The Supreme Dead Beats

a reply to: Sookiechacha

the J6 committe has zero legitimacy.


But you feel free to keep trotting out that dead horse.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The Jan6 committee?

lol

That was so kangaroo, Australians were getting upset!

a reply to: Justoneman

Oh when did they get to be involved in Criminal Court?

You're moving the goal posts. The queston was:

How about you simply prove an insurrection happened.

Should be super easy..right?

The Jan 6th Committee did that.

You are a Marxists all the way

Deflect much? What is that even supposed to mean?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Deflect much? What is that even supposed to mean?

It speaks to your activity and integrity here.


That being a BAMN approach to all things you don't agree with. Lying, hypocrisy, double standards and of course use of force by the gov't on your political enemies which always leads to your neighbors, then yourself.

a reply to: Justoneman

I suppose his theater was real ball breaking.

His reckless spending felt very on par for how the elites have run the country though. Not much else was different under him though.

I’m sure people would love to say they paid less in taxes under him. Sure, so did the elites, and they got a bigger cut than us. Now who’s paying for that bad fiscal policy of high spending and reduction in revenue via inflation? The commoner. The elites just raise the prices. Look at their profit, it’s not taking a hit.

How much more money have the elite gotten since the COVID fiscal policies? They raked it in.

The elites are more elite because of Trump and Biden.

Again, the commoner has no representation from any party or any claimed opposition at the moment.

a reply to: JinMI

the J6 committe has zero legitimacy.

Nevertheless, they did prove that an insurrection did happen.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI

the J6 committe has zero legitimacy.

Nevertheless, they did prove that an insurrection did happen.

That's nice. So did the OP.

Unfortunately, that doesn't carry any weight outside of opinion.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI

the J6 committe has zero legitimacy.

Nevertheless, they did prove that an insurrection did happen.

My cats litter box proved otherwise.
It actually has more providence than the Jan6 Committee.

a reply to: JinMI

No wonder you're confused. You think ATS posters carry the same weight as Congress members and lawyers, who heard hundreds of hours of testimony and reviewed thousands of hours of tapes, and then presented their case simply, coherently and so convincingly, that Trump's attorney's only defense was that wasn't still president.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI

the J6 committe has zero legitimacy.

Nevertheless, they did prove that an insurrection did happen.

If that was a legit committee you mean. Cherry picked "opposition" does not make it legitimate. I keep seeing you and your ilk getting really ticked off when the tables get turned on them by the very same methods they tried to employ. I'm watching to laugh at you when it happens yet again!

originally posted by: ByeByeAmericanPie
It is absolutely clear he engaged in insurrection, unless you can find evidence of election fraud that will stand up in court, which you can’t.

No sweetie ... that's just your OPINION. He hasn't been charged. He hasn't been found guilty. DUE PROCESS. It's for the protection of us all, including the people you don't like. The 14th Amendment doesn't fit, no matter how much you wish it did.

a reply to: hangedman13

Cherry picked "opposition" does not make it legitimate.

The Committee was legally legitimate, which is why the case actually went to the Senate.

If the Republicans did put up extremists that were to be subpoenaed, like Jim Jordon, Pelosi wouldn't have had to rely on the only Republicans that volunteered to serve, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, both staunch conservatives.

LOL
If Republicans want to have any credibility regarding the impeachment of Mayorkas, Republicans are gonna need to stop always getting in their own way.

a reply to: FlyersFan

He hasn't been found guilty. DUE PROCESS.

He was found guilty, in the civil trial that happened in Colorado, not to mention his impeachment for inciting an insurrection.

a reply to: FlyersFan

It is time to stop arguing with those who clearly show they cannot be reasonable.

You can keep repeating your lies over and over hoping they become true.

Maybe The Supreme Dead Beats will even agree with you. I have no doubt that they want to agree with you.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: JinMI

the J6 committe has zero legitimacy.

Nevertheless, they did prove that an insurrection did happen.

They didn't prove Trump committed insurrection, and they don't have trial jurisdiction, and there was no due process. 🤣🤣 If you think they did, why didn't The CO Supreme Court use that as precedent for conviction?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: FlyersFan

He hasn't been found guilty. DUE PROCESS.

He was found guilty, in the civil trial that happened in Colorado, not to mention his impeachment for inciting an insurrection.

He was not guilty in The Senate Impeachment trial. 🤣

a reply to: ByeByeAmericanPie

For any of what you said to be true you would have ignore all evidence and I purely buy into a narrative by people telling you what to think. That makes you an NPC. Please don't procreate. Seriously, I'll pay for the abortions.

originally posted by: CataclysmicRockets
1st Trump did not cause an insurrection, get that in your head. Secondly your TDS is strong enough that your calling the Supreme court justices 'dead beats' cause your liberal antics and mindset you might not get what your agenda desires.

Trump did try and illegitimately steal political power.

The "Stop the steal" slogan appeared well before anyone cast the first vote. He had determined to cast doubt on the vote well before it had happened. We all know it.

But the truth is that Trump lost the election not on the popular vote, but on the EC vote, where there has been no suggestion of vote rigging (if you recall, Trump's previous election was contrary to the popular vote, but he won Presidency in the EC vote).

He wanted to become dictator and the suggestion that the method documented in the US Constitution is faulty is one of the many things he did towards that end.

originally posted by: WingDingLuey

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: FlyersFan

He hasn't been found guilty. DUE PROCESS.

He was found guilty, in the civil trial that happened in Colorado, not to mention his impeachment for inciting an insurrection.

He was not guilty in The Senate Impeachment trial. 🤣

On the technicality that he was ineligible for impeachment, because he wasn't president anymore, according to Trump's attorneys and the Majority Leader of the Senate. Hardly a glowing indictment of innocence. On the contrary, a plea to kick justice down the road.

originally posted by: WingDingLuey

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: FlyersFan

He hasn't been found guilty. DUE PROCESS.

He was found guilty, in the civil trial that happened in Colorado, not to mention his impeachment for inciting an insurrection.

He was not guilty in The Senate Impeachment trial. 🤣

There is no such thing as a trial to see if someone can go to trial.

The trial in this case was to determine if he transgressed sufficient to be impeached. He was impeached. He was found guilty.

The senate blocked his removal from office, or other sentencing outcome, post impeachment. It is the equivalent to a normal court case sentencing phase, which is separate from, and after the conviction.