So...How's it going?

[Nobody]

Even Dems are now saying that Trumps "hush money" trial is BS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...e4e24a86&ei=43

That is one dem, not multiple, not a cadre, not a group, one, as in singular, in an editorial piece, which is fine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And when your job is to prosecute crimes, as the district attorney, then your opinion determines who and what is prosecuted. Simple as that.

[Pyrate Jim]

An echo starts with one voice.

[Tunaman]

An echo starts with one voice.

"he is not going to be president is he?" "No. We will stop him" FBI Lisa Page to her lover FBI Peter Strok.
Why are these democrats not in jail?

[Nobody]

"he is not going to be president is he?" "No. We will stop him" FBI Lisa Page to her lover FBI Peter Strok.
Why are these democrats not in jail?

What is their crime(s)?

Oh wait, since their kerfuffle happened during the last admin, with Barr's DOJ, why didn't Barr prosecute them?

But one thing I believe that all foxnews/Maga fans seem to have forgotten is that you need to identify a ceime, find evidence of that crime, and then find out who or whom has performed that crime. Naming a person or persons and then trying to pin a crime on them does not work in a normal working justice system.

[Pyrate Jim]

What is their crime(s)?

But one thing I believe that all foxnews/Maga fans seem to have forgotten is that you need to identify a ceime, find evidence of that crime, and then find out who or whom has performed that crime. Naming a person or persons and then trying to pin a crime on them does not work in a normal working justice system.

Seems to be working in NY against Trump. But then as you say, that's not a normal working justice system. Prosecution has yet to specify a criminal charge, merely allegations.
Did Trump have an affair with Stormy Daniels? Not a crime even if it actually happened, which Trump denies.
Did Stormy sign an NDA as well as an affidavit denying it? Not a crime, unless She was using blackmail to get the money, which would violate the NDA.
Look back to Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski, or Clinton paying Paula Jones $800,000, or maybe the Joe Biden and Tara Reade scandal. Where's the crime?

They call it a "hush money" trial, with no victim and no crime. Only a gag order denying first amendment rights for Trump.
Maybe Election Interference in 2016. Really? From the National Enquirer? Oh, yeah. Because they have so much influence. Their whole program of "catch & kill" is predicated on picking up stories already out there and refusing to publish them. Prosecutions' first witness, Pecker, admitted on the stand that Trump was unaware of all the discussions and agreements between Himself and Cohen.
It's not like Trump went and paid some russian operative to invent a dossier to discredit his opponent or instructed social media to hide or deny stories about a laptop.
The whole trial is a lie wrapped in a sham wrapped in a hoax, covered in distraction and sprinkled with misdirection. It lacks any sense of justice and exists only as some pathetically thin attempt to prevent the leading GOP candidate from campaigning. It isn't working.

It does, however, keep attention off the real problems. I mean, here we are discussing that rather than pointing out the true issues plaguing this country.

[Nobody]

Seems to be working in NY against Trump. But then as you say, that's not a normal working justice system. Prosecution has yet to specify a criminal charge, merely allegations. they don't have to make allegations, thry have indictments and the crimes are falsifying business records and election interference
Did Trump have an affair with Stormy Daniels? Not a crime even if it actually happened, which Trump denies. except when you use campaign finaces to payoff a person to not tell their story
Did Stormy sign an NDA as well as an affidavit denying it? Not a crime, unless She was using blackmail to get the money, which would violate the NDA. if an NDA was broken, where are thr charges against Stormy Daniels?
Look back to Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski, or Clinton paying Paula Jones $800,000, or maybe the Joe Biden and Tara Reade scandal. Where's the crime? you tell me? But stay on target, this is about trump, not the Clinton's or Biden. If a crime was committed, then you file suit to bring those crimes to court. Just like the Biden impeachment, it doesn'twork to name the crime thrn try to find the evidence that fits.

