Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On October 02 2024 23:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump, getting convicted of fraud at 79? Turn his life around?
Just imagine the inspirational success story of a felon who became so rehabilitated as to accede to the presidency of the US.
It's been curious watching Republicans try to have their cake and eat it too in real time, when it comes to posturing as the "rule of law" party. Trump has been very open about the crimes he's committed, and finally capped it off with a conviction of 34 counts of fraud this summer. His buddy Vance showed last night that he also doesn't seem to understand how the law works, guess it doesn't seem to be a requisite for Republican leadership anymore.
If there's one thing Republicans had been consistent on until Drumpf was convicted, it was their support of Democratic prosecutors in their application of the law. From Chesa Boudin to Andrew Warren to Kim Foxx to Kamala Harris to Merrick Garland and the Obama and Biden DOJs to the FBI and CIA... it's only when they finally convict Drumpf of fraud to influence an election that already happened that Republicans cry foul and take back their unconditional support.
On October 02 2024 23:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump, getting convicted of fraud at 79? Turn his life around?
Just imagine the inspirational success story of a felon who became so rehabilitated as to accede to the presidency of the US.
I would expect such a person to at least confess their wrongdoing to know that they have truly repented and wouldn't simply be a repeat offender. Trump seems constitutionally incapable of doing that minimal but necessary action. Where's his come to Jesus moment?
Come to Jesus? July 13th, there were some loud popping noises when Drumpf fell at a rally.
Pretty sure the well is poisoned at that point, Drumpf could come out as FDR tomorrow with a weeping apology and be met with "so now apologize for lying about xyz, too bad can't trust someone who admits to lying."
On October 03 2024 01:43 Falling wrote: How can we say he has rehabilitated when he continues to maintain the same lie that he never lost the election and he did nothing wrong with putting forth the false elector slate?
Firstly because that wasn't any of the 34 counts, but for curiosity's sake when's the last time he continued to maintain that?
He said that in his debate against Harris. Not sure if he's said it more recently than that.
On October 02 2024 23:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump, getting convicted of fraud at 79? Turn his life around?
Just imagine the inspirational success story of a felon who became so rehabilitated as to accede to the presidency of the US.
It's been curious watching Republicans try to have their cake and eat it too in real time, when it comes to posturing as the "rule of law" party. Trump has been very open about the crimes he's committed, and finally capped it off with a conviction of 34 counts of fraud this summer. His buddy Vance showed last night that he also doesn't seem to understand how the law works, guess it doesn't seem to be a requisite for Republican leadership anymore.
If there's one thing Republicans had been consistent on until Drumpf was convicted, it was their support of Democratic prosecutors in their application of the law. From Chesa Boudin to Andrew Warren to Kim Foxx to Kamala Harris to Merrick Garland and the Obama and Biden DOJs to the FBI and CIA... it's only when they finally convict Drumpf of fraud to influence an election that already happened that Republicans cry foul and take back their unconditional support.
On October 03 2024 01:43 Falling wrote:
On October 03 2024 00:32 oBlade wrote:
On October 02 2024 23:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump, getting convicted of fraud at 79? Turn his life around?
Just imagine the inspirational success story of a felon who became so rehabilitated as to accede to the presidency of the US.
I would expect such a person to at least confess their wrongdoing to know that they have truly repented and wouldn't simply be a repeat offender. Trump seems constitutionally incapable of doing that minimal but necessary action. Where's his come to Jesus moment?
Come to Jesus? July 13th, there were some loud popping noises when Drumpf fell at a rally.
Pretty sure the well is poisoned at that point, Drumpf could come out as FDR tomorrow with a weeping apology and be met with "so now apologize for lying about xyz, too bad can't trust someone who admits to lying."
On October 03 2024 01:43 Falling wrote: How can we say he has rehabilitated when he continues to maintain the same lie that he never lost the election and he did nothing wrong with putting forth the false elector slate?
Firstly because that wasn't any of the 34 counts, but for curiosity's sake when's the last time he continued to maintain that?
He said that in his debate against Harris. Not sure if he's said it more recently than that.
And Vance essentially repeated it by refusing to say Trump lost in 2020. If Trump wasn't trying to maintain the lie, Vance wouldn't have to shy away from the truth.
On October 03 2024 02:18 oBlade wrote: when's the last time he continued to maintain that?
