NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
bourbons said:
Appreciate the effort m8, was pretty sure you'd retreat to "just joking" again. A rew rebuttals;


"Inadvertently" :tearsofjoy:

Here's the timeline again, objective facts;

National Archives and Records Administration notifies Trump that docs have not been turned over in May 2021
Trump gives some of them back in January 2022
Subpoena issued to retrieve the rest in May 2022
Trump gives back more docs and attests in writing that none remain in his custody in June 2022
Search warrant is executed and more docs found in August 2022
Recording revealed of Trump showing classified docs to randoms while noting he could have declassified when he was prez but now he can't

You also seem to be in support of a two-tiered justice system here with reference to other high ranking officials avoidance of consequences. Pretty disappointing, thought you were better than that m8 :(


Intent has not impacted the likelihood of charges being laid in other classified docs cases. People have been prosecuted for accidentally taking them home mixed in with other materials.



So secure :tearsofjoy:

1686341631881.jpg



time.com

Donald Trump Caught on Tape Discussing Classified Documents

The recording, broadcast on CNN, includes a moment when Trump appears to indicate he was holding a document regarding possible military action against Iran.
time.com time.com

The point you've raised here would seem to argue in favour of prosecution rather than against it.


Again, actual risk or harm isn't generally a factor in any decision to prosecute these cases. And find me a single case involving this level of confirmed disregard for established law surrounding classified docs lol

But sure, from this point on any highly public figure facing legal troubles should just run for President and therefore be absolved of all legal responsibility :tearsofjoy:
Click to expand...
Son, of all the times you have dissapointed me - and there have been many! - seeing you argue against a blatant chatgpt post has been the most dissapointing of all... it's like you don't even know my writing style at all m8 :(

But re the topic at hand, as you well know there is precedent. Obama, Biden, Pence, every mf out there has kept confidential docs. Hillary's social media fixers sent out the talking point to respond to any mention of her email server with "bUt HeR eMaIlS" but that doesn't answer anything. It's like the whole "why are you so obsessed with Hunter's ****?" psyop designed to censor discussion re that whole can of worms.

Are you not at all bothered that a secretary of state kept an illegal server, claimed it was for yoga and wedding emails, but then destroyed the evidence upon being issued a subpoena? Carn mate, you know the Clintons have engaged in corruption that would make even orange man himself blush, they were just slightly better at it.

Ask yourself, what was Trump's motive for keeping these physical documents? If he wanted to sell them or to simply flex to visitors, creating digital copies would have sufficed. This was a calculated move to help him stay in the headlines as a perceived victim. Note that I'm not defending him here, quite the opposite, I'm accusing him of using illegal means to manipulate American voters. But it's as clear as day m8. He could've faded into obscurity, now his enemies have once again made him relevant!
 
FireKrakouer said:
Son, of all the times you have dissapointed me - and there have been many! - seeing you argue against a blatant chatgpt post has been the most dissapointing of all... it's like you don't even know my writing style at all m8 :(

But re the topic at hand, as you well know there is precedent. Obama, Biden, Pence, every mf out there has kept confidential docs. Hillary's social media fixers sent out the talking point to respond to any mention of her email server with "bUt HeR eMaIlS" but that doesn't answer anything. It's like the whole "why are you so obsessed with Hunter's utensil?" psyop designed to censor discussion re that whole can of worms.

Are you not at all bothered that a secretary of state kept an illegal server, claimed it was for yoga and wedding emails, but then destroyed the evidence upon being issued a subpoena? Carn mate, you know the Clintons have engaged in corruption that would make even orange man himself blush, they were just slightly better at it.

Ask yourself, what was Trump's motive for keeping these physical documents? If he wanted to sell them or to simply flex to visitors, creating digital copies would have sufficed. This was a calculated move to help him stay in the headlines as a perceived victim. Note that I'm not defending him here, quite the opposite, I'm accusing him of using illegal means to manipulate American voters. But it's as clear as day m8. He could've faded into obscurity, now his enemies have once again made him relevant!
Click to expand...
There is no precedent in refusing to hand them back and cooperate.
That's the issue.

Of course, all that will be forgotten now that Trump is agitating for a border wall crisis (asking the GOP to vote against the bi-partisan bill) and for Putin to attack NATO.

Lunatic.
 
FireKrakouer said:
Son, of all the times you have dissapointed me - and there have been many! - seeing you argue against a blatant chatgpt post has been the most dissapointing of all... it's like you don't even know my writing style at all m8 :(
Click to expand...
I hope you know I'll always welcome you warts and all, m8. ChatGPT, Quora, repeating verbatim arguments far superior to your own that you heard at your mensa meeting... happy to accommodate all of these and more, I know you need a leg up occasionally ;)

FireKrakouer said:
But re the topic at hand, as you well know there is precedent. Obama, Biden, Pence, every mf out there has kept confidential docs. Hillary's social media fixers sent out the talking point to respond to any mention of her email server with "bUt HeR eMaIlS" but that doesn't answer anything. It's like the whole "why are you so obsessed with Hunter's utensil?" psyop designed to censor discussion re that whole can of worms.
Click to expand...
Obama and Biden rofl, yep its eXaCtlY dA sAmE!!11

Oh wait no it isn't :tearsofjoy:

trump-biden-docs.jpeg

Please tell me you're not still onboard with the Obama kept 30 million docs nonsense.

FireKrakouer said:
Are you not at all bothered that a secretary of state kept an illegal server, claimed it was for yoga and wedding emails, but then destroyed the evidence upon being issued a subpoena? Carn mate, you know the Clintons have engaged in corruption that would make even orange man himself blush, they were just slightly better at it.