They call it a "hush money" trial, with no victim and no crime. Only a gag order denying first amendment rights for Trump. the hush money name is misleading, I'll give you that, but the actual charges are true. If they didn'thave merit, then any of the attempts to get the charges dropped or removed would have worked
Maybe Election Interference in 2016. Really? From the National Enquirer? Oh, yeah. Because they have so much influence. Their whole program of "catch & kill" is predicated on picking up stories already out there and refusing to publish them. Prosecutions' first witness, Pecker, admitted on the stand that Trump was unaware of all the discussions and agreements between Himself and Cohen. statute of limitations is still intact, so the charges are legitimate, which is why trump wanted to be re-elected so that he can either kill the case or run out the limitations statute.
It is not a question of what publication has more or better influence, but the fact that during an election, this information was denied to the public, hence the election interference, the true face of the charges, not the "catch and kill", not the affair, not the adultery, or the use of a media source to do one's bidding

Also, the idea of "catch and kill" is to not suppress stories already out there, it is to catch those stories BEFORE they break and to kill them so that story/news/narrative can not be heard when it could have real ramifications.
It's not like Trump went and paid some russian operative to invent a dossier to discredit his opponent or instructed social media to hide or deny stories about a laptop.
The whole trial is a lie wrapped in a sham wrapped in a hoax, covered in distraction and sprinkled with misdirection. It lacks any sense of justice and exists only as some pathetically thin attempt to prevent the leading GOP candidate from campaigning. It isn't working. if it is so false, then the charges, would have been thrown out. If the prosecution is being malicious, then the courts would have thrown out the charges. If the justice system is so broken, then we would not be into a trial. If you believe that this is wrong, and trump is innocent, then it but takes only 1 juror to have been swayed in the trial to prove that trump is innocent. You fear is palatable that not only your belief but your choice is worse than you can imagine.

Also, there is no law saying that you have to campaign. There is no right to campaign like there is to vote, or right to a speedy trial. Cry some more.

It does, however, keep attention off the real problems. I mean, here we are discussing that rather than pointing out the true issues plaguing this country. if holding someone to account that defrauded the people is not a real problem, in the midst of other election interferenceand election denial of some citizens of this country then what is the problem? Also, this is but one case, and the other government agencies are still doing their jobs. If you can only concentrate on one topic, well good thing you aren'tin charge.

Red red wine, you make me feel so fine

[going_home]

Red red wine, you make me feel so fine

Ok that explains a lot....

[Pyrate Jim]

More like red whine.
I've collected a few articles I want to share and comment on.
In the meantime, here's a juicy one;
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...8482b0dc3&ei=5

[Nobody]

More like red whine.
I've collected a few articles I want to share and comment on.
In the meantime, here's a juicy one;
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mark...8482b0dc3&ei=5

You do realize that that article is bad for trump, right? The same way that the Treasury dept got the tax evasion on Capone, this is akin to the same thing. When a squeaky wheel keeps making noise, someone is bound to look at it more closely. When that happens, they bring out the fine tooth comb. And since he has already been found guilty to fraud, what is there to say that he wouldn't get hit with this as well?

Now, if you are counting on the house, it would take but 2 republicans(by last count) to move over to the dems' side to get this through the house. Senate, is another story. So this ,by my count has more legs to stand on.

Now I really don't think that trump would end up paying this bill, if it were to pass. I mean he us spending an awful lot of his and other people's money in the various court cases already started. Come on, he still owes E.Jean Carrol half a hillion alone. Taking an eighth of his supposed wealth and then a fifth? That us a mighty hit, with more yet to come.

[Loguzzzzzz]

You do realize that that article is bad for trump, right? The same way that the Treasury dept got the tax evasion on Capone, this is akin to the same thing. When a squeaky wheel keeps making noise, someone is bound to look at it more closely. When that happens, they bring out the fine tooth comb. And since he has already been found guilty to fraud, what is there to say that he wouldn't get hit with this as well?

Now, if you are counting on the house, it would take but 2 republicans(by last count) to move over to the dems' side to get this through the house. Senate, is another story. So this ,by my count has more legs to stand on.

Now I really don't think that trump would end up paying this bill, if it were to pass. I mean he us spending an awful lot of his and other people's money in the various court cases already started. Come on, he still owes E.Jean Carrol half a hillion alone. Taking an eighth of his supposed wealth and then a fifth? That us a mighty hit, with more yet to come.

Your over-generalizations are ridiculous. Did you even read the article? From your post I would say....NO!

[Pyrate Jim]

Of course He didn't read it, it's all about the big letters at the top. The headline said one thing, the content another.
Sometimes the set-up is too easy. You just need the right bait.

