 2020 before

cardboard and burst pipes ain't gonna cut it this time
so they'll make donny do prison and start doing hard time

if that doesn't work they'll release another virus and start world war 3
these commies work overtime to save our dem-o-cracy

they loved donnie before he became president
but you can never call them out, no not the est-ablish-ment

since 2015 they've ran on fake news and collusion
cause trump derangement syndrome is their number one delusion

we'll find out soon if dems give joe another run
they'll need crate-fulls of ballots to hit 100 mil-lion!

they'll churn out fake news and prop up joseph bi-den
but god bless the orange man and let's make america great once again!

 

[DoctorTaco]

They all must do some whacked shit to keep this nation somewhat safe. We don't want them thinking if some marginal shit will get them tossed in the Fed Prison dissuading them from doing the job. In Trump's docs case part of it was a CYA. He knew Milley and the Establishment were going to try and claim he wanted War with Iran, when it was the opposite. He kept the docs that exposed it. Now, he kept other shit that he didn't belong having most likely, but they all do.... except Obama*

*People wonder why Obama never had any issues with docs. It was really simple. He gave the National Archives the largest budget and payoff they've ever seen and they spent thousands and thousands of man hours de-classifying tons of documents for his use as they grew their department to levels never before seen. You want to endear a Federal Agency to you? Fund the hell out of them. Barack funded them just before he left to be his workforce. Most people don't know he had fleets and fleets of them approving tons and tons of documents for him to keep like no other. Our fucked press doesn't report about it in context, because that Orange Man must be fully demonized. They'll just say that he had them properly declassified, but not share the budget trick and payoff to the department. Barack has way more documents than anyone. Now, the boss of that was the main guy shitting on Trump (recently retired). He's an Obama Deep Stater if ever anyone was. We should give credit where credit is due to Barack. He played it like a Master and was 3 moves ahead of everyone. I am starting to wonder if Trump's Library, when built, will even have documents. The Biden DOJ/FBI virtually took them all. If Biden learned anything from Obama, he will also give the National Archives a huge budget boost at the end to be his workforce on documents. Trump didn't play the game properly.

You understand it wasn’t how many docs Trump had that people take issue with, right????

 

[sickc0d3r]

Trump faces 91 charges. Among them, getting caught with classified documents

I get that it’s not the point of your overall post, but, Trump isn’t charged with possessing classified documents. If that’s all he had done he never would have been charged. He was given ample time and multiple chances to return them. The charges came after he refused and then lied about it.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

I get that it’s not the point of your overall post, but, Trump isn’t charged with possessing classified documents. If that’s all he had done he never would have been charged. He was given ample time and multiple chances to return them. The charges came after he refused and then lied about it.

oh they're fully aware of that. they just try to downplay it as much as possible.

they never did that for hillary or tied themselves into a pretzel trying to defend any squirrely behavior back when they were accusing her of mishandling classified documents. how strange! they were all busy chanting "lock her up!" and reminding us all just how horrible of a crime it is if somebody mishandles classified information. even when she never had her due process or was convicted or indicted for any crimes. but even after the investigation was finished and didn't lead to any indictments, that didn't stop the rubes from calling for that weaponized DOJ of theirs to drag their political opponents into their kangaroo courts and lock them away.

imagine the shit fit they would have thrown if hillary or brandon stole a bunch of classified documents, played games with the rightful owners for years and blew off their every request to recover their property, and then lied to the courts about having any of it just so they wouldn't have to give it back to its owners. suddenly it would be considered an awful crime and the people who did it would deserve to be locked up for their terrible crimes against their country. funny how that works with them.

 

[blackheart]

See the thing is if we are going by the actual definition of a conservative.. Donald Trump doesn't fit that definition.

Conservatives want little government and try to ensure democracy and the Constitution prevail. Our founding fathers wanted to free themselves of tyranny.

Giving someone the kind of power Donald Trump wants goes against what the founding fathers wanted.