Ask yourself, what was Trump's motive for keeping these physical documents? If he wanted to sell them or to simply flex to visitors, creating digital copies would have sufficed. This was a calculated move to help him stay in the headlines as a perceived victim. Note that I'm not defending him here, quite the opposite, I'm accusing him of using illegal means to manipulate American voters. But it's as clear as day m8. He could've faded into obscurity, now his enemies have once again made him relevant!
Click to expand...
No real argument on Hills, would be happy for her to be charged as well. After expressly campaigning on this very point, why didn't Donnie boy do it at any stage during his 4 years in charge I wonder?

Interesting theory on it being a calculated move from Trump with the docs, would be very on-brand of him to 4d chess himself into one of the greatest own goals of all time :tearsofjoy:

Have to disagree on the rest though, he was never going to just fade into obscurity. As I tried in vain to explain to our slightly slow colleague Stokey when he was running the same line a few years back, ego alone wouldn't allow it, he was always going to contest again in '24.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Mofra said:
There is no precedent in refusing to hand them back and cooperate.
That's the issue.
Click to expand...
Well ole Hills Hoist just deleted hers so we don't even know what she had. You saying if Trump had set fire to the docs before the raid it would've made it all okay m8? Shame on you!
bourbons said:
I hope you know I'll always welcome you warts and all, m8. ChatGPT, Quora, repeating verbatim arguments far superior to your own that you heard at your mensa meeting... happy to accommodate all of these and more, I know you need a leg up occasionally ;)
Click to expand...
Crikey m8, that's beautiful...

milhouse-doves.gif


Unfortunately I'm now too emotional to reply to the rest of your post, but you rest assured I would have had a convincing and ingenious rebuttal to all points presented!
 
Last edited:
Mofra said:
Trump 'encouraging' Putin to attack NATO. He really is Putin's lapdog.
Click to expand...

Yet he's right about other nations needing to build their militaries up to defend themselves and others and not rely on "the US will come to our aid" mindset.

In 2024 Europe should be able to defend itself from attacks if it's 29 European nations have well funded technologically advanced militaries.

Who will attack a combined force of 29 nations if they are ready for war?
 
Has anyone seen constitutional law enthusiast BlueE lately?? I missed this last week but I'm sure he'd be all over it :tearsofjoy:

BlueE said:
Do you work as a lawyer or something else?

How many years prosecuting criminal cases in Australia or at Federal level in the US do you have?

Because I'm quoting 22 years FBI and DoJ prosecutor and SCOTUS "collateral order" judgement where they only made a decision on immunity, which they then applied to the case.

It is Shipley's opinion that this "absolute immunity" literally isn't confined to a civil case and also applies to criminal cases.

Two sources. Nixon v Fitzgerald SCOTUS Immunity judgement and Bill Shipley.

Although I did quote the Wikipedia from your source.

It's you with Wikipedia, known liar and NYT journalist Charlie Savage and irrelevant prattling about UK and the King.

Have to wait and see.
Click to expand...



lolz
 
bourbons said:
Has anyone seen constitutional law enthusiast BlueE lately?? I missed this last week but I'm sure he'd be all over it :tearsofjoy:





lolz
Click to expand...

Clearly they all got it wrong. 4D chess etc etc
 
bourbons said:
Has anyone seen constitutional law enthusiast BlueE lately?? I missed this last week but I'm sure he'd be all over it :tearsofjoy:





lolz
Click to expand...

I see you’ve downgraded him to “enthusiast” — a dramatic and somewhat tragic slide from his former exalted status as a world-renowned scholar and expert commentator on US constitutional issues. What a distressing moment this must be for him — one little mistake and his reputation is halved. Have you no mercy?
 
Bostonian said:
Yet he's right about other nations needing to build their militaries up to defend themselves and others and not rely on "the US will come to our aid" mindset.

In 2024 Europe should be able to defend itself from attacks if it's 29 European nations have well funded technologically advanced militaries.

Who will attack a combined force of 29 nations if they are ready for war?
Click to expand...
Clearly true, but the situation is not as dire as he makes out. There’s a good graphic on the NATO site that sets out the level of compliance against the 2% benchmark. It shows that 18 of the 29 non-US members were not at 2%, but the trend over 2014-2023 was strongly upwards. Interestingly, the US was one of only 4 members that reduced military spending over that period, but was still at around 3.5% and second on the table. Based on this, you wouldn’t be getting depressed if you were a military hawk with a spending itch.

 
60 Yards Out said:
Clearly true, but the situation is not as dire as he makes out. There’s a good graphic on the NATO site that sets out the level of compliance against the 2% benchmark. It shows that 18 of the 29 non-US members were not at 2%, but the trend over 2014-2023 was strongly upwards. Interestingly, the US was one of only 4 members that reduced military spending over that period, but was still at around 3.5% and second on the table. Based on this, you wouldn’t be getting depressed if you were a military hawk with a spending itch.

Click to expand...

And many only started increasing after Russia invaded Ukraine and they saw the US wasn't going to be sending troops to fight that war.

There's no point decrying Putin is a madman and we're all in peril if they don't boost their spending and capabilities to match such a threat.

You don't have to spend the increase on a flat out offensive war machine. You can increase spending to build a devastating defensive wall that would decimate anyone looking to cross your borders.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Guys even though Putin and I run in the same social circles, if I'm being honest we don't talk that often anymore. He did ask my thoughts on whether he should do the Tucker interview, I said "Vladsy, go for it m8... but show a lil contempt for that bowtie-clad nerd, do a lil trolling n all that".

Now let's not twist Trump's NATO comments as somehow being a bad thing. He got laughed at when he said Germany should end their dependence on Russian gas cos it would come back to haunt them... history has now shown conclusively that they should've heeded this advice. He told the freeloading majority of NATO countries that they need to meet their 2% defense obligations. If people had listened to him, there would be no war right now!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top