[Nobody]

Why of course I read it. No, seriously, I did. While I doubt that it would ever come to pass. The one thing you can guarantee that millionaires will do is, to make sure that nothing will effect their money, regardless if it will hurt or help a rival. Hence why there are no laws about insider trading. Hence why the entire senate doesn't pay income taxes. He hence why they will increase their pay way above the work they do.

So the partisan cudgel that the article makes the tax look so bad, is just that. It posses on the fear of it. Fear of what it would do to the GOP representative and all his troubles, and fear of being made out as, exactly that, a bad boy stick, heightening the political divide.

So don't come to me about not reading the article. I hate to say, I do read all the articles that Jym posts, as they are funny at times. Some are hilarious, and some I don't think Jym reads, or is it Jym reads the header and thinks it's something else.

[Pyrate Jim]

O.K.
So, here's one where you can ignore the headline and go straight to the first sentence.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/st...d7e9fee6&ei=25

Immediately starts off with the fear of "global Warming" ~

Water scarcity as a result of human-caused global heating is an increasing concern, and California state regulators are getting ahead of the curve after voting on a probation to control groundwater supplies.

This is why we need more Government? To blame the farmers for trying to feed millions of people, the people who now need the water more than the farms is a self-correcting problem.
The total water supply has not changed, the fact that millions more people are sharing what is available is human caused, just not by global warming. That's lying and fear mongering for the purpose of taking more money from productive people. Like I said, it will swing the other way, and correct itself.
After all, restricting water to farms in favor of housing can be predicted.
Farms can't afford water to grow crops, farms are forced to close. No farms = No food. No food = People starve. People starve = less demand. Less demand = more water for crops.
And it was voted on unanimously.

[Nobody]

This is why we need more Government? To blame the farmers for trying to feed millions of people, the people who now need the water more than the farms is a self-correcting problem.

Who said anything about more government? This is the government doing it's job. Though farmers are growing the food, it is also their choice and sometimes their demand to grow crops that require a high demand for water, which is a limited resource in that area. So instead of understanding what the area can support, those farmers pigheadedly, choose to use more water than the area supports? 2ho needs the food they grow when there are no people to eat it?

The total water supply has not changed, the fact that millions more people are sharing what is available is human caused, just not by global warming.

The water supply has changed. When the area is in a drought warning, that means that water needs to be rationed. When something is rationed, it is not because there is an abundance, it means that demand outweighs the supply.

That's lying and fear mongering for the purpose of taking more money from productive people. Like I said, it will swing the other way, and correct itself.

Why do you say that the people are less productive than the farmer? Why are you pre-judging any of this? And why even think that the government is only doing this to make money off the people? What a stupid statement.

After all, restricting water to farms in favor of housing can be predicted.

Oh yes, all those farmers in Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, etc; suffer the same treatment. It's like no one likes farmers anymore.

Farms can't afford water to grow crops, farms are forced to close. No farms = No food. No food = People starve. People starve = less demand. Less demand = more water for crops.

Over simplify much? Ever look at the various exceptions to water usage from places like golf courses, hotels with pools, and even residents with pools? Again, when there is a finite resource, just because you want to do something, doesn't mean that you have to.

And it was voted on unanimously.

Well, if the crops can't go out and vote, it's not the people's fault.

[Pyrate Jim]

This one has a great headline;
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/po...9df05615&ei=22

Reading through, not a single mention of Kent State if you want to speak of lessons not learned.

[Loguzzzzzz]

Who said anything about more government? This is the government doing it's job. Though farmers are growing the food, it is also their choice and sometimes their demand to grow crops that require a high demand for water, which is a limited resource in that area. So instead of understanding what the area can support, those farmers pigheadedly, choose to use more water than the area supports? 2ho needs the food they grow when there are no people to eat it?



The water supply has changed. When the area is in a drought warning, that means that water needs to be rationed. When something is rationed, it is not because there is an abundance, it means that demand outweighs the supply.



Why do you say that the people are less productive than the farmer? Why are you pre-judging any of this? And why even think that the government is only doing this to make money off the people? What a stupid statement.



Oh yes, all those farmers in Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, etc; suffer the same treatment. It's like no one likes farmers anymore.



