Who can identify the five lies in Trump’s 8:17 AM Tweet on his upcoming Stop the Steal insurrection?

[White 6]

Politics in our nation today reminds me of a corrupt football game where the refs are paid by one team.

Hillary should have been indicted and prosecuted for negligently handling classified information. Hillary is above the rule of law.

Yes, Hillary Should Have Been Prosecuted | National Review

I know this is ancient history, but — I’m sorry — I just can’t let it go. When historians write the definitive, sordid histories of the 2016 election, the FBI, Hillary, emai…

www.nationalreview.com

Joe Biden and Family were busy selling Joe’s influence all over the globe but nothing will ever come of it. Joe Biden is above the rule of law. China may own Joe Biden but China likely owns half the politicians in Congress and many of high level government bureaucrats.

Joe Biden: Our First Chinese President?

Joe Biden: Our First Chinese President?How China rents the U.S. media—and its politicians.

humanevents.com

China Owns America: The Shameful Auctioning Off of America's Power

From our politicians to our culture, it's becoming increasingly obvious that China owns America. Read here to learn about China's vast influence in America!

genzconservative.com

The Democrats Are in Bed with China, Literally

This is totally on-brand for the Dems and especially this particular clown.

townhall.com

Top Chinese professor boasts of operatives in top of US ‘core inner circle’

A recently recorded lecture showing a Chinese Communist Party expert explaining how Beijing had “people at the top of America’s core inner circle” has found its way onto the inter…

nypost.com

I expect Trump will be charged for something and prosecuted with a passion. He will be tied up in courts and unable to campaign in 2024.

Trump is an outsider to the Swamp and outsiders the Swamp doesn’t own are not welcome. Trump will serve as the example of why unapproved outsiders should never, ever consider running for President.

Negligent handling of classified information? I suspect you are being kind. The way that reg is written and what is encompassed, most any of us that dealt with that sort information over many years might have been charged with that one, just for innocently and earnestly going about our jobs and moving about. Most don't end up in a position where they have to lie, on the record or shared info over unsecured networks, possibly with people, not even cleared to access it. If running your own server off the government net, in that type of environment or at that level, you are undoubtably guilty, in my book. If you do that, you undoubtedly know what you are doing. Nothing like a good claw hammer to clean up behind you, just like ServerPro, making it like it never happened, eh?

From what I have seen, I have no doubt Hunter was trading and advancing on his dad's name, but whether Joe was ever coming up with the goods or profited to an account is unproven, and I expect that is the crux of the biscuit.

I suspect Donny is indeed guilty as sin, may be indicted, but represented by counsel (probably free to him), would not be tied up, though found guilty in the court of public opinion. I suppose you saw where he had the GOP picked up the tab on $1.6 million of legal fees, for legal situations arising from personal business legal entanglements, totally unrelated to, and before his time in office? Nothing like political donations to allow you to do as you please, on other people's money. You could live like a billionaire.

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT18-POST#0238

Correll wrote: I like the way that you dishonestly conflate plans to fight the certification, in politically/legally way with what we were discussing, ie plans to take over the country as per a coup, once the capitol was taken by force. 21DEC16-POST#0831

NFBW wrote: YOU LIE Correll . The above quote by you is a permanent record on this message board. There was no discussion involving any plans to take over the country by violent coup once the capitol was taken by force. - - - See below the track of the ORIGINAL discussion. - - - Scroll down to Fort Fun Indiana ’s 21OCT18-POST#237. We were discussing what I said we are discussing “Yes, they were trying to stop the certification of the election. To keep their orange lard and master in power, after an election he lost.” 21DEC16-POST#0835

rightwinger wrote: President Trump sent an angry mob after his Vice President and Mike Pence barely escaped the clutches of the mob who was screaming to hang him. Yet, Pence has yet to publicly denounce the actions of Trump on that day. 21JUN07-POST#001

struth wrote: I think Pence realizes that your rhetoric is lying propaganda 21OCT18-POST#224

Fort Fun Indiana wrote to Correll: But we will keep your "But we cultists are mindless sheep, and the antifa guy acting crazy caused us to engage in a violent riot" defense in mind. Because it is hilarious and embarrassing. 21OCT18-POST#225

rightwinger wrote: You mean Trump did not send an anti-Pence tweet that enraged the TRUMPmob? 20OCT21-POST#226