Conservatism is fundamentally a brain abnormality (an enlarged amygdala) that results in heightened fear and disgust responses. Everything else, like the traditional definition of conservatism you've provided, is just facade. It's window dressing. That brain abnormality results in a psychological need for extreme hierarchism - identify who the bad guys are, have extreme preference for the good guys (the in group). At the top of this psychological drive for hierarchy, is a top hierarch. The king of the pyramid. That's why conservatives are far more religious. Believing in God, the ultimate hierarch, psychologically soothes them. That's probably where it's safest for conservatives to rest their NEED for an ultimate hierarch - an imaginary man in the sky that can't hurt anyone. But time and time again, we have seen conservatives replace their top daddy hierarch, with a real living person, and that's where it becomes dangerous. Like with Hitler. Like with Trump.

In this sense, Donald Trump is very much a conservative. He gives conservatives an ultimate hierarch to place at the pinnacle of their devotion and worship, and he clearly identifies who the out group is and the harm he wants to do to them.

Conservative "ideology" is made up. It does not exist. Conservative ideology, at its core, is just a collection of emotional reactions wearing a mask.

 

[mixmastermo]

Conservatism is fundamentally a brain abnormality (an enlarged amygdala) that results in heightened fear and disgust responses. Everything else, like the traditional definition of conservatism you've provided, is just facade. It's window dressing. That brain abnormality results in a psychological need for extreme hierarchism - identify who the bad guys are, have extreme preference for the good guys (the in group). At the top of this psychological drive for hierarchy, is a top hierarch. The king of the pyramid. That's why conservatives are far more religious. Believing in God, the ultimate hierarch, psychologically soothes them. That's probably where it's safest for conservatives to rest their NEED for an ultimate hierarch - an imaginary man in the sky that can't hurt anyone. But time and time again, we have seen conservatives replace their top daddy hierarch, with a real living person, and that's where it becomes dangerous. Like with Hitler. Like with Trump.

In this sense, Donald Trump is very much a conservative. He gives conservatives an ultimate hierarch to place at the pinnacle of their devotion and worship, and he clearly identifies who the out group is and the harm he wants to do to them.

Conservative "ideology" is made up. It does not exist. Conservative ideology, at its core, is just a collection of emotional reactions wearing a mask.

I agree with some parts of this, not so much on the other parts.

It's late so I'm too tired to go into too much detail but basically true conservatism in the political sense doesn't benefit everyone. Since it benefits so few the party of conservatives had to partner up with other people who may not benefit from it financially, but can be convinced that the conservative ideology can protect their beliefs and in turn their country.
Enter the religious conservatives. The religious ones are conservative in a social sense- they defer to the hierarchy you defined and look down on those who believe any differently. What we have today is a coalition of people who call themselves conservative that have opposing beliefs, depending on their social class. The people who are better off are in power and have convinced the people of lower classes to vote against their own financial and political interests, as long as they take care of their social and religious needs. That is why the conservative parties throw them a bone every now and then by opposing abortion or holding up bibles, etc.

True political conservatives do exist in politics- Paul Ryan was a good example. However the voices of that part of the coalition ahs been drowned out by the super popular movement that Donald Trump created. This is why you've had so many Republicans retire and/or not run for re-election. They feel like they don't fit in anymore.

Here's an article on Paul Ryan discussing Trump's ideology.

Trump is a ‘populist, authoritarian narcissist’, says ex-speaker Paul Ryan

Ryan says ex-president ‘not a conservative’ and praises Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for opposing Trump

www.theguardian.com

 

[blackheart]

I agree with some parts of this, not so much on the other parts.

