2020 General Election

[UNI88]

Then by all means share the damning parts - I'm all ears and ready to hear additional evidence. I'm an open mind on this.

Pretty sure I did a long time ago.

If you’re interested, listen to the full tape. I’m not going to parse it out for you and besides, the full tape sheds the most light regarding tone and general motivation.

Snippets are assailable without the entire context (see UNI88’s thoughts on Tucker’s out of context snippets.)

Oh…and keep in mind as you’re listening to Trump’s assured allegations (boxes, Ruby Friedman, etc) that he very likely knew by this call it was all bullshit.

Ganny is right. trump was very careful not to cross the line so I doubt anything from that call could lead to a conviction. He tried to bully Raffensperger (and other state officials) into doing something illegal without actually asking them to do something illegal. The call and others like it were clearly unethical.

Can arranging for fraudulent electors, inciting a riot, the phone calls to state officials asking them to "find" votes or not certify results be used a proof of a conspiracy? That's a question for Ivy or Joe but they're not around much anymore.

[kalm]

Pretty sure I did a long time ago.

If you’re interested, listen to the full tape. I’m not going to parse it out for you and besides, the full tape sheds the most light regarding tone and general motivation.

Snippets are assailable without the entire context (see UNI88’s thoughts on Tucker’s out of context snippets.)

Oh…and keep in mind as you’re listening to Trump’s assured allegations (boxes, Ruby Friedman, etc) that he very likely knew by this call it was all bullshit.

I'm not listening to more than an hour. I don't even have podcasts that run that long and I'm not on a jury. Parse it down for me - what much smaller sections are best to listen to.

Good. That’s how long it is. But it’s ok. You don’t have to and I’m not going to take the time to do it for you. It’s all there if you’re at all curious.

[UNI88]

He's been saying some pretty weird shit lately, we're still unsure whether its the syphilis or that he's off his meds..

How would you know what he’s saying when Maddow won’t let him speak

I’ll help you with some subtitles I read

Unification - It’s pretty much impossible given how much the outsider is hated but he’s been saying it

No retribution - ultimately success will be his retribution and won’t have time for it

Dictator for one day to secure the border

Also said his wife was at Rosalyn Carters funeral and saw Joey Rotten smiling, Jimmy Carter can now go to his grave knowing he’s not the worst President of all time …

maddow is preventing a grown man, a millionaire with his own social media channel from speaking?

trump is a serial liar.
- I don't believe him when he talks about unification. His whole schtick is us against them.
- He's a vindictive twat and he's talking out of both sides of his mouth if he says no retribution.
- if you believe he'll be dictator for one day then I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.

Jimmy was already good, trump passed him in 2020. Now i45 & 46 are competing to pass Buchanan.

[houndawg]

He's been saying some pretty weird shit lately, we're still unsure whether its the syphilis or that he's off his meds..

Your fascination over hundreds of posts with his potential STD's and bizarre bedroom behaviors could also be evidence that you're off your meds too. I can find hundreds of reasons to vote for him and not once have to delve into bodily fluids or deviant sexual behavior. You're a weird duck sometimes.

....many people are saying ....some of them doctors. The speculation comes by way of trying to figure out whats causing his strange ass behavior - and if you don't see strange ass behavior in some of the vids shown here you're engaging willful suspension of disbelief

[GannonFan]

Your fascination over hundreds of posts with his potential STD's and bizarre bedroom behaviors could also be evidence that you're off your meds too. I can find hundreds of reasons to vote for him and not once have to delve into bodily fluids or deviant sexual behavior. You're a weird duck sometimes.

....many people are saying ....some of them doctors. The speculation comes by way of trying to figure out whats causing his strange ass behavior - and if you don't see strange ass behavior in some of the vids shown here you're engaging willful suspension of disbelief

I've thought that Trump is a whacko for decades now (and a dangerous whacko since the end of his first term) so I hardly think I'm engaging in any willful suspension of disbelief. I'm just generally concerned for your continual probing into Trump's sexual discretions and how they might now be affecting his health. As for doctors speculating on someone's medical condition from watching some video, well, those aren't really the kind of doctors to listen to.