Correll wrote: We see one lefty agitator on film. Were there others? 21OCT18-POST#229

Correll wrote: The 1/6 riot was an oddity, in this country. A right leaning riot. The obvious question is why, what was different. - - - One possible answer would be possible lefty agitators infiltrating and leading or agitating violence. Especially if there was coordination with city police or the FBI. 21OCT18-POST#231

Fort Fun Indiana wrote: It was an attempted insurrection by a Trump-licking crowd that absolutely thought it was going to get its hands on the Vice President and keep him from certifying the election. 21OCT18-POST#232

Correll wrote: It was not an attempted insurrection. - - - That might be what the history books show. IF your side wins, and lies a lot. In that case, I imagine they won't even mention that hundreds of far more serious riots that YOUR side did, in the years prior to 1/6. - - - My point stands. AS a right leaning riot, is was quite the anomaly. The question is why? Lefty infiltrators, possibly working with city police or the FBI would explain it nicely. 21OCT18-POST#235

Fort Fun Indiana wrote: Well, then you are a delusional cultist who is too far gone to discuss any of this. Yes, they were trying to stop the certification of the election. To keep their orange lard and master in power, after an election he lost. Again, this is what history will record, as well as your cult's bizarre behavior. 21OCT18-POST#237

Correll wrote: It was a riot. A violent outburst. It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT18-POST#238 - - - The only death was one of their own, shot to death by a cop. - - - 21OCT18-POST#238 - - - You people are trying hard to gin it up, into a mountain, to distract from your own, far worse riots AND to justify your increasing use of government force against your partisan enemies. 21OCT18-POST#238

NFBW wrote: You are a dishonest dumbass Correll.21DEC16-POST#0835

Dude. YOu are being pathetic. You are still hung up on coming at the same debunked point, and all you have to support it, is retarded word games.


They had "plans" to use the protest to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means.

You are trying to pretend that use silly word games to conflate that, with "plans" for a violent overthrow of the government.


Your position is utterly retarded. As you do not come across as utterly retarded, I can only conclude that your thinking is warped by your deep emotional investment in President Trump being some sort of Evul Supervillain.

That you insist on restating everything others and yourself say, multiple times, you imagine gives your posts more credibility because you posted to posts, both having the word "plan" in them.


That this is your idea of...logic? Debate? ANything that means shit? Is you being seriously fucked in the head.


It seems to be a form of magical thinking. You seem to think if you can construct a imaginary coup out of mispresentations, that that will make what you want to be true, true, or as you put it, "an observable fact".


Hint: Reality does not work that way.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

@Fort Fun Indiana wrote: Yes, they were trying to stop the certification of the election. To keep their orange lard and master in power, after an election he lost. Again, this is what history will record, as well as your cult's bizarre behavior. 21OCT18-POST#237

?Question? for Correll 9thIDdoc TrumpDotes et al : Would it be accurate to substitute “irrational behavior” for “bizarre behavior” in the paragraph above? 21DEC17-POST#0843

@Correll wrote: It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT18-POST#0238

?Question? for Correll 9thIDdoc TrumpDotes et al : Were there meetings at the White House on December 21. 2020 attended by DJT PENCE and Congressional Republicans to develop and coordinate a plan for Pence to refuse to "formalize” the outcome of the election where Biden is declared the winner? 21DEC17-POST#0843

@Correll wrote: Trump and the 1/6 protestors believe that the election was fraudulent. So, in their minds, what RIGHTFULLY should have happened, is that "congress" specifically PENCE, should have refused to "formalize the outcome". 21NOV27-POST#1111

?Question? for Correll 9thIDdoc TrumpDotes et al : When Correll used the phrase “in their minds” is it acknowledging that Trump and his entire contingent of election fraud sympathizers are not basing their belief on observable facts. They are therefore making it clear they do not have evidence of actual fraud? Election fraud exists only in their minds and nowhere else. 21DEC17-POST#0843

@Correll wrote: I find it hard to believe that such a rationalist as you, are just agnostic. That hardly fits with your obsession with "observable facts". 21DEC16 POST#0833

NFBW wrote: Is it a universally acceptable observable fact or is it my opinion that a man named Jody Hice as a member of the US House of Representatives who attended the meeting at the White House on December 21 2020 to discuss plans for Mike Pence to change the outcome of the election from Biden to DJT becoming the winner instead.

