User Controls
Posts by stl1
-
2022-06-09 at 7:43 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sLANNY WEARS A DRESS AND FRALA WEARS THE PANTS
Originally posted by frala If you had any idea how expensive my purses are, you’d know I’d never put anyone’s balls in there.
Also, this thread is 733 pages long. I don’t think it needs a revival.
Bitch thinks she runs this place.
Too bad she does.
LANNY IS A CUCK. -
2022-06-08 at 8:44 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty's
Originally posted by POLECAT whoa, did you guys see that cum lickin faggot post in here,,, lol what a faggot
LANNY'S BALLS ARE IN FRALA'S PURSE!
Skunk, this is the thanks I get for single handedly reviving this dead thread of yours? It had been FOUR DAYS since anybody even posted in here and after one single post by me, there are TWO FULL PAGES of responses! Some people's kids just never learned gratitude.
By the way...only one more day until THE TRUTH IS REVEALED and all you MAGA MORONS learn how gullible you've been and led around like the sheeple that you are! -
2022-06-07 at 2:52 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sLANNY'S BALLS ARE WALKING AROUND IN FRALA'S PURSE
-TWO DAYS TO TRUTH-
Business Insider
Jan. 6 panel has evidence on Trump showing 'a lot more than incitement,' member says
tporter@businessinsider.com (Tom Porter)
Rep. Jamie Raskin said the Jan 6 committee found serious evidence implicating Trump in the riot.
He said it showed worse than incitement — the charge in Trump's second impeachment.
Raskin hinted that the committee would try to prove a "conspiracy" in hearings due this week.
The House committee investigating the January 6, 2021, Capitol Riot has evidence against former President Donald Trump showing "a lot more than incitement," one of its members said.
Rep. Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat, said the evidence against Trump was more serious than was known before.
He suggested it would justify more serious charges than leveled at Trump in his second impeachment, where he was accused of incitement to insurrection.
"The select committee has found evidence about a lot more than incitement here, and we're gonna be laying out the evidence about all of the actors who were pivotal to what took place on Jan. 6," Raskin said during an interview Monday with Washington Post Live.
The committee's first public hearings is due on Thursday evening, where the panel plans to reveal the evidence that it has gathered on the key individuals and events behind the riot over more than a year.
Raskin told the Post that the panel had evidence of "concerted planning and premeditated activity" and that this week's hearing would "tell the story of a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 presidential election and block the transfer of power."
Asked if Trump was at the center of that conspiracy, Raskin said "I think that Donald Trump and the White House were at the center of these events."
"That's the only way really of making sense of them all," he said.
He noted, however, that "people are going to have to make judgments themselves about the relative role that different people played."
Trump was acquitted by the Senate on incitement charges in February 2021, after the upper chamber failed to reach the two-thirds majority required to convict. Seven Republican senators sided with the Democratic caucus in finding the president guilty, enough for an absolute majority but too few for a conviction under impeachment rules.
That trial focused on an incendiary speech Trump delivered to supporters before they marched on the Capitol and temporarily halted the ceremony certifying Joe Biden's victory, as well disinformation from Trump wrongly claiming that the 2020 election was stolen by fraud.
The committee's activities have gone beyond this, per statements by Raskin and other members, and the hearings are likely to make a much broader argument about Trump's culpability. -
2022-05-24 at 6:39 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sFRALA CARRIES LANNY'S BALLS IN HER PURSE
SERVES THE BASTARDS RIGHT!
RawStory
Texas GOP voters are getting tripped up by their own party's new voting restrictions
By Sarah K. Burris
New Texas voting laws are causing a lot of problems for Republican voters, according to a Newsy report ahead of the primary run-off elections Tuesday.
As the report notes, several new rules passed by Texas Republicans in the wake of the 2020 elections put more stringent requirements on mail-in ballots.
One rule passed by Republican lawmakers is mandates that voters must put either their drivers license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number on the envelope containing their ballot.