[GannonFan]

I'm not listening to more than an hour. I don't even have podcasts that run that long and I'm not on a jury. Parse it down for me - what much smaller sections are best to listen to.

Good. That’s how long it is. But it’s ok. You don’t have to and I’m not going to take the time to do it for you. It’s all there if you’re at all curious.

So we're agreed, you're not going to pinpoint anything specific from that call that is clearly illegal and obviously damning. Thanks, you just saved me an hour I could've spent getting to the same conclusion.

UNI's right, Trump is unethical as the day is long. As to whether he did anything illegal in that specific phone call, if he did it would be real simple to post that. Alas, no.

[houndawg]

....many people are saying ....some of them doctors. The speculation comes by way of trying to figure out whats causing his strange ass behavior - and if you don't see strange ass behavior in some of the vids shown here you're engaging willful suspension of disbelief

I've thought that Trump is a whacko for decades now (and a dangerous whacko since the end of his first term) so I hardly think I'm engaging in any willful suspension of disbelief. I'm just generally concerned for your continual probing into Trump's sexual discretions and how they might now be affecting his health. As for doctors speculating on someone's medical condition from watching some video, well, those aren't really the kind of doctors to listen to.

I appreciate your concern, ganster, and that you understand how a candidate for President's health is everybody's business. You seem to be deliberately misconstruing that his sexual discretions are an issue - they're not. They're his own business. BUT- if he picked up and STD during his self-admitedly promiscuous lifestyle back in the cocaine-fueled 80s and it has progressed to the point where its affecting his ability to distinguish between Nancy Pelosi and Nikki Haley and his ability to remember who his opponent was when he ran for President... that's everybody's business.

So tell us what you think is the reason for his strange behavior, gf, since you're not engaging in any willful suspension of disbelief.

[Caribbean Hen]

What’s comical is how nobody pays attention to Biden’s long and dirty laundry list, but Trumps gets 90 % of the attention and 95% of the ire.

Dems created Trump and are making him more powerful with all the BS

[GannonFan]

I've thought that Trump is a whacko for decades now (and a dangerous whacko since the end of his first term) so I hardly think I'm engaging in any willful suspension of disbelief. I'm just generally concerned for your continual probing into Trump's sexual discretions and how they might now be affecting his health. As for doctors speculating on someone's medical condition from watching some video, well, those aren't really the kind of doctors to listen to.

I appreciate your concern, ganster, and that you understand how a candidate for President's health is everybody's business. You seem to be deliberately misconstruing that his sexual discretions are an issue - they're not. They're his own business. BUT- if he picked up and STD during his self-admitedly promiscuous lifestyle back in the cocaine-fueled 80s and it has progressed to the point where its affecting his ability to distinguish between Nancy Pelosi and Nikki Haley and his ability to remember who his opponent was when he ran for President... that's everybody's business.

So tell us what you think is the reason for his strange behavior, gf, since you're not engaging in any willful suspension of disbelief.

I frankly have no idea for the cause for his cognitive decline. Heck, I think he was pretty dim before all of this started so it's not even that steep of a decline. He, like Biden, to me is patently unable to serve as President due to this cognitive decline. If we want to ascribe that to age, sure, go ahead. If you want to continually fascinate about his sexual escapades and them being the cause of his incoherence, well, that's an odd predilection on your part, but to each their own I suppose.

[Caribbean Hen]

How would you know what he’s saying when Maddow won’t let him speak

I’ll help you with some subtitles I read

Unification - It’s pretty much impossible given how much the outsider is hated but he’s been saying it

No retribution - ultimately success will be his retribution and won’t have time for it

Dictator for one day to secure the border

Also said his wife was at Rosalyn Carters funeral and saw Joey Rotten smiling, Jimmy Carter can now go to his grave knowing he’s not the worst President of all time …

maddow is preventing a grown man, a millionaire with his own social media channel from speaking?

I didn’t know Kalm was a grown man … you don’t say

[UNI88]

What’s comical is how nobody pays attention to Biden’s long and dirty laundry list, but Trumps gets 90 % of the attention and 95% of the ire.