20DEC21-Headline: Walton's congressman meets with Trump in White House - - - 21DEC17-POST#0843

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You are trying to pretend that use silly word games to conflate that, with "plans" for a violent overthrow of the government.

NFBW wrote: You are a liar. That is a lie. I pretend no such thing. My points and arguments are made in writing at all times. TRUMP and Rep Hice and other GOP Reps did not “plan” to use violence to overthrow the government that I have observed to be an observable fact. 21DEC17-POST#0844

 

[Correll]

@Fort Fun Indiana wrote: Yes, they were trying to stop the certification of the election. To keep their orange lard and master in power, after an election he lost. Again, this is what history will record, as well as your cult's bizarre behavior. 21OCT18-POST#237

?Question? for Correll 9thIDdoc TrumpDotes et al : Would it be accurate to substitute “irrational behavior” for “bizarre behavior” in the paragraph above? 21DEC17-POST#0843

@Correll wrote: It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT18-POST#0238

?Question? for Correll 9thIDdoc TrumpDotes et al : Were there meetings at the White House on December 21. 2020 attended by DJT PENCE and Congressional Republicans to develop and coordinate a plan for Pence to refuse to "formalize” the outcome of the election where Biden is declared the winner? 21DEC17-POST#0843

@Correll wrote: Trump and the 1/6 protestors believe that the election was fraudulent. So, in their minds, what RIGHTFULLY should have happened, is that "congress" specifically PENCE, should have refused to "formalize the outcome". 21NOV27-POST#1111

?Question? for Correll 9thIDdoc TrumpDotes et al : When Correll used the phrase “in their minds” is it acknowledging that Trump and his entire contingent of election fraud sympathizers are not basing their belief on observable facts. They are therefore making it clear they do not have evidence of actual fraud? Election fraud exists only in their minds and nowhere else. 21DEC17-POST#0843

@Correll wrote: I find it hard to believe that such a rationalist as you, are just agnostic. That hardly fits with your obsession with "observable facts". 21DEC16 POST#0833

NFBW wrote: Is it a universally acceptable observable fact or is it my opinion that a man named Jody Hice as a member of the US House of Representatives who attended the meeting at the White House on December 21 2020 to discuss plans for Mike Pence to change the outcome of the election from Biden to DJT becoming the winner instead.

20DEC21-Headline: Walton's congressman meets with Trump in White House - - - 21DEC17-POST#0843

My god, you are still trying to do it.

The word "plans" refers in these contexts, refers to an intention to do a number of steps or actions to achieve a goal.

You are talking about two very different set of "plans" above and pretending that since both are referred to, with the same word, that they are the same "plans".

That is the most retarded, insane game, you have tried to play, in place of making a sane, rational point, in all the time I have conversed with you on this site.


One set of plans, was the ACTUAL plans, ie the "plan" to fight out the election, though procedure and legislation and law.


The other, that I referred to, was the NON-EXISTENT "plan" of how to take over the country by the act of taking the Capitol by force and then...doing something...to take control of the government.


That you are trying to use our discussing the former, to pretend that we are admitting the existence of the latter, is the most fucked in the head rhetorical device I have every seen.


You should be ashamed.


If that really makes sense to you, you really need to see a doctor about what is wrong with your brain.

 

[Batcat]

Negligent handling of classified information? I suspect you are being kind. The way that reg is written and what is encompassed, most any of us that dealt with that sort information over many years might have been charged with that one, just for innocently and earnestly going about our jobs and moving about. Most don't end up in a position where they have to lie, on the record or shared info over unsecured networks, possibly with people, not even cleared to access it. If running your own server off the government net, in that type of environment or at that level, you are undoubtably guilty, in my book. If you do that, you undoubtedly know what you are doing. Nothing like a good claw hammer to clean up behind you, just like ServerPro, making it like it never happened, eh?