This has led to a higher number of rejected ballots: Ballot rejections in 2020 ran about 0.8 percent, but in 2022 they're at 12 percent. The number might seem low, but that's equal to at least 7,000 people in one Texas county.
Republicans had a higher rate of error than Democrats, meaning there are thousands more Republicans in the state whose ballots aren't being counted in the primary election.
In March, during the initial primary elections, just 16 of the state’s largest counties had more than 18,000 mail-in ballots that were rejected because they missed the tiny fine print.
One elderly Republican voter noted that the question about the driver's license or social security number was printed so small she couldn't read it. Newsy said they calculated it was seven-point font. National election standards that benefit visually impaired people require nothing can be smaller ten-point font.
The first time Texas voted with the new ballot was March 1, so when the state passed the law in December, they had very little time to print the ballots and get them out to voters. But, two months later, for the run-off elections, the ballots are still a mess, the report said. -
2022-03-28 at 7:55 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sLanny. would you please change my title to "LANNY IS FRALA'S CUCK"?
Thanks!
"WE GOT HIM THIS TIME!"
The Washington Post
Here’s how a federal judge believes Trump likely broke the law
Philip Bump
They are astonishing words to read just above the signature of a federal judge.
Here’s how a federal judge believes Trump likely broke the law
“Dr. [John] Eastman and President Trump launched a campaign to overturn a democratic election, an action unprecedented in American history,” U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter wrote in an opinion published on Monday. “Their campaign was not confined to the ivory tower—it was a coup in search of a legal theory.”
Eastman, you’ll recall, is the legal scholar who advocated that Vice President Mike Pence simply reject electoral votes submitted by a number of states as Congress convened to finalize the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021. Carter’s summary of Eastman’s efforts — championed eagerly by Trump — was that it was not sincere advocacy of a novel theory of allocating power but, instead, a contrived rationale aimed at the goal of preserving Trump’s presidency.
This is not particularly surprising, even if it is stark. What’s more important is what precedes those words in Carter’s opinion: a detailed argument, hinging at one critical point on Trump’s own words, explaining why it’s likely that Donald Trump broke federal law in trying to retain power.
Carter’s ruling is part of a legal fight over documents in Eastman’s possession that focus on the effort to reject the outcome of the 2020 election. The House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack subpoenaed material from Eastman related to the effort and he withheld it, citing attorney-client privilege. Carter was asked to determine if that privilege should apply to the material. In the end, he found that it overwhelmingly did not. But not because he thought Eastman was mostly not acting as counsel to Trump or Trump’s campaign and not solely because he thought most of the material was not related to litigation.
The judge was also asked by the House committee to evaluate if the material might need to be turned over because it was not protected by privilege due to the “crime-fraud” exception. In other words, if an attorney is discussing the commission of a crime with a client, that material may not be subject to being withheld under privilege. And earlier this month that’s precisely what the committee alleged: Trump and Eastman were engaged in an effort to violate more than one federal law and, therefore, communication related to that effort should not be privileged.
Carter agreed. The standard in a civil case is that a “preponderance of the evidence” shows that a crime was likely committed, meaning the evidence needed to show that it was “more likely than not.” And when considering the components of two crimes identified by the committee, Carter felt such a preponderance existed.
The first allegation was that Trump had tried to obstruct an official proceeding. In order for such a crime to be committed, Carter wrote, it needs to be shown that three things happened:
“the person obstructed, influenced or impeded, or attempted to obstruct, influence or impede”
“an official proceeding of the United States, and”
“did so corruptly.”
The second allegation — that there was a conspiracy to defraud the U.S. — has similar requirements: that “at least two people entered into an agreement to obstruct a lawful function of the government ... by deceitful or dishonest means, and ... that a member of the conspiracy engaged in at least one overt act in furtherance of the agreement.”
