American Politics

[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2727037]This post is beautiful! I think I will print it & frame it.

So, PV Acknowledges my critical point that the reason the Secret Service were not asked to testify in front of Nancy's inquisition is that their firsthand testimony would have been exculpatory because their testimony would have completely contradicted the third hand testimony of the woman. I am not even going to mention her name anymore. Note: some posters on this thread may not know what exculpatory means. Ha ha.

In any case PV and I agree on something. Unbelievable, but apparently true. These are his words not mine. "If somebody flat out lies in your presence about something you said, you call bullshit immediately. " Absolutely right, and that is just what the two secret service agents riding in the car with Trump on Jan 6 did. They went public with it within hours of the woman's testimony and stated categorically that what the woman told the committee never happened. They also volunteered to testify under oath in front of the committee to what they witnessed firsthand that day in the limo. But the committee did not call them. Game set match. The committee hearings are nothing more than choreographed soviet style show trial. A propaganda ballet.

Note to our literary challenged radical bm's: my reference to a "soviet style show trial" is an analogy..[/QUOTE]Did Bobby Engle dispute Ornato's story to Cassidy Hutchinson [B]while she was in the room[/B]. Nope. Did these two morons testify [B]under oath[/B]? Nope.

Case closed.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2727158]Did Bobby Engle dispute Ornato's story to Cassidy Hutchinson [B]while she was in the room[/B]. Nope. Did these two morons testify [B]under oath[/B]? Nope.

Case closed.[/QUOTE]I see that Axel isn't engaging with the content of you and Xpartan's rebuttals but is only repeating the fallacious and simplistic right wing nut media talking points over and over. He's not capable of anymore so he marches a long like a good sheep with blinders on.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2727110]Can you read for comprehension?

When the Mango Mussolini said to inject disinfectant, trump supporters immediately began making bleach martinis. Because they believed what he said. words matter.[/QUOTE]Again with the bleach?

Let's test your theory if words matter.

You are not going to get Covid if you get these vaccinations. [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wST_Oo1osdA[/URL].

I have another one, "Putin cannot stay in power. " [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agEaCr6InEM[/URL].

"The American people think there is inflation because the government is spending more money, simply not true. " [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTPX1ejoYdg[/URL].

As for American troops in Ukraine, Biden said "You are going to see when you go there (to Ukraine)" [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RER3Q8JAFbE[/URL].

Nah, your theory does not hold up about words meaning things. What you mean to say is when Republicans say something, words matter. That does not apply to Democrats. Democrats can be inaccurate and lie all they want.

That depends on what your definition of is is should be the motto of the Democratic Party.

KABUL — Biden is demanding answers after a precision drone strike in Afghanistan actually killed a real terrorist leader named Ayman al-Zawahiri instead of a car full of innocent children, as is tradition.

"Come on, folks, we all know what drone strikes are for," said the angry President to an LOL Surprise Doll he mistook for a member of the press. "We conduct drone strikes to kill civilians in the Middle East in hopes of stirring up multigenerational hatred for the USA Which will lead to endless war and help feed the military-industrial complex! How on earth did this actual terrorist get caught up in the mix?

Sources in the CIA revealed they briefly deviated from the standard procedure of killing innocents with Hellfire missiles to kill a terrorist, as Biden's poll numbers are down and people like it when presidents kill terrorists.

"The death of this austere religious scholar, while tragic, could produce a 3 to 4 point bump in Biden's approval ratings in time for the midterms," said Fitch Biggenslimes, a columnist for the Washington Post. "That's what really matters here. ".

Government officials assured the president they will return to their normal business of blowing up chai tea cafes and busses full of aid workers this week.

UPDATE: New reports confirm Ayman al-Zawahiri is still alive and the precision strike actually killed a busload of orphans.

[QUOTE=Villainy;2726348]You are absolutely correct. I would say it slightly differently but it all comes to the same place.

AxelHeyst has been watching too many episodes of Law & Order. Hearsay may not be accepted in a trial. But absolutely it is acceptable in a Congressional Hearing. What Axel didn't know is that the Congressional Hearing is not a trial. They are functioning like a Grand Jury and listening to evidence. Hearsay may lead to witnesses with direct involvement or knowledge of the events. So while "hearsay evidence" may not be used at a future trial, the Congressional Committee is absolutely entitled to listen to it and issue subpoenas to others who may have direct knowledge.

