Folks, it's already too late.

[Foolardi]

I'm speaking to my fellow progressives when I make this observation.

It is painfully apparent the unfounded, as I write this, allegations of corruption made about Joe Biden with respect to his son are now permanently part of the conservative lexicon. No amount of refutation has in any way diminished their blind devotion to it. They're all in.

This phenomenon is hardly unique. We see other examples of it all the time. Everything from bamboo in the ballots to Fast and Furious to Crossfire Hurricane to "Obama is a Muslim" and everything in between. Endless posts with irrefutable factual content laying to waste the falsehoods they've adopted break like waves on a seawall. Their beliefs are as impenetrable as they are intransigent.

I don't believe progressives have cornered the market on the truth. Nor do I believe everything that is part of the liberal lexicon is wholly, factually, accurate. But I can find no liberal equivalence to the pervasive belief on the part of Repubs in the Big Lie. Or the extent to which conspiracy theories are central to their narratives.
Nearly 700 days later, most Republicans still believe Trump’s big lie
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ost-republicans-still-believe-trumps-big-lie/

What can be done? Persist. Persist in the hope that even if they can not bring themselves to admit it on this forum they will come to know the facts. Persist in the hope we can someday have constructive conversations over issues with which we disagree without having to argue about the color of the sky. Persist in the hope we can eventually move past the vitriol and work, TOGETHER, to address the nation's very consequential problems. IMO, Repubs have lost their way. We must remain hopeful they will find it again or all is lost.

What Part of DENIAL are you unstudied over.
Next thing in yer lexicon of bullshit will be how to properly
Polish a Turd.

 

[westwall]

Nothing about the crimes Don committed in furtherance of his goal to reject the will of the voters who kicked his ass out of the WH is protected by the 1st A. If you had read the indictment you'd know that.

What crimes? He did nothing more than what the shrilary did.

 

[Dagosa]

You fell for the prosecutor trick of making each part of a supposed crime another crime.

Trick ? It’s the law non reader. i know you simpletons like to think in simple terms.

 

[Foolardi]

You really should consider, for the amount of time you spend here, contributing something constructive to the board.

The only thing constructive over the shenanigans of this
uppity New York AG is exposure.The ability to see what underscores
the use of Stalinism.Or a complete reversal of Due Process and
acheiving a Fair Trial.What part of purposeful reversing of all
Trump's legal teams Motions,.Plus AG James during her re-election
bid spoke highly disparingly about Trump.That alone is grounds for her
accusal to call for Trump anything.Or Self-accusations towards Trump.

 

[martybegan]

Trick ? It’s the law non reader.

It's abuse of the law.

 

[Foolardi]

Trick ? It’s the law non reader.

Yeah,the law according to Who ?
Judge Roy Bean ... West of the Pecos.
IF you were just a little bit more bright in the head,
you might understand simple humor like The Three Stooges.
Nyuk! Nyuk!

 

[Dagosa]

It's abuse of the law.

No bozo. It’s the difference between conspiring to commit a crime and doing it in the heat if the moment. It’s the difference between a planned felony and a knee jerk reaction and unplanned crime. You don’t seem to know much about it do you ?

it's the difference between premeditation and not. All these other crimes are offenses too that when taken alone ARE STILL CRIMES.

 

[Dagosa]

Yeah,the law according to Who ?
Judge Roy Bean ... West of the Pecos.
IF you were just a little bit more bright in the head,
you might understand simple humor like The Three Stooges.
Nyuk! Nyuk!

It’s the one you apply to Hunter Biden, dufus. And the one you’re too incompetent to use.

 

[martybegan]

No bozo. It’s the difference between conspiring to commit a crime and doing it in the heat if the moment. It’s the difference between a planned felony and a knee jerk reaction and unplanned crime. You don’t seem to know much about it do you ?

it's the difference between premeditation and not. All these other crimes are offenses too that when taken alone ARE STILL CRIMES.

It's looking for a crime to fit the person you detest.

Not crimes.

 

[Dagosa]

It's looking for a crime to fit the person you detest.

Not crimes.

it’s pretty easy. There were 90 to choose from.