In each case, two of the three stipulations are easy to meet. Trump’s effort to obstruct (#1) an official proceeding (#2) — the counting of electoral votes — is obvious, though Carter outlines the specific path by which that occurred. Similarly, the first and third components of the conspiracy allegation are fairly trivial to identify: Trump and Eastman worked to twist Pence’s arm and called on the crowd outside the White House to march to the Capitol and pressure Congress, among other things. Again, the full filing makes each case explicitly.
As I noted when the committee first alleged the violation of these laws (as it sought to apply the crime-fraud exception to Eastman’s privilege claims), the more challenging aspect of each allegation lies in the intent. Did Trump try to obstruct the electoral-vote count corruptly; that is, knowing that it was dishonest to do so? Did the conspiracy to obstruct the function of government occur thanks to “deceitful or dishonest means” — or did Trump perhaps sincerely believe that the election had been stolen?
The House committee, arguing for the former, pointed to the various officials and experts who’d rejected the idea that the election had been stolen as evidence that Trump must have known it hadn’t been. But Eastman, replying to that filing, argued that just as many advisers to Trump were insisting that the opposite was true, that there was rampant fraud that demanded the election results be reconsidered. That perhaps Trump existed in some liminal space between truth and falsehood making his objections sincere.
That’s why Carter’s isolation of Trump’s comments in his phone call with Georgia’s secretary of state on Jan. 3, 2021, is so important.
You probably remember that call. Trump phoned the man in charge of Georgia’s elections, Brad Raffensperger, and repeatedly tried to cajole him into identifying enough “fraudulent” votes that Trump could win the state. In short order, the audio of the call was obtained by The Washington Post and published.
During the conversation, Trump repeatedly tried to claim that various buckets of votes were questionable and Raffensperger repeatedly indicated that the claims were unfounded or unproven. Then Trump, who lost the state by fewer than 12,000 votes laid his cards on the table, telling Raffensperger, "I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have. Because we won the state.”
“President Trump’s repeated pleas for Georgia Secretary of State Raffensperger clearly demonstrate that his justification was not to investigate fraud, but to win the election,” Carter wrote in his opinion. He quoted Trump: "So what are we going to do here, folks? I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I need 11,000 votes. Give me a break.”
“Taken together, this evidence demonstrates that President Trump likely knew the electoral count plan had no factual justification,” Carter continued.
In other words, Trump let the veil drop. He wasn’t concerned that fraud might have occurred and that the will of the voters was lost. He was simply worried about getting those votes he needed — and wanted the Republican secretary of state to play ball. This is a corrupt intent. This is dishonest.
“The illegality of the plan was obvious,” Carter wrote of the obstruction allegation. “... President Trump vigorously campaigned for the Vice President to single-handedly determine the results of the 2020 election. As Vice President Pence stated, ‘no Vice President in American history has ever asserted such authority.’ Every American—and certainly the President of the United States—knows that in a democracy, leaders are elected, not installed. With a plan this ‘BOLD’” — quoting Eastman — “President Trump knowingly tried to subvert this fundamental principle.”
There were legal implications from the ruling for the House committee and for Eastman. But, particularly when coupled with the finding last month that Trump probably entered into a civil conspiracy with extremist groups similarly aimed at blocking the 2020 election, Carter’s assertion that a preponderance of evidence suggested that Trump violated the law is historic and enormously significant.
A crime was likely committed by the sitting president in order to retain power. -
2022-03-18 at 5:17 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty's
Originally posted by POLECAT R I P motherfucker…
in memory of a faggot commie's last thought inline before he died realizing TRUMP was actually THE MAN FOR THE JOB.
stl1
Cum Lickin' Fagit
Anything but "Orange Man Bad".
Quote
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ St|1 died of the jab.
I wrote Lanny that I would not post under the heading of "Cum Lickin' Fagit".
Just thought you'd want to know why I no longer around.
Lanny has put his fat fingers on the scales. -
2022-03-03 at 6:15 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sJan. 6 Panel Sees Evidence of Trump ‘Criminal Conspiracy’
The House panel investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol said for the first time that its evidence suggests crimes may have been committed by former President Donald Trump and his associates.
Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House panel investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol said Wednesday for the first time that its evidence suggests crimes may have been committed by former President Donald Trump and his associates in the failed effort to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.
Trump and his associates engaged in a “criminal conspiracy” to prevent Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the Electoral College, the House committee said in a court filing. Trump and those working with him spread false information about the outcome of the presidential election and pressured state officials to overturn the results, potentially violating multiple federal laws, the panel said.
“The Select Committee also has a good-faith basis for concluding that the President and members of his Campaign engaged in a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States,” the committee wrote in a filing submitted in U.S. District Court in the Central District of California.
The 221-page filing marks the committee’s most formal effort to link the former president to a federal crime, though the actual import of the filing is not clear. Lawmakers do not have the power to bring criminal charges on their own and can only make a referral to the Justice Department. The department has been investigating last year’s riot, but it has not given any indication that it is considering seeking charges against Trump.
The committee made the claims in response to a lawsuit by Trump adviser John Eastman, a lawyer and law professor who was consulting with Trump as he attempted to overturn the election. Eastman is trying to withhold documents from the committee.
In a statement late Wednesday, Charles Burnham, Eastman’s attorney, said his client has a responsibility “to protect client confidences, even at great personal risk and expense.”
Burnham added, “The Select Committee has responded to Dr. Eastman’s efforts to discharge this responsibility by accusing him of criminal activity.”
The brief filed Wednesday was an effort to knock down Eastman’s attorney-client privilege claims. In doing so, the committee argued there is a legal exception allowing the disclosure of communications regarding ongoing or future crimes.
“The Select Committee is not conducting a criminal investigation,” Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the committee’s Democratic chairman, said in a statement. “But, as the judge noted at a previous hearing, Dr. Eastman’s privilege claims raise the question whether the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege applies in this situation.”
The filing also provides new details from the committee’s interviews with several top Trump aides and members of former Vice President Mike Pence’s team, including chief of staff Marc Short and chief counsel Greg Jacob.
The committee said it has evidence that Trump sought to obstruct an official proceeding — in this case, the certification of the election results — by trying to strong-arm Pence to delay the proceedings so there would be additional time to “manipulate” the results.
“The evidence supports an inference that President Trump and members of his campaign knew he had not won enough legitimate state electoral votes to be declared the winner of the 2020 Presidential election during the January 6 Joint Session of Congress, but the President nevertheless sought to use the Vice President to manipulate the results in his favor,” the filing states.
In a Jan. 6, 2021, email exchange between Eastman and Jacob revealed by the committee, Eastman pushed for Pence to intervene in his ceremonial role and halt the certification of the electoral votes, a step Pence had no power to take.
Jacob replied: “I respect your heart here. I share your concerns about what Democrats will do once in power. I want election integrity fixed. But I have run down every legal trail placed before me to its conclusion, and I respectfully conclude that as a legal framework, it is a results-oriented position that you would never support if attempted by the opposition, and essentially entirely made up.”
He added, “And thanks to your bulls—-, we are now under siege.”
The filing represents the most comprehensive look yet at the findings of the Jan. 6 committee, which is investigating the violent insurrection of Trump’s supporters in an effort to ensure that nothing like it happens again. While the panel can’t pursue criminal charges, members want to provide the public a thorough account of the attack, in which hundreds of people brutally beat police, pushed through windows and doors and interrupted the certification of Biden’s win.
So far, lawmakers and investigators have interviewed hundreds of people, including members of Trump’s family and his chief of staff as well as his allies in the seven swing states where the former president tried and failed to prove he won. The panel has also sought out information from members of Congress and subpoenaed records and testimony from top social media platforms they believe had a hand in the spreading of election misinformation.
The committee is expected to fully release its findings in a lengthy report or series of reports later this year, ahead of the midterm elections. The panel is also planning days or weeks of hearings starting in April with some of the witnesses who testified.