If charges are referred and a trial occurs later that "hearsay" may or may not be useable. Generally not, however there are exceptions..[/QUOTE]I can't see Axel being able to follow an episode of Law and Order. He's just regurgitating what he's read off right wingnut blogs, complete with all the asinine red baiting while ignoring all rebuttals. But what else do Trumpists know how to do besides play the victim? That said there are many exceptions to the hearsay rule so it's often admitted in trials. I've made that point several times and of course it's been continually ignored.

[URL]https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_803[/URL]

Also you are correct about the different context, aims, and rules in Congressional hearings. Trumpists were invited but chose rather to whine and throw rocks from the sidelines with fallacious arguments / play the victim. It's true that Jim Jordan wasn't invited but he's grossly dishonest plus extremely rude and disruptive. The hearings would have seen many delays with him in the room constantly filibustering, interrupting, and trying to shout people down. The Trumpists could have chosen other, more cultured adherents to send to the Committee but did as six year olds do, took their toys and went home.

P.S. At the end of the day Jordan is a wuss like all bullies. It's hilarious when Maxine Waters tells him to shut his mouth and he complies like a good little boy. LOL.

Nor have I seen a clip of Biden saying it sourced from FUX News and the like.

Where do you imagine you saw and heard it?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2726773]Yeah, there were hundreds of articles about dozens of phone calls to poison control. I am surprised you dumb Dems did not impeach Trump over that.

And you are complaining about that? I thought you wanted all Trump's amoral, racist, and evil supporters dead. Maybe now you should not impeach Trump but give him a medal. Can you make up your mind about why Trump is evil?

By the way, where are all the articles about people who died from Covid after Biden said you could not get it if vaccinated? Where are those hundreds of articles?

When a Republican talks, words mean things. When a Democrat talks, what does the word words mean? Does that not depend on what your definition of is is?[/QUOTE]There are tons of videos showing Trump repeatedly assuring the world that his Trump's Pandemic virus "will go away without a vaccine" as well as the one of him being deadly serious that the injection of disinfectant (bleach) to cure it ought to be looked into instead.

Have you got a link for Biden saying, "you can not get Covid if you are vaccinated"?

[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2726924]Xpartan, in order to defend Pelosi's disgraceful congressional committee proceedings, you are not only misrepresenting what I posted, you are dancing around what actually occurred in the house of Representatives. Why won't you address the relevant issue? Why were the two eyewitnesses to whatever actually occurred in the limo not called to testify under oath? Your silence about the Secret Service agent's firsthand information being ignored by the committee and your foolish attempt to dance around the issue confirms your absolute political bias and concedes the point that the House committee is not interested in finding the truth about what actually occurred on Jan 6. Shame on you and shame on your party.

Unfortunately, from your point of view these hearings failed. Nobody tuned in to watch and the hearings failed to distract the American people from the colossal failures and outrageous behavior of the Biden administration. Namely the economy "stupid", the border chaos, the violence in the streets of all Democratic party controlled cities, and the communist critical race theory and trany indoctrination being forced on our school children. So, November is fast approaching. I can't wait.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=PVMonger;2727158]Did Bobby Engle dispute Ornato's story to Cassidy Hutchinson [B]while she was in the room[/B]. Nope. Did these two morons testify [B]under oath[/B]? Nope.

Case closed.[/QUOTE]As if, LOL!

He'll keep coming back with new absurdities, new deflections, more circular logic and even bigger words to try and align facts with his twisted political beliefs. But at least, he seems to quit that "hearsay" bullshit.

Legendary comedian, Jon Stewart, blasts the GOP/QOP Senate members w/r to a bill they blocked and stalled, that provides healthcare to [B]veterans who've suffered long-term illness from the burn pits[/B] from their service. Not long after, Mr. Stewart's drubbing, GOP/QOP Senate members do an about-face, with their tails tucked between their legs.