He's claimed that he's won hundreds of times and not once conceded that he didn't. He's gone so far as to recently claim that he would have won California had he not been cheated. Given the overwhelming evidence that he maintains it and the complete absence of any evidence to the contrary why is the burden on us to provide evidence that he still maintains it? Why are you not providing evidence that he no longer maintains it?
On October 03 2024 02:18 oBlade wrote: when's the last time he continued to maintain that?
He's claimed that he's won hundreds of times and not once conceded that he didn't. He's gone so far as to recently claim that he would have won California had he not been cheated. Given the overwhelming evidence that he maintains it and the complete absence of any evidence to the contrary why is the burden on us to provide evidence that he still maintains it? Why are you not providing evidence that he no longer maintains it?
Well, he has evidence, he has a friend who thinks Trump admitted defeat just the other day!
On October 02 2024 23:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump, getting convicted of fraud at 79? Turn his life around?
Just imagine the inspirational success story of a felon who became so rehabilitated as to accede to the presidency of the US.
It's been curious watching Republicans try to have their cake and eat it too in real time, when it comes to posturing as the "rule of law" party. Trump has been very open about the crimes he's committed, and finally capped it off with a conviction of 34 counts of fraud this summer. His buddy Vance showed last night that he also doesn't seem to understand how the law works, guess it doesn't seem to be a requisite for Republican leadership anymore.
If there's one thing Republicans had been consistent on until Drumpf was convicted, it was their support of Democratic prosecutors in their application of the law. From Chesa Boudin to Andrew Warren to Kim Foxx to Kamala Harris to Merrick Garland and the Obama and Biden DOJs to the FBI and CIA... it's only when they finally convict Drumpf of fraud to influence an election that already happened that Republicans cry foul and take back their unconditional support.
On October 03 2024 01:43 Falling wrote:
On October 03 2024 00:32 oBlade wrote:
On October 02 2024 23:53 NewSunshine wrote: Trump, getting convicted of fraud at 79? Turn his life around?
Just imagine the inspirational success story of a felon who became so rehabilitated as to accede to the presidency of the US.
I would expect such a person to at least confess their wrongdoing to know that they have truly repented and wouldn't simply be a repeat offender. Trump seems constitutionally incapable of doing that minimal but necessary action. Where's his come to Jesus moment?
Come to Jesus? July 13th, there were some loud popping noises when Drumpf fell at a rally.
Pretty sure the well is poisoned at that point, Drumpf could come out as FDR tomorrow with a weeping apology and be met with "so now apologize for lying about xyz, too bad can't trust someone who admits to lying."
On October 03 2024 01:43 Falling wrote: How can we say he has rehabilitated when he continues to maintain the same lie that he never lost the election and he did nothing wrong with putting forth the false elector slate?
Firstly because that wasn't any of the 34 counts, but for curiosity's sake when's the last time he continued to maintain that?
He said that in his debate against Harris. Not sure if he's said it more recently than that.
And Vance essentially repeated it by refusing to say Trump lost in 2020. If Trump wasn't trying to maintain the lie, Vance wouldn't have to shy away from the truth.
Excellent conversation with Kamala Harris - relatable, personable, optimistic, pleasant, passionate. It was certainly a "softball" interview, but they did talk about certain contemporary issues and policies (the importance of fighting for civil rights, how her presidential vision will continue to improve our economy and make goods and services more affordable for average families, etc.).
5:15 - At least she says it "breaks her heart" to see what has become of her hometown of Oakland and the shuttered businesses she sees when she lands at Oakland airport and drives through the area. Unfortunately she wants to blame the Oakland sports teams for leaving when she should be attributing it to the crime that has been allowed to fester out of control.
Well said. Jon Stewart does such a good job of cutting through all of Trump's bullshit and projection, refuting all the ignorant and misguided reasons to support Trump, and pointing out the insane double standards that the media has when assessing Harris vs. Trump.
Donald Trump Jr.: When people call my dad Hitler, it promotes violence against my dad. J.D. Vance, Donald Trump's vice presidential runningmate: Donald Trump is America's Hitler.
On October 03 2024 20:57 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Donald Trump Jr.: When people call my dad Hitler, it promotes violence against my dad. J.D. Vance, Donald Trump's vice presidential runningmate: Donald Trump is America's Hitler.
Melania Trump coming out as full pro choice sounds like a big deal, but probably just a big FU to her husband. It does show what a big issue it is for women. Make me think more women than it shows in polling are going to reject the Republicans when it comes to actually putting down their vote.
