MSNBC host cries over Jan 6th Anniversary

[the other mike]

Is that an answer? Are you suggesting the President of the United States should take action to subvert the Judicial Branch in order to protect his political rival?

You don't think that's "politicizing", and probably illegal? Come to think of it, can you be more specific as to how you suggest Biden should "own" 60 judges?

I'm sure you'll consider it running away but time to get ready for work now.....we'll catch up later.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Stop lying.

Where am I lying?

Are Democrat politicians and leaders attempting or advocating for Trump to be imprisoned? Yes

Are Democrat officials/judges trying to remove Trump from ballots? Yes

Did big tech companies take orders from the Biden admin to censor Donald Trump and other Hunter Biden laptop/COVID claims that turned out to be true? Yes.

All of this is completely against the notion of a free society. You just like it because it benefits the party you pledge allegiance to. I would denounce the practice no matter who did it. We are quite different

 

[the other mike]

...... I would denounce the practice no matter who did it.

Thank you. As most true Americans would.

 

[forkup]

I got the summary: Orange Man BAD!!!!!!
That's all they amount to!

You fucking retarded demented avenger subverted demoralized zombie Marxist Leninist Stalinist ASSHOLES are going TOO FAR with your utter HATRED of Trump and EVERY OTHER AMERICAN that loves this country AS FOUNDED,and our Constitution!!!!
I'll quote Peter Gabriel....
"This time you've gone too far.
This time you've gone too far
This time you've GONE TOO FAR!!!!!"

Fuck off and DIE, commie scum!!!!

Where did you get this summary? I'm guessing from your personal prefered media sources.

So let me do something really specific and you can explain how this isn't a crime.


I saw a subpoena by the DOJ demanding from Trump all documents bearing classification markings.

I saw the reply to that subpoena signed by a Trump lawyer stating that all documents of that kind were delivered.

In the indictment I read testimony by another still active Trump lawyer stating to the Grand Jury that the reason for that statement was Trump saying to him that he gave them everything.

Then I have the inventory of the FBI search, including photographs. Stating they found hundreds of documents bearing classification markings including some in his office desk.

Now feel free to explain to me why that is not a crime?

 

[forkup]

Supreme Court is also withholding evidence.
From Philadelphia for sure.

Please answer the questions. They aren't that hard. Are you suggesting POTUS should intervene into how the judicial branch operates?

 

[forkup]

I'm sure you'll consider it running away but time to get ready for work now.....we'll catch up later.

I don't consider somebody leading their lives free from all the BS as running away. I would like a straight answer for once if you get back.

 

[forkup]

Where am I lying?

Are Democrat politicians and leaders attempting or advocating for Trump to be imprisoned? Yes

Are Democrat officials/judges trying to remove Trump from ballots? Yes

Did big tech companies take orders from the Biden admin to censor Donald Trump and other Hunter Biden laptop/COVID claims that turned out to be true? Yes.

All of this is completely against the notion of a free society. You just like it because it benefits the party you pledge allegiance to. I would denounce the practice no matter who did it. We are quite different

Are Democrat officials/judges trying to remove Trump from ballots? Yes

Sure, the context being it in response to lawsuits filed against Trump by (former) Republicans. Going by a legal paper by members in good standing of the Federalist Society. And despite the moves themselves running into skepticism by a lot of Democrats.

Not just that. But the whole idea that it somehow is inappropriate to apply one of the conditions for running for president. And frankly the only one that actually has a grounding in actually protecting the Constitution. Namely not actively tried to rise up against it is ludicrous.

You can not run if you're not a natural born citizen. I'm sure you agree with that.

You can't run if you're not 35. You probably agree.

But you can't run if you engaged in an insurrection. Now that's wrong.

Did big tech companies take orders from the Biden admin to censor Donald Trump and other Hunter Biden laptop/COVID claims that turned out to be true? Yes.

No on the first. The Biden campaign flagged NUDE pictures belonging to Hunter to Twitter something you and I can do and something that's against their terms of service. How is that not allowed? And why would you want it?

COVID was going on DURING Trump. Unless time flows backwards hard to pin it in Biden.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Where did you get this summary? I'm guessing from your personal prefered media sources.

So let me do something really specific and you can explain how this isn't a crime.


I saw a subpoena by the DOJ demanding from Trump all documents bearing classification markings.

I saw the reply to that subpoena signed by a Trump lawyer stating that all documents of that kind were delivered.

In the indictment I read testimony by another still active Trump lawyer stating to the Grand Jury that the reason for that statement was Trump saying to him that he gave them everything.

Then I have the inventory of the FBI search, including photographs. Stating they found hundreds of documents bearing classification markings including some in his office desk.

Now feel free to explain to me why that is not a crime?

SENATOR BIDEN STOLE classified documents!!!!!!
Until that mother fucker's held to the same standards as you're using against Trump, you can PISS OFF!!!!!!!

 

[forkup]

SENATOR BIDEN STOLE classified documents!!!!!!
Until that mother fucker's held to the same standards as you're using against Trump, you can PISS OFF!!!!!!!

No, not what I asked. I asked you to explain why that's not illegal.

A appeal to hypocrisy, achieved by drawing a false equivalency is not a legal defense.