It's late so I'm too tired to go into too much detail but basically true conservatism in the political sense doesn't benefit everyone. Since it benefits so few the party of conservatives had to partner up with other people who may not benefit from it financially, but can be convinced that the conservative ideology can protect their beliefs and in turn their country.
Enter the religious conservatives. The religious ones are conservative in a social sense- they defer to the hierarchy you defined and look down on those who believe any differently. What we have today is a coalition of people who call themselves conservative that have opposing beliefs, depending on their social class. The people who are better off are in power and have convinced the people of lower classes to vote against their own financial and political interests, as long as they take care of their social and religious needs. That is why the conservative parties throw them a bone every now and then by opposing abortion or holding up bibles, etc.

True political conservatives do exist in politics- Paul Ryan was a good example. However the voices of that part of the coalition ahs been drowned out by the super popular movement that Donald Trump created. This is why you've had so many Republicans retire and/or not run for re-election. They feel like they don't fit in anymore.

Here's an article on Paul Ryan discussing Trump's ideology.

Trump is a ‘populist, authoritarian narcissist’, says ex-speaker Paul Ryan

Ryan says ex-president ‘not a conservative’ and praises Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for opposing Trump

www.theguardian.com

I appreciate the analysis. But Paul Ryan is just a liberal. Liberalism is the pervasive and dominant ideology in the capitalist western world, and they comprise most of both parties. People like Paul Ryan and Liz Cheney are just on the conservative end of the liberal spectrum.

Now, maybe you can say, that conservatism is the conservative end of the liberal spectrum. But in my mind a true conservative must possess that psychological drive towards hierarchy, as outlined in social dominance theory.

So maybe what I'm talking about is a reactionary, and not a conservative. As long as we have distinct terms for the two different groups its purely semantic. Idc what we call them. But I would still argue that the Paul Ryan types you speak of are just liberals and not their own distinctive ideological grouping.

 

[mixmastermo]

I appreciate the analysis. But Paul Ryan is just a liberal. Liberalism is the pervasive and dominant ideology in the capitalist western world, and they comprise most of both parties. People like Paul Ryan and Liz Cheney are just on the conservative end of the liberal spectrum.

Now, maybe you can say, that conservatism is the conservative end of the liberal spectrum. But in my mind a true conservative must possess that psychological drive towards hierarchy, as outlined in social dominance theory.

So maybe what I'm talking about is a reactionary, and not a conservative. As long as we have distinct terms for the two different groups its purely semantic. Idc what we call them. But I would still argue that the Paul Ryan types you speak of are just liberals and not their own distinctive ideological grouping.

Yep, you basically just illustrated the point I was trying to make. Two different perspectives sharing the same political coalition.

Pat Robertson and Paul Ryan both call themselves conservatives- and they are if you want to go by the actual definition of the word. However both have differing perspectives on what it actually means to be conservative. It really does come down to semantics.

 

[emefer]

trump scandal update! trump sleeps nude in an oxygen tent which he believes gives him sexual powers!

I knew you had a thing for trump but didn’t know it was like that.

 

[emefer]

Are you not embarrassed at yourself, at all, when you start using these terms only after hearing them from your favorite cult leader?

You know that you never once in your life used the word "lawfare" until your cult daddy said it

You know that you never once used the term "deep state" until your cult daddy said it

It's like being in middle school and seeing a cool backpack on another kid so you immediately run out and make your mom buy you one

It's just deeply, deeply embarrassing behavior from a grown man.

Are you capable of the tiniest bit of self-reflection and self-awareness on this?

That type of behavior is a big no go.

 

[blackheart]

Yep, you basically just illustrated the point I was trying to make. Two different perspectives sharing the same political coalition.

Pat Robertson and Paul Ryan both call themselves conservatives- and they are if you want to go by the actual definition of the word. However both have differing perspectives on what it actually means to be conservative. It really does come down to semantics.

Conservative and liberal are not mutually exclusive descriptors.

