Possible Trump Indictment

[Ronson]

That is just a stupid point...

Agreed. The brother thinks an indictment is equal to a guilty verdict? No wonder the western world is in such sad shape.

[Starlight]

It seems you only had issue with one reference, not half.

Of the 5 references in your post, I was absolutely sure of only one (Biden sniffing hair).

Another I was reasonably sure who you were intending to refer to (HRC), but thought the reference to defending her husband was pretty vague and could be applied to almost anyone who has ever stood by her husband after accusations, including Melania Trump or Ginni Thomas.

One reference I'd forgotten (allegedly took showers with his daughter) but from your sentence structure was able to determine it was Biden because I recognized the sniffing hair reference.

One reference could have referred to almost anyone (got her start in politics the old fashion way).

And one reference I just plain don't know what you're talking about (supporting allowing infants who survive abortion to be led alone to die), but kind of assume it's an "I hate abortion, waaaah!!!" thing, so don't really care, and have zero clue whether you're trying to refer to all Dems, all liberals, or someone specific.

So of your 5 references, I'd say about 1-3 of them were sufficiently clear depending on how the borderline ones get adjudicated.

[Diogenes]

Of the 5 references in your post, I was absolutely sure of only one (Biden sniffing hair).

Another I was reasonably sure who you were intending to refer to (HRC), but thought the reference to defending her husband was pretty vague and could be applied to almost anyone who has ever stood by her husband after accusations, including Melania Trump or Ginni Thomas.

One reference I'd forgotten (allegedly took showers with his daughter) but from your sentence structure was able to determine it was Biden because I recognized the sniffing hair reference.

One reference could have referred to almost anyone (got her start in politics the old fashion way).

And one reference I just plain don't know what you're talking about (supporting allowing infants who survive abortion to be led alone to die), but kind of assume it's an "I hate abortion, waaaah!!!" thing, so don't really care, and have zero clue whether you're trying to refer to all Dems, all liberals, or someone specific.

So of your 5 references, I'd say about 1-3 of them were sufficiently clear depending on how the borderline ones get adjudicated.

Democrats regular oppose so called "born alive bills". Seeing as the infant is born despite the attempt at abortion, it has nothing to with "I hate abortion". I do enjoy seeing you fail at references that are commonly understood if one is even somewhat attentive, at least for a native.

[Starlight]

I do enjoy seeing you fail at references that are commonly understood if one is even somewhat attentive, at least for a native.

When my knowledge of the US is enough to point out half a dozen people your vague vague reference might refer to and you pretend that no, it's not your failure to communicate that's the problem, it's my knowing too much about America so knowing too many possible references that's the problem.

Also I don't live in the depths of 4-chan or whatever depraved site it is that you and seer get your stuff from, so I'm not familiar with exactly how you depraved people like to refer to particular politicians.

[Starlight]

Democrats regular oppose so called "born alive bills". Seeing as the infant is born despite the attempt at abortion, it has nothing to with "I hate abortion".

Such bills strike me as virtue signaling nonsense. An infant that is born absurdly pre-term as a result of an attempted abortion is going to die even if it received state of the art medical care. And of course it has to do with you hating abortion, you're not successfully deceiving anyone.

[Diogenes]

When my knowledge of the US is enough to point out half a dozen people your vague vague reference might refer to and you pretend that no, it's not your failure to communicate that's the problem, it's my knowing too much about America so knowing too many possible references that's the problem.

Also I don't live in the depths of 4-chan or whatever depraved site it is that you and seer get your stuff from, so I'm not familiar with exactly how you depraved people like to refer to particular politicians.

Seeing as Harris is the diversity hire of a VP and the issue is Trump's sexual indiscretions, and that the list is about Democrats starting with the alleged President of the US (as Joe thinks Harris is President), the context is sufficient, except for you apparently.

Pray tell, which politician should US evangelical look towards? Who is the most "Christ like" politician in the US?

Edit: I've never been to 4chan or similar sites for information.

[Gondwanaland]

I guess the left wants a civil war...

