Please, Help Me Find The Battery

[ASUG8]

No doubt.
Natalie Morales is definitely the better looking of the two though...

No.

Seriously?

I put an Al Roker buffer in there so you wouldn't confuse the two.



Natalie in a landslide.

[kalm]

No.

Seriously?

I put an Al Roker buffer in there so you wouldn't confuse the two.



Natalie in a landslide.

Natalie is cheap imitation of Amanda Peet at best.

Not that there's anything wrong with Amanda.

[JohnStOnge]

That was horrific, John. I almost vomited when I saw him touch her and she never even moved.

I think I saw her brush against Trump also - maybe he should be filing for battery.

The video is not continuous. You can't necessarily see the extent to which she moved because of that. And, again, you have that audio. I call it contemporaneous but if you wish you can call it "immediately thereafter." Unless you think like 93 does that the two of them hatched this great plan to frame the guy in about 8 seconds it's really hard to dismiss. It has been validated as genuine too. It's not a fake. Whatever happened was sufficient to cause the WP reporter to ask her if she was OK and to say that Trump's staffer almost threw her to the ground.

What the video DOES unambiguously show is that Lewandowski lied when he said he never touched her.

BTW, do you think she faked the bruises? I think that's important because, obviously, if Lewandowski grabbing her caused those bruises he grabbed her pretty hard.

[JohnStOnge]

While I agree he did not almost throw her to the ground, not even close, he did touch her. That counts as battery. I know it's stupid, but that is the law.

The WP reporter who was present at the time and saw it happen continuously instead of in a video that has significant gaps between frames disagreed with you about whether she was almost thrown to the ground. Again, here is what he said on that matter immediately after witnessing the event:

He really just almost threw you on the ground.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/ ... ack-220589

But I agree with you about what the Florida law says. Also, note that the Florida law references "intentional" touching. While I'll say again that the video is not continuous I don't see anything in it to confirm that Fields intentionally touched trump. It's at the very least debatable. Absolutely no doubt that Lewandowski intentionally touched Fields.

[93henfan]

Lewandowski's lawyer is on CNN live with Anderson Cooper right now and he says exactly what I've been saying. Lewandowski was protecting Trump from this woman grabbing at Trump and redirecting her away from him.

I think it's funny to hear them say the woman was a threat, but it's also funny for her and the WaPo fag to say he tried to throw her to the ground. It's clear he didn't at the 46 second mark (no gaps - continuous video) of the video JSO posted earlier in this thread but refuses to watch.

[BDKJMU]

Here's the surveillance video:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plZyWBTtlQU[/youtube]

That was horrific, John. I almost vomited when I saw him touch her and she never even moved.

I think I saw her brush against Trump also - maybe he should be filing for battery.

My thoughts exactly. She definitely touched Trump. If touching = battery, then Trump could file for battery against her.

[BDKJMU]

"Fla. prosecutor in Trump campaign manager case is Clinton backer

...The Florida prosecutor whose office is handling the battery case involving Donald Trump's campaign manager is a long-time Democrat and former state senator who's now part of Hillary Clinton's so-called Florida leadership "council."....

....Aronberg, who was elected to the post in 2012, has been listed as a member of Clinton's "Florida Leadership Council" since November, along with several state senators, representatives and local elected officials. He also gave $1,000 to Clinton's campaign in January, according to campaign finance records.....

....A former assistant attorney general, the Harvard-educated Aronberg lost in the Democratic primary for the AG's post in 2010. He served in the Florida state Senate for eight years starting in 2002, when he was elected to the chamber as its youngest member...."
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_pol ... ton_backer
So the prosecutor who decided to bring charges is a hardcore donk Hillary supporter. Shows how this whole thing is a farce.

[Jjoey52]

This is all bs, the media worries about this, yet lets Hillary get embassy staff killed and ignores it. We are becoming a banana republic.

[DSUrocks07]

Lol i love how much JSO has been getting his panties in a bunch about anything that has to do with Trump. You would swear he was a closet donk

[kalm]

"Fla. prosecutor in Trump campaign manager case is Clinton backer

...The Florida prosecutor whose office is handling the battery case involving Donald Trump's campaign manager is a long-time Democrat and former state senator who's now part of Hillary Clinton's so-called Florida leadership "council."....

....Aronberg, who was elected to the post in 2012, has been listed as a member of Clinton's "Florida Leadership Council" since November, along with several state senators, representatives and local elected officials. He also gave $1,000 to Clinton's campaign in January, according to campaign finance records.....

....A former assistant attorney general, the Harvard-educated Aronberg lost in the Democratic primary for the AG's post in 2010. He served in the Florida state Senate for eight years starting in 2002, when he was elected to the chamber as its youngest member...."
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_pol ... ton_backer
So the prosecutor who decided to bring charges is a hardcore donk Hillary supporter. Shows how this whole thing is a farce.