From what I have seen, I have no doubt Hunter was trading and advancing on his dad's name, but whether Joe was ever coming up with the goods or profited to an account is unproven, and I expect that is the crux of the biscuit.

I suspect Donny is indeed guilty as sin, may be indicted, but represented by counsel (probably free to him), would not be tied up, though found guilty in the court of public opinion. I suppose you saw where he had the GOP picked up the tab on $1.6 million of legal fees, for legal situations arising from personal business legal entanglements, totally unrelated to, and before his time in office? Nothing like political donations to allow you to do as you please, on other people's money. You could live like a billionaire.
View attachment 576743

I also handled classified data and was being kind.

I would be rotting in prison today if I would have put classified info on my home computer let alone an unauthorized and unprotected private server.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

NFBW wrote: On DECEMBER 21 2020 at a meeting in the White House with former President Trump several Republican members of Congress discussed a "plan” to use their membership in Congress to protest in order to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means. - - - All I am asking (#2) right now Correll and 9thIDdoc is Do you agree with my statement? If not what is not true? 21DEC16-POST#0847

 

[Correll]

NFBW wrote: On DECEMBER 21 2020 at a meeting in the White House with former President Trump several
Republican members of Congress discussed a "plan” to use their membership in Congress to protest to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means. - - - All I am asking right now Correll and 9thIDdoc is Do you agree with my statement? If not what is not true? 21DEC16-POST#0847

I have no idea if that is true or not, nor do I care.

Also, your question is very unclear. Where they planning to use legislative means or stage a protest?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: I have no idea if that is true or not, nor do I care. 21DEC17-POST#0848

NFBW wrote: Well then Correll 9thIDdoc how about if I put it this way? - - - They had "plans" to use the protest to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means. 21DEC17-POST#0849

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: Also, your question is very unclear. Where they planning to use legislative means or stage a protest 21DEC17-POST#0848

NFBW wrote: DJT and congressional Republicans were planning to use legislative means some were calling it protesting the electoral college votes from certain states being counted on January 6 along with calling for and planning a big and wild peaceful protest on the elliosec outside of the White House also on January 6. 21DEC17-POST#0850

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT17-POST#0238

NFBW wrote: You are wrong Correll. There was a plan to take over. The plan was to be achieved peacefully with ABSOLUTELY no violence needed. The take over plan did not require peaceful protests outside the Capitol to succeed either? Do you agree Correll 9thIDdoc ? 21DEC17-POST#08

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: They had "plans" to use the protest to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means. 21DEC17-POST#0842

NFBW wrote: Was their plan to decertify the entire election Correll 9thIDdoc or just to cancel all the voters in six targeted states that Biden had won? 21DEC17-POST#08

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Correll wrote: I can only conclude that your thinking is warped by your deep emotional investment in President Trump being some sort of evil supervillain. 21DEC17-POST#0842

NFBW wrote: No. Supervillains are fiction - - - I concur with the absolutely most unwarped thinking from the highest politically ranked conservative Republican in office right now.- - - I LOVE Mitch’s super smack down of the most pathetic sore loser buffoon in the history of mankind. 21DEC18-Post#0853

​

"There's no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people that stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president, And having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole, which the defeated presiden21DEC18-Post#08t kept shouting into the largest megaphone on Earth," Mitch McConnell 21DEC18-Post#0853​

​

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9thIDdoc wrote: I'd say that you really need to get down off your soap box more often and actually read and try to understand what others write and say. 21DEC14-POST#0781

NFBW wrote: As you wish. 21DEC18-POST#0854

"There's no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people that stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president, And having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole, which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on Earth," Mitch McConnell 21DEC18-Post#0853

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: I have no idea if that is true or not, nor do I care. 21DEC17-POST#0848

NFBW wrote: Well then Correll 9thIDdoc how about if I put it this way? - - - They had "plans" to use the protest to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means. 21DEC17-POST#0849

And those plans had nothing to do with a forcible take over of the country, but instead with political and legislative process.


That both teh real plans, and the made up plans that people like you fantasize about, are both described with the same word, but that does not mean that the same plans.

You are being....pathetic.