By the actual definition of the word, Paul Ryan is a liberal. Actual conservatism was born out of a reaction against the enlightenment, and was primarily focused on preserving and defending monarchy. There again we see that extreme hierarchy component. Western "conservatives", like Paul Ryan and Liz Cheney, aren't trying to re-establish a monarchy. But what I would say are actual conservatives, or reactionaries, are trying to essentially re-establish a monarchy in Trump. They want to give him absolute authority with complete immunity from the law - just like a monarch. Some of the far right media ghouls actually openly say they want Trump to be made king.

 

[Ruv]

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I get that it’s not the point of your overall post, but, Trump isn’t charged with possessing classified documents. If that’s all he had done he never would have been charged. He was given ample time and multiple chances to return them. The charges came after he refused and then lied about it.

And the fact that some of them have yet to be produced. Best case scenario is he has them in a safe at Bedminster and worse case scenario is that someone already stole them or he sold them off.

 

[sickc0d3r]

And the fact that some of them have yet to be produced. Best case scenario is he has them in a safe at Bedminster and worse case scenario is that someone already stole them or he sold them off.

Yeah, it’s bad. The comparisons to Biden and Hilldawg are weak. Trump gets a pass from his fans for shit they’d absolutely hammer anyone else for doing. Not really a surprise.
Tbf, our overall document security apparently sucks ass, though.

 

[Crawler89]

I just wanted Donny to get to 100 so we could shop him as the wilt chamberlain 100 point game.

Might just have to do the Kobe pic.

Trump man God.

 

[CatchnShoot]

And the fact that some of them have yet to be produced. Best case scenario is he has them in a safe at Bedminster and worse case scenario is that someone already stole them or he sold them off.

Yep... some quid pro quo for data with most likely Russia.
I expect Kushner to make a trip to Moscow after the Ukraine invasion and come home with a couple billion to "invest".

 

[emefer]

And the fact that some of them have yet to be produced. Best case scenario is he has them in a safe at Bedminster and worse case scenario is that someone already stole them or he sold them off.

I wonder which ones were hand delivered to Putin by Rand Paul on behalf of trump.

 

[Strychnine]

I wonder which ones were hand delivered to Putin by Rand Paul on behalf of trump.

This right here^.

 

[mixmastermo]

Conservative and liberal are not mutually exclusive descriptors.

By the actual definition of the word, Paul Ryan is a liberal. Actual conservatism was born out of a reaction against the enlightenment, and was primarily focused on preserving and defending monarchy. There again we see that extreme hierarchy component. Western "conservatives", like Paul Ryan and Liz Cheney, aren't trying to re-establish a monarchy. But what I would say are actual conservatives, or reactionaries, are trying to essentially re-establish a monarchy in Trump. They want to give him absolute authority with complete immunity from the law - just like a monarch. Some of the far right media ghouls actually openly say they want Trump to be made king.

Haha dude we are talking semantics again. All good though, this highlights the very issue I was trying to get at, with the multiple definitions and factions attempting to work together to form a coalition.

In the US the conservative movement originated from trying to make as few changes to the original constitution as possible. Keeping things status quo, conserving the original intent of the founding fathers- who wanted to move away from monarchy. Under this system some exceptional and ruthless people thrived, such as Andrew Carnegie and Norman Rockefeller. The traditional American conservatives that exist today push back against wage mandated wage increases and regulations.

Liberals have a more liberal take on the constitution and government power, essentially wanting to change things so the status quo does not remain. They would prefer to have a more equal distribution of wealth and are more welcoming of people who are more different.

The way the media and campaigning politicians paint the "other side" as one dimensional is incredibly dishonest, but unfortunately it works and keeps people divided. It's also unfortunate that even right leaning publications like the wall street journal recognize how the Republican party is divided and could eventually rupture.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/will-the-republican-party-split-in-two-5262781b

If conservatives and right-leaning populists can’t get along, Democrats win.​

 

[jefferz]

I wonder which ones were hand delivered to Putin by Rand Paul on behalf of trump.

I wonder what those Senators were doing in Russia on July 4th a couple of years ago…