That makes sense. Clinton would definitely prefer to run against Cruz rather then Trump.

[andy7171]

Lol i love how much JSO has been getting his panties in a bunch about anything that has to do with Trump. You would swear he was a closet donk

Well, he's married into the establishment.

[JohnStOnge]

That makes sense. Clinton would definitely prefer to run against Cruz rather then Trump.

I'm guessing you're being sarcastic.

[JohnStOnge]

I think I saw her brush against Trump also - maybe he should be filing for battery.

The relevant language from the statute:

Any actual and intentional touching or striking of another person against that person's will

Note the underlined word. To charge Fields with Battery on Trump they'd have to prove that she intended to touch him. That's if she touched him and I'm not sure the video shows that anyway.

No problem showing that Lewandoski intentionally touched Fields. Totally different situation.

[93henfan]

I think I saw her brush against Trump also - maybe he should be filing for battery.

The relevant language from the statute:

Any actual and intentional touching or striking of another person against that person's will

Note the underlined word. To charge Fields with Battery on Trump they'd have to prove that she intended to touch him. That's if she touched him and I'm not sure the video shows that anyway.

No problem showing that Lewandoski intentionally touched Fields. Totally different situation.

Bruh. Just let it go. Let it go.

[kalm]

That makes sense. Clinton would definitely prefer to run against Cruz rather then Trump.

I'm guessing you're being sarcastic.

I'm not. Cruz is unelectable. Trump has shown he can pivot and win as an underdog. If you truly think Cruz has a better chance you really don't understand politics.

[JohnStOnge]

It's clear he didn't at the 46 second mark (no gaps - continuous video) of the video JSO posted earlier in this thread but refuses to watch.

I watched it the first time you brought it up. I just watched it again. It is a limited view.

And again: You have that audio. There's no way around it. You have audio of the WP reporter immediately after the event first asking her if she's OK then saying that Lewandoski almost threw her the the ground. If HE perceived her as almost being thrown to the ground when he was right there looking at it it's certainly reasonable for HER to perceive things that way.

And thinking that the two of them somehow hatched a conspiracy to say Lewandoski almost threw her to the ground in about 8 seconds without us hearing any of THAT on the audio is just absurd. What do you think happened? The two of them hurriedly whispered to each other, "Look, I will ask you if you're OK then say he almost threw you to the ground so we'll have this contemporaneous audio to support us of accusing him of that" and "yeah, that's it, that's the plan!"

That's ridiculous. The WP reporter who was right there next to her and saw it live and full view clearly perceived Lewandoski as almost throwing her to the ground.

And it actually really doesn't matter in terms of charging him with battery anyway. He clearly intentionally grabbed her without her consent. If you don't like the way the statute is written write to the Florida legislature and tell them to change it. But there is no question that, literally anyway, he committed battery according to what that statute says.

[93henfan]

It's clear he didn't at the 46 second mark (no gaps - continuous video) of the video JSO posted earlier in this thread but refuses to watch.

I watched it the first time you brought it up. I just watched it again. It is a limited view.

And again: You have that audio. There's no way around it. You have audio of the WP reporter immediately after the event first asking her if she's OK then saying that Lewandoski almost threw her the the ground. If HE perceived her as almost being thrown to the ground when he was right there looking at it it's certainly reasonable for HER to perceive things that way.

And thinking that the two of them somehow hatched a conspiracy to say Lewandoski almost threw her to the ground in about 8 seconds without us hearing any of THAT on the audio is just absurd. What do you think happened? The two of them hurriedly whispered to each other, "Look, I will ask you if you're OK then say he almost threw you to the ground so we'll have this contemporaneous audio to support us of accusing him of that" and "yeah, that's it, that's the plan!"

That's ridiculous. The WP reporter who was right there next to her and saw it live and full view clearly perceived Lewandoski as almost throwing her to the ground.

And it actually really doesn't matter in terms of charging him with battery anyway. He clearly intentionally grabbed her without her consent. If you don't like the way the statute is written write to the Florida legislature and tell them to change it. But there is no question that, literally anyway, he committed battery according to what that statute says.

Seriously man. Stop with your long winded posts. Nobody cares. I didn't read whatever I just quoted.

Some things are known here:

1. He touched her.
2. His lawyer says he was defending his candidate.
3. Court will make the call.
4. The person who brought the charges is a Hillary Clinton financial supporter.

That's about all that's really needed to know what's going on here.

[JohnStOnge]

I'm not. Cruz is unelectable. Trump has shown he can pivot and win as an underdog. If you truly think Cruz has a better chance you really don't understand politics.

What Trump has shown is that he can consolidate support among something on the order of 15 to 20 percent of the electorate. He has ALWAYS polled more poorly against the Democratic candidates that any of the other leading Republican candidates. He is where he is because opposition to him has been divided within the Republican Party. As noted before, if he'd been running against either Rubio or Cruz one on one from the beginning he'd have been getting trounced.