In other transcripts released as part of the filing, former senior Justice Department official Richard Donoghue described trying to convince Trump that claims of election fraud were pure fiction. “I told the President myself that several times, in several conversations, that these allegations about ballots being smuggled in a suitcase and run through the machines several times, it was not true, that we had looked at it, we looked at the video, we interviewed the witnesses, and it was not true.”
At one point, Donoghue said, he had to reassure Trump that the Justice Department had investigated a report that someone has transported a tractor-trailer full of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. The department found no evidence to support the allegations, Donoghue said.
The transcripts also shed colorful detail on a contentious Jan. 3, 2021, meeting at which Trump contemplated replacing his acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, with an assistant who promised to get to the bottom of the president’s bogus claims of election fraud.
That assistant, Jeffrey Clark, had been the department’s top environmental enforcement lawyer for a period, a fact that led to some derision from colleagues at the meeting when it was pointed out that Clark had not been a criminal prosecutor.
“And he kind of retorted by saying, ‘Well, I’ve done a lot of very complicated appeals and civil litigation, environmental litigation, and things like that,’” Donoghue said. “And I said, ‘That’s right. You’re an environmental lawyer. How about you go back to your office, and we’ll call you when there’s an oil spill.’” -
2022-03-03 at 6 PM UTC in Whoopi's OopsiesAnything but "Orange Man Bad".
-
2022-03-03 at 5:49 PM UTC in Turns out the wheel bolt pattern for my escape and my lancer are the same.Could you copy and paste something instead, please?
-
2022-03-03 at 5:43 PM UTC in Whoopi's OopsiesLanny needs to control his woman and take away her ability to edit.
If he has the balls. -
2022-03-03 at 5:38 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sRoss Perot would look good after Trump.
Or Michael Dukakis.
Or George McGovern.
Or...Pee Wee Herman -
2022-03-03 at 5:36 PM UTC in World to hit temperature tipping point 10 years faster than forecast
-
2022-03-03 at 5:33 PM UTC in World to hit temperature tipping point 10 years faster than forecast
Originally posted by mmQ I feel like stl ruined the concept of copy/paste with his thousands of them never followed up with any personal insight.
Just the facts, ma'am. Screw your "personal insight" and your "alternative truths". The articles I so shamelessly copy and paste are from reliable news sources that have usually been around for years, if not decades or longer. My opinion can be garnered from the articles I post. The people I quote are usually highly educated and trained to do their jobs. That is how they make their living. They better know what they write about and have sources available to them that neither you nor I ever could.
You keep typing about your feelings and watching imbeciles on YouTube videos.
I'll stick to the facts, ma'am. -
2022-03-03 at 5:12 PM UTC in World to hit temperature tipping point 10 years faster than forecastMy plan is working.
I am occupying an inordinate amount of your brains! -
2022-03-03 at 5:09 PM UTC in Whoopi's OopsiesDo you think Lanny would change it to "Orange Man Bad"?
-
2022-03-03 at 5:08 PM UTC in Whoopi's OopsiesAnything but "Cum Lickin' Fagit".
-
2022-03-03 at 5:06 PM UTC in THE MAGA PARTY!,,, the GOP is dead, republicans are going down with the dems,, get ready for THE MAGA PARTY lefty'sIt's all a trick to take your virginity.
-
2022-03-03 at 5:04 PM UTC in what's the last thing you bought?I'd like to buy a couple of Subway sandwiches with the "Buy one, get one free" coupon that I've been mailed...AGAIN.
The problem the last time they did this was that I tried to use their coupon and every Subway I tried to use the coupon at had a sign up stating that they didn't honor that coupon.
That kind of nonsense pisses me off. Aren't all Subways independently owned so that the coupon is useless and misleading advertising? -
2022-03-03 at 4:57 PM UTC in Whoopi's OopsiesAfter you get Lanny to stay on topic, get back to me.
-
2022-03-03 at 4:55 PM UTC in It's Almost St. Paddy's Day^Bumps and grinds with his nose and a cane.