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: Also, your question is very unclear. Where they planning to use legislative means or stage a protest 21DEC17-POST#0848

NFBW wrote: DJT and congressional Republicans were planning to use legislative means some were calling it protesting the electoral college votes from certain states being counted on January 6 along with calling for and planning a big and wild peaceful protest on the elliosec outside of the White House also on January 6. 21DEC17-POST#0850

Yep. And saying "wild" does not mean a coup. you are playing one of the worst of the libtard games, where you imagine all these additional meanings to words, don't tell anyone them, then pretend that they are agreeing to shit they did not actually agree to.


It is an insanely immature form of debate. Nearly infantile.

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT17-POST#0238

NFBW wrote: You are wrong Correll. There was a plan to take over. The plan was to be achieved peacefully with ABSOLUTELY no violence needed. The take over plan did not require peaceful protests outside the Capitol to succeed either? Do you agree Correll 9thIDdoc ? 21DEC17-POST#08

You are talking in circles, making no real point.

There was no plan to take over, ONCE THE RIOTERS STORMED THE CAPITOL. That is what I said.


The way you removed my context from my comment, and then changed it, by addressing it, as though I was commenting on other plans? COMPLETELY CHANGING THE MEANING OF MY POST.

That is you playing absolutely fucking retarded word games.



Any point you make, if you ever make one, based on such a fucking retarded game, will be nothing but a big old pile of fucking shit.

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: They had "plans" to use the protest to put political pressure on Pence and Congress to try to decertify the election and thus win it by political or procedural means. 21DEC17-POST#0842

NFBW wrote: Was their plan to decertify the entire election Correll 9thIDdoc or just to cancel all the voters in six targeted states that Biden had won? 21DEC17-POST#08

Why do you ask?

 

[Correll]

Correll wrote: I can only conclude that your thinking is warped by your deep emotional investment in President Trump being some sort of evil supervillain. 21DEC17-POST#0842

NFBW wrote: No. Supervillains are fiction - - - I concur with the absolutely most unwarped thinking from the highest politically ranked conservative Republican in office right now.- - - I LOVE Mitch’s super smack down of the most pathetic sore loser buffoon in the history of mankind. 21DEC18-Post#0853

​

"There's no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people that stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their president, And having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole, which the defeated presiden21DEC18-Post#08t kept shouting into the largest megaphone on Earth," Mitch McConnell 21DEC18-Post#0853​

​

Except that Trump had had literally hundreds, if not thousands of rallies and protests by his supporters over his campaign and administration and NONE of them had turned into riots.


So, the idea that there is "no question" about this, is obviously wrong.


Also, you finding a republican that agrees with you, doesn't prove shit.


My point stands, you are obviously, deeply and emotionally invested in this shit. And it is fucking with your head.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

NFBW wrote: I cited your words Correll: “There was no plan to take over” … where is the word “stormed” mentioned by you Correll? 21DEC18-POST#299

You are talking in circles, making no real point.

There was no plan to take over, ONCE THE RIOTERS STORMED THE CAPITOL. That is what I said.


The way you removed my context from my comment, and then changed it, by addressing it, as though I was commenting on other plans? COMPLETELY CHANGING THE MEANING OF MY POST.

That is you playing absolutely fucking retarded word games.



Any point you make, if you ever make one, based on such a fucking retarded game, will be nothing but a big old pile of fucking shit.

Correll wrote: It was not an insurrection. There was no plan to take over 21OCT17-POST#0238

NFBW wrote: You are wrong Correll. There was a plan to take over. The plan was to be achieved peacefully with ABSOLUTELY no violence needed. The take over plan did not require peaceful protests outside the Capitol to succeed either? Do you agree Correll9thIDdoc ? 21DEC17-POST#08

Correll wrote: You are talking in circles, making no real point.

There was no plan to take over, ONCE THE RIOTERS STORMED THE CAPITOL. That is what I said.

The way you removed my context from my comment, and then changed it, by addressing it, as though I was commenting on other plans? COMPLETELY CHANGING THE MEANING OF MY POST.

That is you playing absolutely fucking retarded word games.

Any point you make, if you ever make one, based on such a fucking retarded game, will be nothing but a big old pile of fucking shit 21DEC17-POST#0857