Plus as I have said before most Republicans do NOT want him. That's a heck of a situation to be in when you're trying to run as the Republican candidate in a general election.

Cruz does have his problems in the general election. Frankly, the Republican primary voters probably kissed their chances of winning the general election goodbye when they discarded Rubio. But Cruz has a better shot than Trump.

[Ibanez]

[JohnStOnge]

1. He touched her.
2. His lawyer says he was defending his candidate.
3. Court will make the call.
4. The person who brought the charges is a Hillary Clinton financial supporter.

That's about all that's really needed to know what's going on here.

You missed one:

A Washington Post reporter who was right there to witness the event was recorded on audio, immediately after the event, saying that Lewandoski almost threw Fields to the ground.

You keep acting like that's no big deal. But it's pretty much the most compelling piece of evidence discussed so far. You have an eye witness that will testify as to what he saw and he'll be backed up by audio recorded immediately after the event showing that it's what he said he saw at the time.

She's going to say she felt like she was almost thrown to the ground, the witness is going to say she was almost thrown to the ground, and there is audio confirming that the witness perceived her as almost being thrown to the ground at the time. She had bruises consistent with finger marks. On and on.

You Trump people are just totally divorced from reality.

[93henfan]

OK I went back and read your long winded post.

I know you're not a dumb person, but you seem to need some help getting through this whole situation. Ask yourself a few short questions:

1. Do you think the WaPo style reporter and Michelle Fields met for the first time that day or do you think a cadre of credentialed reporters travel and cover Trump?

2. If the latter, do you think they establish working relationships and get to know each other?

3. Do you think two liberals want to see Trump do well and succeed?

[93henfan]

1. He touched her.
2. His lawyer says he was defending his candidate.
3. Court will make the call.
4. The person who brought the charges is a Hillary Clinton financial supporter.

That's about all that's really needed to know what's going on here.

You missed one:

A Washington Post reporter who was right there to witness the event was recorded on audio, immediately after the event, saying that Lewandoski almost threw Fields to the ground.

You keep acting like that's no big deal. But it's pretty much the most compelling piece of evidence discussed so far.

Why do I need that guy when I can see it all clear as day on video? There is no "throwing to the ground". Not even remotely close. That discredits him immediately. God you're dense. You have to be trolling again, right? Nobody is as dumb as you are trying to play. Good job man. You got me. You win this troll.

[YoUDeeMan]

93 is correct.

The reporter is a fag. No real man would say that the interaction went to the level of throwing someone down.

And JSO, you should check out modern medicine...an old girlfriend of mine would bruise if you looked at her sideways. Another girl on one sailboat I used to sail on bruised if the wind hit her.

Plenty of medical reasons for a person to bruise easily.

But, in the end, the chick is looking for fame...and is probably being paid to hound Trump.

She is the equivalent of the girl suing McDonald's for the cup of coffee...a gold digging whore.

[andy7171]

93 is correct.

The reporter is a fag. No real man would say that the interaction went to the level of throwing someone down.

And JSO, you should check out modern medicine...an old girlfriend of mine would bruise if you looked at her sideways. Another girl on one sailboat I used to sail on bruised if the wind hit her.

Plenty of medical reasons for a person to bruise easily.

But, in the end, the chick is looking for fame...and is probably being paid to hound Trump.

She is the equivalent of the girl suing McDonald's for the cup of coffee...a gold digging whore.

This. JSO apparently has a job to do, its to, for some reason it's to destroy Trump on a I-AA message board.
1- Who fucking cares?
2- JSO needs to man up and admit he's pat of the establishment, by marriage.
3- Who fucking cares?
4- This is at most a misdemeanor "battery" chage at most. The reporter and her witnesseshave dicredited this event to the point of turning supporters towards voting for Trump, being a BS charge.
5- I saw 93 hypermiling down my street last night scoping out sleepover parking spots.

[ASUG8]

93 is correct.

The reporter is a fag. No real man would say that the interaction went to the level of throwing someone down.

And JSO, you should check out modern medicine...an old girlfriend of mine would bruise if you looked at her sideways. Another girl on one sailboat I used to sail on bruised if the wind hit her.

Plenty of medical reasons for a person to bruise easily.

But, in the end, the chick is looking for fame...and is probably being paid to hound Trump.

She is the equivalent of the girl suing McDonald's for the cup of coffee...a gold digging whore.

This. JSO apparently has a job to do, its to, for some reason it's to destroy Trump on a I-AA message board.
1- Who fucking cares?
2- JSO needs to man up and admit he's pat of the establishment, by marriage.
3- Who fucking cares?
4- This is at most a misdemeanor "battery" chage at most. The reporter and her witnesseshave dicredited this event to the point of turning supporters towards voting for Trump, being a BS charge.
5- I saw 93 hypermiling down my street last night scoping out sleepover parking spots.

I think Andy's "r" is broken.