[QUOTE] ... In the days since the GOP stalled the bill, Stewart was unflinching. He went in front of cameras on Thursday to express what many Americans were feeling. Regarding Republicans about-face on the bill, Stewart said he was used to the ‘hypocrisy,’ ‘lies’ and ‘cowardice’ of politicians, [b]but I am not used to the cruelty.[/b] [/QUOTE][URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/08/01/jon-stewart-veterans-burn-pits-gop-cruelty/[/URL]

On the flip-side, it was said, the Dems could stand to take notes, from Jon Stewart, when it came to Republican cruelty. Couldn't agree more...kkkk!

[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2727152]So now that it can no longer be hidden or denied that there were eyewitnesses willing to come forth and testify under oath as to what actually took place in the famous or rather infamous limo ride, Woke Marxist propaganda agents must set to work trashing the two secret service agent's character and credibility so that their sworn testimony can be called into question on Marxist media outlets. The 2 agents have not even testified yet, but the Marxists are already attacking them. It seems very Soviet Union to me. The two secret service agents are lucky they have not been shipped off to the Aleutian Islands.

Of course, we must believe the Party's witness and her 2nd or 3rd hand, hearsay, testimony because woman never lie for political gain or personal reasons except when they accuse Woke politicians of misconduct. But for those of us who have not yet been forced to become card carrying members of the Woke Marxist New Democrat Party, an interesting question remains: who told her about what happened on the Limo ride? Another third person who saw nothing or someone actually in the Limo? But I guess this is just a trivial, unimportant question for party loyalists like yourself since we common folk are expected to shut up, fall in line, and follow the party's directive Soviet Style.

You are back on my ignore list, poncho.[/QUOTE]As usual, you are misrepresenting "hearsay". Again. You have been told several times what hearsay is, what it isn't and when hearsay can be accepted. You are been provided with sources from a legal perspective. Yet you refuse to listen, evidently preferring to bury your head in the sand and raise it only to listed to FUX Snooze. Repeating a lie often enough does not make it the truth, regardless of what Goebbles or the Mango Mussolini said.

Furthermore, you have refused to acknowledge that any sane person would speak up [B]immediately[/B] when they are party to a lie being told. And by "party", I mean when they are present in the room while the lie was told. Did Bobby Engle [B]immediately dispute[/B] Ornato's recounting of what happened in the SUV? Nope. Any sane person would. I would. You would. But not Engle. No siree. Not Ornato. No siree. What they did was wait until after Hutchinson's testimony to dispute what was said. Hogwash. Those are [B]not[/B] the actions of someone who is blameless. Someone who is blameless would [B]immediately refute a falsehood[/B].

Again with the "woke" term. When will you realize that the opposite of "woke" is "asleep". Evidently, RethugliKKKants prefer to go through life asleep at the switch.

This is a superb discussion (by 2 USANs) on equality.

First the present the case for equality, then they expose it for the myth that it is. And finally the present what an alternative and better world would look like, particularly for the USA but also for the whole world.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ly4w_FHf_Q[/URL]

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2727104]You have no idea what anyone would do, and it is a sorry ass excuse. With Russiagate, with the Kyle Rittenhouse trial and how it was covered, and with the Brett Kavanaugh hearing, you dumb Dems lost all credibility. I did not even like Kavanaugh that much. There are like five Catholics on SCOTUS already, and he is another blue blood type whose views on the 4th amendment may be at odds with mine but what you dumb Dems did not get is that after that flimsy bullshit feminist hit job on him, a repeat of Clarence Thomas, he had my support.

So we see a movie like 2000 mules and a woman who lives in another state put ballots into a ballot box wearing gloves, threw them out, and the pathetic excuse given, "it was during a pandemic don't you know", we just sit in shock. No one knows why she was wearing gloves, so why do you fools give out such an explanation?

Thing is PVM, we do not know what the fuck she was doing. She could have been stuffing the ballot box for Trump right? But you dumb Dems do not care if there was an election fraud. All you care about is the result, and if that woman is deposed, there is a chance the result you desire comes into question.[/QUOTE]Facts? You wouldn't know a "fact" if it sat on your face. But you know all about "alternative facts".