Dems created Trump and are making him more powerful with all the BS

Not true. You, SG, BDK, Fox, OAN, Newsmax, and MAGAt yahoo echo chambers are paying attention to biden's corruption giving him 50% of the attention (the other 50% is spent defending trump) and 90% of the ire.

Dems didn't create trump but they are trying to take advantage of ire and consternation that he causes. It might make him more popular and powerful with MAGAt yahoos but we have yet to see how it will be perceived by the moderates/independents who are most likely to decide the 2024 election. I be too confident that he'll win based on how MAGAt yahoo candidates did in 2018, 2020 and 2022

[houndawg]

I appreciate your concern, ganster, and that you understand how a candidate for President's health is everybody's business. You seem to be deliberately misconstruing that his sexual discretions are an issue - they're not. They're his own business. BUT- if he picked up and STD during his self-admitedly promiscuous lifestyle back in the cocaine-fueled 80s and it has progressed to the point where its affecting his ability to distinguish between Nancy Pelosi and Nikki Haley and his ability to remember who his opponent was when he ran for President... that's everybody's business.

So tell us what you think is the reason for his strange behavior, gf, since you're not engaging in any willful suspension of disbelief.

I frankly have no idea for the cause for his cognitive decline. Heck, I think he was pretty dim before all of this started so it's not even that steep of a decline. He, like Biden, to me is patently unable to serve as President due to this cognitive decline. If we want to ascribe that to age, sure, go ahead. If you want to continually fascinate about his sexual escapades and them being the cause of his incoherence, well, that's an odd predilection on your part, but to each their own I suppose.

No.

Not going ahead with ascribing it to age is exactly what I was doing while you professed how "worried" you were. I also said maybe it isn't syphilis, maybe he's off his meds. Notice how when he's sweating and ad libbing on camera how he does that T-rex thing with his elbows against his sides and his little hands flapping about? Same move, same look in his eyes as the pic of him mocking the disabled reporter, look it up. I came up near San Francisco in the 60/70s, gf, I know drug issues when I see them.

Either he's taking something he shouldn't, or he's not taking something he should. I think the latter the strongest possibility, although I don't completely dismiss advanced syphilis.

[GannonFan]

I frankly have no idea for the cause for his cognitive decline. Heck, I think he was pretty dim before all of this started so it's not even that steep of a decline. He, like Biden, to me is patently unable to serve as President due to this cognitive decline. If we want to ascribe that to age, sure, go ahead. If you want to continually fascinate about his sexual escapades and them being the cause of his incoherence, well, that's an odd predilection on your part, but to each their own I suppose.

No.

Not going ahead with ascribing it to age is exactly what I was doing while you professed how "worried" you were. I also said maybe it isn't syphilis, maybe he's off his meds. Notice how when he's sweating and ad libbing on camera how he does that T-rex thing with his elbows against his sides and his little hands flapping about? Same move, same look in his eyes as the pic of him mocking the disabled reporter, look it up. I came up near San Francisco in the 60/70s, gf, I know drug issues when I see them.

Either he's taking something he shouldn't, or he's not taking something he should. I think the latter the strongest possibility, although I don't completely dismiss advanced syphilis.

You're a riot, houndie!!! I don't think I've laughed as much today as I did after that post. Just the idea of you studying photos, re-running video clips, and cataloguing all the symptoms is just hysterical to me. Like I said, to each their own, and if being an armchair doctor/clinical sleuth for potential STD afflictions is your thing then by all means enjoy.

[houndawg]

No.

Not going ahead with ascribing it to age is exactly what I was doing while you professed how "worried" you were. I also said maybe it isn't syphilis, maybe he's off his meds. Notice how when he's sweating and ad libbing on camera how he does that T-rex thing with his elbows against his sides and his little hands flapping about? Same move, same look in his eyes as the pic of him mocking the disabled reporter, look it up. I came up near San Francisco in the 60/70s, gf, I know drug issues when I see them.