 

[Foolardi]

It's looking for a crime to fit the person you detest.

Not crimes.

Ford long that supposed person will be a kingsized
Hero among good Americans.As if he ain't already.
How much more popular could an american git.
His Rally's ... His Polling.I mean,talk about name recognition.
Donald John Trump has already set the Guinness world record
for name recognition for the umpteenth time.

 

[Foolardi]

it’s pretty easy. There were 90 to choose from.

Geez Louize ... I bet you could probably handle naming
maybe 5 er 6 due to limited schooling.
You make for the ideal Democrat.just as those
who cottoned Jim Crow laws in the South.

 

[berg80]

The grand jury was a farce.

Because...............any grand jury that indicts Trump is a farce? No chance they impartially examined the overwhelming evidence and voted on that?

 

[berg80]

What Part of DENIAL are you unstudied over.

Believe me, I am very familiar with the denial of Trump's criminality. Also, the denial that there is no substantiated evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden as of this date. Conversations about the allegations go something like this.
"He did it."
"Did what?"
"Acted corruptly."
"Where's the evidence?"
"He did it."
"Did what?"
"Acted corruptly."
"Where's the evidence?"
"He did it."
"Did what?"
"Acted corruptly."
"Where's the evidence?"

Republicans’ own witness in their impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden on Thursday completely destroyed their claims before the hearing even began.

The House GOP held its first hearing on Biden’s alleged corruption. Republicans have insisted for months that the president is guilty of criminal wrongdoing, but they have yet to produce any actual evidence of their claims.

As one of their first witnesses, Republicans called on Jonathan Turley, a conservative legal scholar who previously served as a Justice Department tax attorney. Turley was set to act as a content witness to help analyze the Biden family’s business dealings—but even he admitted there’s not enough evidence.

Republicans’ Key “Biden Corruption” Witness Torches Their Entire Claims

If you want to hold a big impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden, maybe make sure your witnesses are on the same page first.

newrepublic.com

 

[martybegan]

Because...............any grand jury that indicts Trump is a farce? No chance they impartially examined the overwhelming evidence and voted on that?

Where were the Grand Juries located?

 

[Dagosa]

Geez Louize ... I bet you could probably handle naming
maybe 5 er 6 due to limited schooling.
You make for the ideal Democrat.just as those
who cottoned Jim Crow laws in the South.

Oh, climate change denier and champion of QAnon has a another dumbass idea.

 

[Dagosa]

Believe me, I am very familiar with the denial of Trump's criminality. Also, the denial that there is no substantiated evidence of wrongdoing by Joe Biden as of this date. Conversations about the allegations go something like this.
"He did it."
"Did what?"
"Acted corruptly."
"Where's the evidence?"
"He did it."
"Did what?"
"Acted corruptly."
"Where's the evidence?"
"He did it."
"Did what?"
"Acted corruptly."
"Where's the evidence?"

Republicans’ own witness in their impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden on Thursday completely destroyed their claims before the hearing even began.

The House GOP held its first hearing on Biden’s alleged corruption. Republicans have insisted for months that the president is guilty of criminal wrongdoing, but they have yet to produce any actual evidence of their claims.

As one of their first witnesses, Republicans called on Jonathan Turley, a conservative legal scholar who previously served as a Justice Department tax attorney. Turley was set to act as a content witness to help analyze the Biden family’s business dealings—but even he admitted there’s not enough evidence.

Republicans’ Key “Biden Corruption” Witness Torches Their Entire Claims

If you want to hold a big impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden, maybe make sure your witnesses are on the same page first.

newrepublic.com

House lunatics want to impeach Biden so they can THEN look for evidence of wrong doing.,
They are a clown show.

 

[berg80]

It's abuse of the law.

Finally we agree. What Trump and his co-defendants did was indeed an abuse of the law.

 

[martybegan]

Finally we agree. What Trump and his co-defendants did was indeed an abuse of the law.

Not even close, mouth breather.

The only abuse of the law here is being done by prosecutors and judges.

 

[Dagosa]

Not even close, mouth breather.

The only abuse of the law here is being done by prosecutors and judges.

So you say, with NO EVIDENCE.