"Russiagate", as you have termed it, was covered in the Mueller Report. How many people were [B]indicted[/B]? To my recollection, it was a non-zero number, wasn't it? What was it that Mueller said? As I recall, it was something to the effect of "If we could have said that Donnie the Dumbass was innocent, we would have said it. We didn't say that he was innocent. " You could read the Mueller Report but I know you won't.

All you have is conspiracy theories. You don't have facts, you have theories. Rudy G even admitted it. "We have lots of theories but no evidence". [URL]https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3531342-rusty-bowers-says-giuliani-told-him-weve-got-lots-of-theories-we-just-dont-have-the-evidence/[/URL].

Even Bill Barr admitted that "2000 Mules" was bullshit. But RethugliKKKants keep bringing it up as proof. [URL]https://theweek.com/jan-6-committee/1014350/barr-talks-trump-the-big-lie-and-2000-mules-during-2nd-jan-6-hearing[/URL].

And the issue with all of this is that RethugliKKKants keep trying to convince everybody that their evidence-free "proof" is fact. The only people they convince with this nonsense is other RethugliKKKants who have been breathing their own exhaust for so long that they think it smells good. You keep going down the same rabbit-hole and think that you find something different every time you do. You don't. It is just same stuff over-and-over-again.

And you are still doing it. That's why we tune you out.

[QUOTE=AxelHeyst;2727037]This post is beautiful! I think I will print it & frame it.

So, PV Acknowledges my critical point that the reason the Secret Service were not asked to testify in front of Nancy's inquisition is that their firsthand testimony would have been exculpatory because their testimony would have completely contradicted the third hand testimony of the woman. I am not even going to mention her name anymore. Note: some posters on this thread may not know what exculpatory means. Ha ha.

In any case PV and I agree on something. Unbelievable, but apparently true. These are his words not mine. "If somebody flat out lies in your presence about something you said, you call bullshit immediately. " Absolutely right, and that is just what the two secret service agents riding in the car with Trump on Jan 6 did. They went public with it within hours of the woman's testimony and stated categorically that what the woman told the committee never happened. They also volunteered to testify under oath in front of the committee to what they witnessed firsthand that day in the limo. But the committee did not call them. Game set match. The committee hearings are nothing more than choreographed soviet style show trial. A propaganda ballet..[/QUOTE][B]"If somebody flat out lies in your presence about something you said, you call bullshit immediately. "[/B] (highlights are mine).

Here's the definition of "immediately". [URL]https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/immediately[/URL].

Please be so kind as to point out where in the definition it says that an 18 months wait is "immediate".

When you call somebody out for a comment, at least have the decency to know what you're talking about. Waiting 18 months (which is what Ornato and Engle did) to rebut something is certainly not "immediately".

Had Engle refuted the story that Ornato told Hutchinson [B]immediately, while Hutchinson was still in the room[/B], we wouldn't be having this argument. Did he refute the story "immediately"? Nope. Did he refute it 18 months later? Yes. Under oath? Nope.

But, according to you, 18 months is "immediate". FYI, it is not.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2726773]By the way, where are all the articles about people who died from Covid after Biden said you could not get it if vaccinated? Where are those hundreds of articles?[/QUOTE]Yeah.

Where are the articles filled with Elvis's "alternate" quotes of Biden that were never said?

[blue][Deleted by Admin][/blue]

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2727110]Can you read for comprehension?

When the Mango Mussolini said to inject disinfectant, trump supporters immediately began making bleach martinis. Because they believed what he said. [B]words matter[/B].[/QUOTE]Among republicans there are lots and lots of suckers.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2727110]They also believed the Orange Moron when he said that Mexico would pay for the wall. Nobody else did, of course, but trump supporters did.[/QUOTE]TrumpShit supporters are the BIGGEST SUCKERS of all time.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2727110]They also believed Hair Furor when he said that he had proof of the election being stolen. Nobody else did, of course, but trump supporters did.[/QUOTE]TrumpShit voters are the EASIEST SUCKERS to fool ever again and again and again & AGAIN.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2727110]They believed Cheeto Tweeto when he said that Chinese thermostats changed votes. Or was it Italian satellites? Nobody else did, of course, but trump supporters did.[/QUOTE]All you can do is laugh hard at these naive suckers.

Unfortunately, America is burdened by these suckers.