Either he's taking something he shouldn't, or he's not taking something he should. I think the latter the strongest possibility, although I don't completely dismiss advanced syphilis.

You're a riot, houndie!!! I don't think I've laughed as much today as I did after that post. Just the idea of you studying photos, re-running video clips, and cataloguing all the symptoms is just hysterical to me. Like I said, to each their own, and if being an armchair doctor/clinical sleuth for potential STD afflictions is your thing then by all means enjoy.

Glad I can help! You seem like somebody that could use some laughter in your life

[Caribbean Hen]

No.

Not going ahead with ascribing it to age is exactly what I was doing while you professed how "worried" you were. I also said maybe it isn't syphilis, maybe he's off his meds. Notice how when he's sweating and ad libbing on camera how he does that T-rex thing with his elbows against his sides and his little hands flapping about? Same move, same look in his eyes as the pic of him mocking the disabled reporter, look it up. I came up near San Francisco in the 60/70s, gf, I know drug issues when I see them.

Either he's taking something he shouldn't, or he's not taking something he should. I think the latter the strongest possibility, although I don't completely dismiss advanced syphilis.

You're a riot, houndie!!! I don't think I've laughed as much today as I did after that post. Just the idea of you studying photos, re-running video clips, and cataloguing all the symptoms is just hysterical to me. Like I said, to each their own, and if being an armchair doctor/clinical sleuth for potential STD afflictions is your thing then by all means enjoy.

Just think how funny he could be with Biden

[GannonFan]

You're a riot, houndie!!! I don't think I've laughed as much today as I did after that post. Just the idea of you studying photos, re-running video clips, and cataloguing all the symptoms is just hysterical to me. Like I said, to each their own, and if being an armchair doctor/clinical sleuth for potential STD afflictions is your thing then by all means enjoy.

Glad I can help! You seem like somebody that could use some laughter in your life

On the contrary, I always find the funny side of things. You have a fascination with the sexual behavior of a political candidate and how STD's from that behavior could be wrecking his body, and I still found humor with that!

[kalm]

Good. That’s how long it is. But it’s ok. You don’t have to and I’m not going to take the time to do it for you. It’s all there if you’re at all curious.

So we're agreed. I’m too intellectually lazy to listen for myself as that might shake my already formed cliff notes version of what really happened. It’s much easier to know less and dismiss something than it is to threaten my own opinions by actually listening myself.

Wow. Kudos for making a good faith admission.

[GannonFan]

So we're agreed. I’m too intellectually lazy to listen for myself as that might shake my already formed cliff notes version of what really happened. It’s much easier to know less and dismiss something than it is to threaten my own opinions by actually listening myself.

Wow. Kudos for making a good faith admission.

Not lazy, too busy. You're telling me that it's an open and shut case, he's guilty as sin in terms of just what happened in this phone call. However, you can't provide timestamps or summaries of exactly what that is that's so damning. I think you even said the "tone" is enough. Heck, UNI has listened to all of it and he's saying there's no specific thing Trump said in the call that is a smoking gun.

I don't like Trump, I hope he's never close to the Presidency again, I think he should be charged with and convicted of insurrection since the impeachment and removal/banning from office that I first advocated for didn't happen.

With all that said, you're just as spiteful and dismissive here as you are on many topics on Trump. It's not good enough to dislike him, you need to come with proof and you need to prove it. Time and time again, you want others to do the work and just know what you already seem to know. You'd be awful in court, you don't want to prove anything you just want things accepted because you said so. Why even post on a message board if you're not willing to engage and debate? Ironic considering you deride others for being intellectually lazy.

[UNI88]

Wow. Kudos for making a good faith admission.

Not lazy, too busy. You're telling me that it's an open and shut case, he's guilty as sin in terms of just what happened in this phone call. However, you can't provide timestamps or summaries of exactly what that is that's so damning. I think you even said the "tone" is enough. Heck, UNI has listened to all of it and he's saying there's no specific thing Trump said in the call that is a smoking gun.

I don't like Trump, I hope he's never close to the Presidency again, I think he should be charged with and convicted of insurrection since the impeachment and removal/banning from office that I first advocated for didn't happen.

