Antagonist in Chief

[pucho812]

So is this thread now "The California Antagonists in Chief?" And have pucho and AP taken it upon themselves to become the chief antagonizers of the state of California?

In the meantime:
Trump's crazy defense team presented their case to Judge Cannon today, and as far as I can tell tried to claim that it is illegal to search a home when law enforcement has a signed and valid warrant. That's some heady stuff right there. I guess it's time to start crimin', because John Law is no longer allowed to search my home!!!


P.S. Nothing to see here. Move along:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2022/09/01/ginni-thomas-wisconsin-bernier-tauchen/

I guess you were not reading the other comments that led us to provided examples of the democratic utopia that is California and why it is a failed state.

 

[hodad]

California and why it is a failed state.

Something to do with Trump? Is it Trump's fault?

While I'm sure the orange anus would like to take credit for the success of a state with a GDP topped by only 5 countries in the world (and he'd certainly love an opportunity to pilfer the state's coffers), I don't think he's had all that much to do with it.

EDIT: I just watched a clip of one of Trump's lawyers on Hannity. Holy crap she embarrassed herself. Sadly, I'm sure Hannity's audience thought she was awesome.

 

[pucho812]

Something to do with Trump? Is it Trump's fault?

While I'm sure the orange anus would like to take credit for the success of a state with a GDP topped by only 5 countries in the world (and he'd certainly love an opportunity to pilfer the state's coffers), I don't think he's had all that much to do with it.

EDIT: I just watched a clip of one of Trump's lawyers on Hannity. Holy crap she embarrassed herself. Sadly, I'm sure Hannity's audience thought she was awesome.

No one ever said it was trumps fault. I suspect you were not reading every dialog that went on.
But speaking of trump
“Did you see the photos with the cover sheets saying “secret/sci” I bet you did and said guilty guilty guilty
let’s assume the cover sheets are covering legitimate documents. Are they classified?
Hard to tell as the documents are entirely covered. They could be drawings of from his grandson for all we know; there’s no proof the document, itself, from the photos shown, reveals whether it’s a classified document.
For sake of discussion let’s assume the documents are classified. What does it mean to be “classified?”
Classified documents fall into a multitude of categories: Confidential, Secret, Top Secret “TS” and Sensitive Compartmentalized Information “SCI” - in that order (plus higher categories but those are irrelevant here).
let’s assume the documents under the cover sheets ARE “CLASSIFIED” that means the documents themselves are specifically marked with a level classification. In ink. It’s a stamp.
A document marked with a stamp indicating it is classified (to whatever degree) - does it always remain classified?
No. But you can’t get rid of ink.

If you read the subpoena, the unredacted part, it says documents MARKED classified; not documents that ARE classified. Why?
POTUS can declassify documents. It’s that simple.
remember the order of classification levels I laid out?

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS “SECRET/SCI” - it’d be “TS/SCI” or “CS/SCI””

 

[Recording Engineer]

It’s amusing to read all the rationale in Trump’s defense on this, with so much unknown, while chastising others with just as much “evidence” in the same breath. The fact that people feel they need to come up with all these notions is assuming in itself.

 

[pucho812]

It’s amusing to read all the rationale in Trump’s defense on this, with so much unknown, while chastising others with just as much “evidence” in the same breath. The fact that people feel they need to come up with all these notions is assuming in itself.

it's equally amusing to watch people insist guilty when no court proceedings have taken place purely because you don't like the guy

 

[AnalogPackrat]

From what I can tell, you’re saying there’s nothing more to discuss if I’m not willing to tell you which party I voted with on issues. If so, you’re right. No more to discuss then. I said some time ago that I’m not playing your game.

You keeping reading things I didn't write. Sincere curiosity isn't a game. You claim to dislike Newsom. Did you support the recall petition effort or vote to recall him?

 

[hodad]

let’s assume the cover sheets are covering legitimate documents. Are they classified?

IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!! EVERYONE IS OUT TO GET TRUMP!!!!!!!!!

 

[pucho812]

IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!!!!! EVERYONE IS OUT TO GET TRUMP!!!!!!!!!

maybe, maybe not. who's to say. what I can say for certainty is that we are a country of laws. Under those laws everyone is innocent until proven guilty in the American legal system. as has been shown that does not apply to the court of public opinion.

 

[hodad]

maybe

That whole line of "reasoning" is built on what-ifs, half-truths, baseless assumptions, distortions, and outright lies. I'm constantly amazed at how far people on the right are willing to contort logic, morals and reality in order to defend a sleazy, orange trustfund baby.

Yeah, innocent until proven guilty. But the evidence so far overwhelmingly points to guilt.

 

[pucho812]

thanks for misquoting me. It never ceases to amaze me how people will constantly misquote a person just to try and spew some nonsense. we covered what constitute classified documents and how they can easily be declassified. but hey no matter what you think guilty guilty guilty. If there really was a guilty he would have already been in court vs the kabuki theater we see them doing.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Don't get sucked into the trial by public opinion strategy.

This is all orchestrated to sway low attention span voters (like why did they stage a photo? Not for judges or lawyers).

This is like watching kittens chase around after a laser pointer...

Have fun.

JR

 

[Recording Engineer]

maybe, maybe not. who's to say. what I can say for certainty is that we are a country of laws. Under those laws everyone is innocent until proven guilty in the American legal system. as has been shown that does not apply to the court of public opinion.

It never has and never will. It’s human nature. However, most of the same people using that sentiment now, never have or ever will apply that to someone they oppose. Again, human nature.

 

[Recording Engineer]

it's equally amusing to watch people insist guilty when no court proceedings have taken place purely because you don't like the guy

I understand. I myself haven’t said it. Still, I don’t trust what the guy says he had for lunch, since I first started paying attention to him during the 2016 campaign, so how am I going to believe he’s not guilty unless the courts say otherwise? I’ve kept an open mind as much a possible though.

 

[Recording Engineer]

If there really was a guilty he would have already been in court vs the kabuki theater we see them doing.

I wish it were that simple. It’s not at all though. It is for most of us though. The talk of a 2-tier system in this case is rather misplaced.

 

[scott2000]

I don’t trust what the guy says he had for lunch, since I first started paying attention to him during the 2016 campaign

But some trust that he said there are fine people and he grabs things..etc?

 

[Recording Engineer]

I have no clue the point being made.

Because… he… did?

 

[Matador]

However, most of the same people using that sentiment now, never have or ever will apply that to someone they oppose. Again, human nature.

You mean like this?

clinton has experience on national security? coffee just went out my nose...

About the only thing she can secure is to not get charged when she is clearly guilty....

 

[Recording Engineer]

Did you support the recall petition effort or vote to recall him?

Nah. As much as I would have wished otherwise, that was nothing more than another political campaign stunt, regardless of how strong and legal it was; obviously not strong enough. I know some CA Democrats that said otherwise, because Newsom is way too left for them; he is for me too.

It’s amazing how plenty of the CA Right supported that, but said Trump’s impeachments were nothing more than political attacks and just attempts to undermine the voting will of the people.

The amount of hypocrisy since the beginning of the 2016 election cycle has soared to astronomical levels. Anyone not recognizing and admitting this is part of the problem. Anyone saying it’s not apples to apples is part of the problem as well. Illogical and unreasonable has taken over.

 

[iturnknobs]

But some trust that he said there are fine people and he grabs things..etc?

??
I have heard the audio clips. They are easily retrieved from the internet(they were played over and over by most media outlets). What are you referencing?
??

 

[scott2000]

??
I have heard the audio clips. They are easily retrieved from the internet(they were played over and over by most media outlets). What are you referencing?
??

Just saying it seems it's easy for many to take him at his word when he says something that makes him look bad. And impossible to take him at his word when he says something that doesn't