Over simplify much? Ever look at the various exceptions to water usage from places like golf courses, hotels with pools, and even residents with pools? Again, when there is a finite resource, just because you want to do something, doesn't mean that you have to.



Well, if the crops can't go out and vote, it's not the people's fault.

To quote Saturday Night Live / Dan Aykroyd, "Jane (Doug) you ignorant slut!".

There you go again, prognosticating on things you know little of.
Where's the drought? Not here in California or probably Texas...
California Water

Everything you posted here is "FAIL"

[Nobody]

There you go again, prognosticating on things you know little of.
Where's the drought? Not here in California or probably Texas...
California Water

Everything you posted here is "FAIL"

You read so little. Never said that Ca. was in a drought, but per the article, they're talking about drought conditions. So, once again, how is that reading comprehension or are you going to blame this on not having your readers?

[Loguzzzzzz]

You read so little. Never said that Ca. was in a drought, but per the article, they're talking about drought conditions. So, once again, how is that reading comprehension or are you going to blame this on not having your readers?

I read it, you must read every third word. I didn't say you said California, I asked you where the drought was, mentioning that California is not in a drought condition. Did you miss that or were you reading every third word again.....
...and you challenge my reading comprehension???
Laughable

[Pyrate Jim]

Couple of cute ones, first to the college campus situation. This is how you deal with them;
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/co...98113d29&ei=17
Now, I don't care if it's paint or bullets but once the trigger is pulled, when you jump in front of the spraygun...You're asking to get painted.

And this one, a Joe Biden interview on CNN;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50IRZ054D0
At about five minutes into this "response" the President claims that the inflation rate the day he took office was nine percent. And repeated it. In a CNN interview.
C'mon, Joe! Americans have an (admittedly unreasonable) expectation that a President will tell them the truth. Telling lies is inherent to politics, but there is a threshold above which citizens will not abide.

[Nobody]

And this one, a Joe Biden interview on CNN;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j50IRZ054D0
At about five minutes into this "response" the President claims that the inflation rate the day he took office was nine percent. And repeated it. In a CNN interview.
C'mon, Joe! Americans have an (admittedly unreasonable) expectation that a President will tell them the truth. Telling lies is inherent to politics, but there is a threshold above which citizens will not abide.

I find that funny. Either you have no mirrors(political ones) or you were born a few days ago.

I say that because of the 4 years of the trump admin and subsequent years since. Here is a man that has lied about everything.

Infrastructure week
New healthcare system to replace Obama care
How tall he is
His weight
His taxes
Not taking donor money for campaigns
Caring about the American worker
January 6th
The election

Need I go on? Cause, maybe Biden got the number wrong. Maybe he lied about it. All I know is that a Biden lie is way less damaging than a trump truth.

[Pyrate Jim]

All I know is that a Biden lie is way less damaging than a trump truth.

I should have realized you would prefer one man's lies over another man's truth.
After all, you've already admitted to telling lies here merely to promote yourself.

Tell me, why is it that Trump has never been charged with insurrection over January 6th?

[Nobody]

Tell me, why is it that Trump has never been charged with insurrection over January 6th?

I don't know. I can't keep up with all the numerous courtcases, whether they are state, federal or what they are covering in the multitude of serious charges against him. All I know is, those lawyers know what and how to do their jobs and other than how llong it's taking, the wheels of justice are still moving slowly. I guess if you don't want to be associated with criminal types, don't surround yourself with people doing crimes.

[Pyrate Jim]

I don't know. I can't keep up with all the numerous courtcases, whether they are state, federal or what they are covering in the multitude of serious charges against him.

Really? I find that an odd statement since you seem to have pretty strong opinions about them. Let me get you up to speed.
The Jan 6th case brought by special counsel Jack Smith is currently hung up in the Supreme Court over Presidential Immunity.
Federal Judge Eileen Canon has postponed the documents case indefinitely.
Fani Willis messed up in the Georgia case and appeals court is now reviewing that before proceeding.
And the NY "hush money" case? You would think that for the first time ever prosecution of a President of the United States we would have serious people bringing forth serious facts and serious charges.
Instead, we have a porn star, a perjurer, a DA in ill-fitting suits, a Judge with appearances of impropriety and bias, a vague and as yet undisclosed criminal charge, and a Pecker.