With all that said, you're just as spiteful and dismissive here as you are on many topics on Trump. It's not good enough to dislike him, you need to come with proof and you need to prove it. Time and time again, you want others to do the work and just know what you already seem to know. You'd be awful in court, you don't want to prove anything you just want things accepted because you said so. Why even post on a message board if you're not willing to engage and debate? Ironic considering you deride others for being intellectually lazy.

Confession - I haven't listened to the whole thing. I am confident that if there were "smoking gun" statements that could lead to a conviction that we would have heard them. The fact that we haven't tells me they're not there.

While trump's intent (and lack of scruples) was pretty clear, he was smart enough not to say anything clearly criminal. trump did plenty of things worth investigating and charging but the phone call alone isn't enough.

kalm's conviction of trump based on tone and circumstantial evidence is similar to CH and the MAGAt yahoo lynch mob convicting biden based on circumstantial evidence.

[kalm]

Wow. Kudos for making a good faith admission.

Not lazy, too busy. You're telling me that it's an open and shut case, he's guilty as sin in terms of just what happened in this phone call. However, you can't provide timestamps or summaries of exactly what that is that's so damning. I think you even said the "tone" is enough. Heck, UNI has listened to all of it and he's saying there's no specific thing Trump said in the call that is a smoking gun.

I don't like Trump, I hope he's never close to the Presidency again, I think he should be charged with and convicted of insurrection since the impeachment and removal/banning from office that I first advocated for didn't happen.

With all that said, you're just as spiteful and dismissive here as you are on many topics on Trump. It's not good enough to dislike him, you need to come with proof and you need to prove it. Time and time again, you want others to do the work and just know what you already seem to know. You'd be awful in court, you don't want to prove anything you just want things accepted because you said so. Why even post on a message board if you're not willing to engage and debate? Ironic considering you deride others for being intellectually lazy.

1). I didn’t claim there was a smoking gun from a literal evidentiary circumstance.

2). And tone is what jurors would notice in helping them decide intent. That would be further supported by when team Trump knew there was no fraud scalable to the level of a stolen election. There have been many overtures in the news that suggest they knew long before this was call was made. So no I didn’t say tone was enough.

3). You sound awfully spiteful yourself considering this call was already talked about long ago and i provided you with a link today. So yes, I engaged in debate and provided water
In the form of evidence.

No one outside of MAGA listens to that call and fails to recognize it for what it was.

You’re simply the horse who refuses to drink.

[kalm]

Not lazy, too busy. You're telling me that it's an open and shut case, he's guilty as sin in terms of just what happened in this phone call. However, you can't provide timestamps or summaries of exactly what that is that's so damning. I think you even said the "tone" is enough. Heck, UNI has listened to all of it and he's saying there's no specific thing Trump said in the call that is a smoking gun.

I don't like Trump, I hope he's never close to the Presidency again, I think he should be charged with and convicted of insurrection since the impeachment and removal/banning from office that I first advocated for didn't happen.

With all that said, you're just as spiteful and dismissive here as you are on many topics on Trump. It's not good enough to dislike him, you need to come with proof and you need to prove it. Time and time again, you want others to do the work and just know what you already seem to know. You'd be awful in court, you don't want to prove anything you just want things accepted because you said so. Why even post on a message board if you're not willing to engage and debate? Ironic considering you deride others for being intellectually lazy.

Confession - I haven't listened to the whole thing. I am confident that if there were "smoking gun" statements that could lead to a conviction that we would have heard them. The fact that we haven't tells me they're not there.

While trump's intent (and lack of scruples) was pretty clear, he was smart enough not to say anything clearly criminal. trump did plenty of things worth investigating and charging but the phone call alone isn't enough.

kalm's conviction of trump based on tone and circumstantial evidence is similar to CH and the MAGAt yahoo lynch mob convicting biden based on circumstantial evidence.

I’m not a juror. Just an observer who like you recognizes what the intent was. I can convict him all I want.