I asked you why ignoring a subpoena and lying to the Justice Department isn't a crime.

 

[SeaMajor7]

No, not what I asked. I asked you to explain why that's not illegal.

A appeal to hypocrisy, achieved by drawing a false equivalency is not a legal defense.

I asked you why ignoring a subpoena and lying to the Justice Department isn't a crime.

I don't give a FUCK about you questions!!!!!
This God damned lawfare against Trump and over HALF the country HAS TO STOP!!!!!!
Let the voters decide THIS TIME!!!!!!!!

 

[forkup]

I don't give a FUCK about you questions!!!!!
This God damned lawfare against Trump and over HALF the country HAS TO STOP!!!!!!
Let the voters decide THIS TIME!!!!!!!!

You keep on doing it, so I'll engage it once. I don't care how many insults, how many caps or how many times you try to deflect. I hardly read it since it isn't relevant , and in all honesty just shows how weak your position instead I will do the worst thing I can think off. Make you actually rationally defend your position.

You assert that Trump is being treated unjustly. This is fine. So I provided you not with assertions, but with stuff I've actually seen and read in court documents. Asking you to give any actual possible legal defense.

The fact that you "don't give a fuck" about my questions is BS. The problem you have is that you don't have an actual answer to the questions. Something that's the point.

Don't feel bad. Trump's lawyers don't have an answer either. There's a reason they are trying to get Trump absolute immunity, something that has no legal bases, instead of qualified immunity which does. Some of the stuff he's been indicted for is both completely uncontested and undeniable illegal.

 

[SeaMajor7]

You keep on doing it, so I'll engage it once. I don't care how many insults, how many caps or how many times you try to deflect. I hardly read it since it isn't relevant , and in all honesty just shows how weak your position is. I will do the worst thing I can think of in return. Make you actually rationally defend your position.

You assert that Trump is being treated unjustly. This is fine. So I provided you not with assertions, but with stuff I've actually seen and read in court documents. Asking you to give any actual possible legal defense.

The fact that you "don't give a fuck" about my questions is BS. The problem you have is that you don't have an actual answer to the questions. Something that's the point.

Don't feel bad. Trump's lawyers don't have an answer either. There's a reason they are trying to get Trump absolute immunity, something that has no legal bases, instead of qualified immunity which does. Some of the stuff he's been indicted for is both completely uncontested and undeniable illegal.

 

[forkup]

That's right. Run and hide.

 

[SeaMajor7]

That's right. Run and hide.

I said all that needed to be said.
This fucking SOVIET LAWFARE MUST END!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[forkup]

I said all that needed to be said.
This fucking SOVIET LAWFARE MUST END!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lol you said nothing at all. Besides that is. It's unfair the law applies to Trump.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Lol you said nothing at all. Besides that is. It's unfair the law applies to Trump.

LAWS didn't apply to Biden!
LAWS didn't apply to Hillary!
LAWS don't apply to DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!
Fuck you and your two-tiered "justice"!!!!!

 

[forkup]

LAWS didn't apply to Biden!
LAWS didn't apply to Hillary!
LAWS don't apply to DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!!
Fuck you and your two-tiered "justice"!!!!!

Again. Begging the question, so you can make an appeal to hypocrisy, using a false equivalency, is not a legal defense, or for that matter, a compelling argument.

It's more a "I'll throw shit at the wall, call it art and hope nobody notices there's just shit on the wall."

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Sure, the context being it in response to lawsuits filed against Trump by (former) Republicans. Going by a legal paper by members in good standing of the Federalist Society. And despite the moves themselves running into skepticism by a lot of Democrats.

Not just that. But the whole idea that it somehow is inappropriate to apply one of the conditions for running for president. And frankly the only one that actually has a grounding in actually protecting the Constitution. Namely not actively tried to rise up against it is ludicrous.

You can not run if you're not a natural born citizen. I'm sure you agree with that.

You can't run if you're not 35. You probably agree.

But you can't run if you engaged in an insurrection. Now that's wrong.

Trump didn’t “engage in an insurrection”, he was never charged with anything of the sort.

Leftists/Democrats/media made that up, and you oddly recite it, even though it’s a lie

 

[SeaMajor7]

Again. Begging the question, so you can make an appeal to hypocrisy, using a false equivalency, is not a legal defense, or for that matter, a compelling argument.

It's more a "I'll throw shit at the wall, call it art and hope nobody notices there's just shit on the wall."

"They don't think it be like it is, but it do."

 

[forkup]

Trump didn’t “engage in an insurrection”, he was never charged with anything of the sort.

Leftists/Democrats/media made that up, and you oddly recite it, even though it’s a lie

Nothing in the fourteenth amendment states one has to be "charged" with insurrection, simply engaged in it. That's what's IN the Constitution. A judge is perfectly allowed to make that determination.

Me personally, I'm not comfortable with it. With the provision I mean. I think he should be allowed to run. But then again I don't believe strict Constitutionalism is the best legal doctrine to judge.

But reading the Constitution strictly, I think Trump should be barred.

This is why this will be interesting. SCOTUS will now have to judge, while the legal doctrines the judges claim to adhere to, and political affiliation are not the same. On both sides that is.