A civil war over what? Some stupid rich dude with an orange spray tan who can't help but get himself into trouble constantly by breaking the law? Y'all come near me or any real patriot with your civil war and you won't like the end results.

[Ronson]

Ron DeSantis says he will refuse any extradition request after Trump indictment: 'Questionable circumstances'

DeSantis slammed the charges against Trump as 'un-American'

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/des...t-by-manhattan

Interesting development. I'm guessing Trump will turn himself in, as he initially said he would do. It's a lot of free advertising.

[NorrinRadd]

My brother messaged me saying evangelicals in the US are disgusting if any of them continue to support Trump now. LOL, he's so naive: assuming US evangelicals actually care in the slightest about morality like evangelicals in New Zealand do, lol.

As others have said, your brother barfed out a stupid point.

But morbid curiosity compels me to ask: What of significance has changed "now"? We all knew back in 2016 that he was a loud-mouthed jerk with questionable morals and ethics, and we held our noses and voted for him anyway. We were, on the whole, pleasantly surprised by both his behavior and his job performance in office. We tend to put this "indictment" in the same steamin' pile of dookie category as the two bogus impeachments.

So what is different "now"?

[Starlight]

But morbid curiosity compels me to ask: What of significance has changed "now"? We all knew back in 2016 that he was a loud-mouthed jerk with questionable morals and ethics, and we held our noses and voted for him anyway.

Yes, as I said, what my brother fails to realize is that US evangelicals don't give a fig about morality so voted for him in 2016 despite knowing his deep immorality and would vote for him again now with the same knowledge. That's inherently different to New Zealand where religious people would definitely shy away from voting for publicly deeply immoral people.

We were, on the whole, pleasantly surprised by both his behavior and his job performance in office.

Tucker Carlson, in private, on Trump's presidency:

"That's the last four years. We're all pretending we've got a lot to show for it, because admitting what a disaster it's been is too tough to digest. But come on. There isn't really an upside to Trump."

Tucker personally believes Trump's presidency was a disaster, with no upsides, that delivered nothing. He just lies to viewers on air.

We tend to put this "indictment" in the same steamin' pile of dookie category as the two bogus impeachments.

Michael Cohen did prison time for committing an electoral crime for Trump. Should the one who told him to do it and who he did it for, escape justice?

So what is different "now"?

I think nothing, hence why I think my brother is naive. Evangelicals are still going to vote for an immoral person. They are going to lie to themselves and/or believe Tucker's public lies on Fox that Trump had a good administration. And they are going to lie to themselves that this is just a politically motivated prosecution, instead of realizing the fact that he got away with it until now was the politically motivated part. So my brother is naive because he overestimates both the intelligence and values of US evangelicals.

[eider]

Several polls demonstrated that blacks either want the same level of policing or even more but there is this to contend with

More of your black/white muck trawled up?

People want law enforcement, they just don't want bent law enforcement.

[eider]

There have been occasions where one community or another was able to successfully reduce the police presence in their neighborhoods, which predictably resulted in increased crime, followed by those same communities bitterly complaining about the reduced police presence in their neighborhoods. A classic example of "Be careful what you wish for, because you might get it."

Oh yes...... humans can blow-hot, blow-cold..... Snap decisions driven by heat and much regretted once the cold sets in.

[eider]

About the Trump indictment..............
Who chose the Grand-Jury?
Can the defence/prosecution recuse any persons from selection?

[seer]

A civil war over what? Some stupid rich dude with an orange spray tan who can't help but get himself into trouble constantly by breaking the law? Y'all come near me or any real patriot with your civil war and you won't like the end results.

It is not about Trump per se, it further divides the country. The trans thing, the possible gun grab, are all tied up in this. I support Desantis, but the left is using questionable charges to try and remove the front runner of the opposing party, and a former president. It is unprecedented in US history. It will not go over well. I was a Democrat most of my adult life (no longer) and what has been happening to Trump from day one really is a witch hunt - and I think you know that Gond...

[seer]

So if Trump goes to Jail does the Secret Service go with him?