[GannonFan]

Not lazy, too busy. You're telling me that it's an open and shut case, he's guilty as sin in terms of just what happened in this phone call. However, you can't provide timestamps or summaries of exactly what that is that's so damning. I think you even said the "tone" is enough. Heck, UNI has listened to all of it and he's saying there's no specific thing Trump said in the call that is a smoking gun.

I don't like Trump, I hope he's never close to the Presidency again, I think he should be charged with and convicted of insurrection since the impeachment and removal/banning from office that I first advocated for didn't happen.

With all that said, you're just as spiteful and dismissive here as you are on many topics on Trump. It's not good enough to dislike him, you need to come with proof and you need to prove it. Time and time again, you want others to do the work and just know what you already seem to know. You'd be awful in court, you don't want to prove anything you just want things accepted because you said so. Why even post on a message board if you're not willing to engage and debate? Ironic considering you deride others for being intellectually lazy.

1). I didn’t claim there was a smoking gun from a literal evidentiary circumstance.

2). And tone is what jurors would notice in helping them decide intent. That would be further supported by when team Trump knew there was no fraud scalable to the level of a stolen election. There have been many overtures in the news that suggest they knew long before this was call was made. So no I didn’t say tone was enough.

3). You sound awfully spiteful yourself considering this call was already talked about long ago and i provided you with a link today. So yes, I engaged in debate and provided water
In the form of evidence.

No one outside of MAGA listens to that call and fails to recognize it for what it was.

You’re simply the horse who refuses to drink.

I'm still waiting for the water, you just brought an empty pail.

[UNI88]

Confession - I haven't listened to the whole thing. I am confident that if there were "smoking gun" statements that could lead to a conviction that we would have heard them. The fact that we haven't tells me they're not there.

While trump's intent (and lack of scruples) was pretty clear, he was smart enough not to say anything clearly criminal. trump did plenty of things worth investigating and charging but the phone call alone isn't enough.

kalm's conviction of trump based on tone and circumstantial evidence is similar to CH and the MAGAt yahoo lynch mob convicting biden based on circumstantial evidence.

I’m not a juror. Just an observer who like you recognizes what the intent was. I can convict him all I want.

Okay Caribbean Eagle.

[houndawg]

Glad I can help! You seem like somebody that could use some laughter in your life

On the contrary, I always find the funny side of things. You have a fascination with the sexual behavior of a political candidate and how STD's from that behavior could be wrecking his body, and I still found humor with that!

Just watching him in amazement and trying to think what could possibly be the reason for him losing his shit right in front of us. Its gotta be drugs or disease the way he's collapsing and how quickly it appears to be accelerating. Maybe he has long covid - rumor was he got it real bad early on.

[houndawg]

Not lazy, too busy. You're telling me that it's an open and shut case, he's guilty as sin in terms of just what happened in this phone call. However, you can't provide timestamps or summaries of exactly what that is that's so damning. I think you even said the "tone" is enough. Heck, UNI has listened to all of it and he's saying there's no specific thing Trump said in the call that is a smoking gun.

I don't like Trump, I hope he's never close to the Presidency again, I think he should be charged with and convicted of insurrection since the impeachment and removal/banning from office that I first advocated for didn't happen.

With all that said, you're just as spiteful and dismissive here as you are on many topics on Trump. It's not good enough to dislike him, you need to come with proof and you need to prove it. Time and time again, you want others to do the work and just know what you already seem to know. You'd be awful in court, you don't want to prove anything you just want things accepted because you said so. Why even post on a message board if you're not willing to engage and debate? Ironic considering you deride others for being intellectually lazy.

Confession - I haven't listened to the whole thing. I am confident that if there were "smoking gun" statements that could lead to a conviction that we would have heard them. The fact that we haven't tells me they're not there.

While trump's intent (and lack of scruples) was pretty clear, he was smart enough not to say anything clearly criminal. trump did plenty of things worth investigating and charging but the phone call alone isn't enough.

kalm's conviction of trump based on tone and circumstantial evidence is similar to CH and the MAGAt yahoo lynch mob convicting biden based on circumstantial evidence.

You think that their entire case is based on one phone call?