[Nobody]

Really? I find that an odd statement since you seem to have pretty strong opinions about them. Let me get you up to speed.

Sorry for thinking on my own and not sharing a single brain cell that says that trump will fix everything.

The Jan 6th case brought by special counsel Jack Smith is currently hung up in the Supreme Court over Presidential Immunity.

But not dead. I feel that SCOTUS, in order to not give a statement to either side, has come up with the strategy of of they don't make a judgment, then there is no question of partisanship. But no matter what, the time will come when the delays will run out and they will have to rule.

Federal Judge Eileen Canon has postponed the documents case indefinitely.

Indefinitely but not permanently. While the weakest judicial, not substantive, case, it is full of questionable actions done by judge Cannon. So while justice delayed is justice denied, it like the case in front of SCOTUS, will come to terms soon enough.

Fani Willis messed up in the Georgia case and appeals court is now reviewing that before proceeding.

But it is not delayed on any count. To attack everything but the case itself is not a show of innocence, IMHO. So trying to remove the DA, is a viable strategy, it does nothing about the case itself. And since this is still a state case, no matter what Trump does, he can't stop it from happening.

And the NY "hush money" case? You would think that for the first time ever prosecution of a President of the United States we would have serious people bringing forth serious facts and serious charges.
Instead, we have a porn star, a perjurer, a DA in ill-fitting suits, a Judge with appearances of impropriety and bias, a vague and as yet undisclosed criminal charge, and a Pecker.

Ok, I hate the name "Hush Money", as that act has nothing to do with the actual crime and thus gives a false identifier as paying hush money is not a crime.

The funny thing is, adultery is a crime. In fact it is against the law in New York as well as 15 other states. As I read it, it is more towards civil cases and not state. But that is not part of thr indictment.

The actual crime is falsifying business records, which doesn't sound that serious, except when it*becomes a felony*if the defendant falsified the records with the intent of furthering a separate underlying crime. That underlying crime is of course election fraud. Sidenote, it is sweet irony that the only election frauds found have been committed by republicans,

As much as you might want "serious people", you can't pick who is brought to trial/court. So the cast of characters is merely who was involved in the crime. So have no fear, those charges are serious. The possibility of jail time is as serious as it gets. And I see the NY case as, a sum of it's parts do not equal the whole. Adultery is not a state or federal crime. Paying hush money isn't a crime. Adultery is a crime but the state is not the aggrieved party. Falsifying records is a crime within the State, and Falsifying business records in an election is a federal crime.

I guess we all just want a better class of political representation.

[Pyrate Jim]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjYR1I0RNCc

[Nobody]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjYR1I0RNCc

Let me guess. Did he pay the bill for his rally? Cause the last one, he seemed to stiff the convention center on the extra security. How do I know this, cause it happened where I live.

[Tunaman]

Let me guess. Did he pay the bill for his rally? Cause the last one, he seemed to stiff the convention center on the extra security. How do I know this, cause it happened where I live.

He had his convention under a bridge?

[Pyrate Jim]

Adultery is not a state or federal crime. Paying hush money isn't a crime. Adultery is a crime but the state is not the aggrieved party.

So, which is it? In a single paragraph you say adultery both is and it isn't a crime. Make up your mind.

[Nobody]

So, which is it? In a single paragraph you say adultery both is and it isn't a crime. Make up your mind.

Some states adultery is a crime. It ranges from a misdemeanor with a fine to jail time. It is up to the state to pursue or not pursue/prove that adultery should be prosecuted. But in trump's case, it is not part of the indictment.

But morally, it is a crime against the vows to the woman that you are married to.

I would figure that after all the self research that people put into their cures on covid, constitution law and the truth of vaccinations, that you would also do a simple search of is adultery a crime.

[Nobody]

Huh, in addition to the near 500 million in money due on the fraud and defamation lawsuits; news reporting has found that trump could owe another additional 100mil in overdue taxes.

All this is happening when Biden has done the same thing that trump was empeached for, withholding arms to Israel. People leaving his rally early in Wildwood, while he was talking and Michael Cohen laying out how the crime happened in the Hush Money case. Guess this is not trump's week