On October 05 2024 00:58 Billyboy wrote: Melania Trump coming out as full pro choice sounds like a big deal, but probably just a big FU to her husband. It does show what a big issue it is for women. Make me think more women than it shows in polling are going to reject the Republicans when it comes to actually putting down their vote.
I certainly hope so.
Apparently, there are plenty of Republican First Ladies who have strongly disagreed with their husbands' anti-woman / anti-abortion / anti-choice position, including the wife of Ronald Reagan and the wife of Donald Trump:
Melania Trump seems to have joined a long line of Republican former first ladies who have come out in support of abortion rights, putting them at odds with their husbands' public views.
In a short video clip promoting her forthcoming book, Mrs Trump expressed her support for women's "individual freedom", describing it as an "essential right that all women possess from birth".
It comes a day after an excerpt of her soon-to-be-released memoir, in which she reportedly takes an even clearer pro-choice stance, was published in a newspaper report.
Mrs Trump's apparent stance on the issue appears to contrast with the position of her husband, who has taken credit for helping overturn Roe v Wade, upending the constitutional right to abortion.
But it follows a decades-long American tradition of Republican first ladies who - since Roe v Wade was first decided in 1973 - have said legal abortion access should be protected.
In 1975, while still in the White House, First Lady Betty Ford called the Roe ruling a "great, great decision".
Nancy Reagan waited until her husband, President Ronald Reagan, left office before she said publicly that she "believed in a woman's choice", but her position on the issue was reportedly well known within the White House.
Barbara Bush, wife of President George HW Bush, and her daughter-in-law, Laura Bush, wife of President George W Bush, were similar, revealing their stance on the issue after their husbands left the White House. ...
The video comes one day after The Guardian published an excerpt from her new book, Melania, set to be released on 8 October.
In the excerpt, quoted by the Guardian, she writes: “It is imperative to guarantee that women have autonomy in deciding their preference of having children, based on their own convictions, free from any intervention or pressure from the government."
“Why should anyone other than the woman herself have the power to determine what she does with her own body? A woman’s fundamental right of individual liberty, to her own life, grants her the authority to terminate her pregnancy if she wishes," she continues.
“Restricting a woman’s right to choose whether to terminate an unwanted pregnancy is the same as denying her control over her own body.
"I have carried this belief with me throughout my entire adult life.
Former first lady Melania Trump said in a new video posted Thursday that she believes there is “no room for compromise” when it comes to a woman’s “individual freedom,” after The Guardian reported excerpts from her forthcoming book in which she says she supports abortion rights “free from any intervention or pressure from the government.”
“Individual freedom is a fundamental principle that I safeguard. Without a doubt, there is no room for compromise when it comes to this essential right that all women possess from birth: individual freedom. What does my body, my choice really mean?” the former first lady said in a video posted on X.
I'm not Chris Matthews but I'm pretty sure the wife of a president coming out against abortion would be the position that would result in less support from pro-choice/anti-baby women voters.
On October 05 2024 01:15 oBlade wrote: I'm not Chris Matthews but I'm pretty sure the wife of a president coming out against abortion would be the position that would result in less support from pro-choice/anti-baby women voters.
You are wrong, everyone is against abortion, it is a horrible experience for everyone involved. It just just a choice that many people believe woman and doctors should have.
Melania came out with the exact opposite position that her husband is currently saying he has.
On October 05 2024 01:15 oBlade wrote: I'm not Chris Matthews but I'm pretty sure the wife of a president coming out against abortion would be the position that would result in less support from pro-choice/anti-baby women voters.
Male Republican President: Women are second-class citizens. President's Wife: My husband is wrong. Constituents: Maybe that president really is wrong, considering even his wife disagrees with him. Next time I vote, I might consider voting for the other person.
Melania coming out about her stance shortly before the elections is a much bigger deal than previous first ladies coming out post-term. From the comments I've been reading this is not going unnoticed and it's causing a significant stir in the Christian camp. They're trying to keep this under wraps, relativizing and deflecting as hard as they can. It'll only have a small effect on Trump's chances, but every bit counts. This cannot be good for his campaign.
On October 05 2024 01:25 Magic Powers wrote: Melania coming out about her stance shortly before the elections is a much bigger deal than previous first ladies coming out post-term. From the comments I've been reading this is not going unnoticed and it's causing a significant stir in the Christian camp. They're trying to keep this under wraps, relativizing and deflecting as hard as they can. It'll only have a small effect on Trump's chances, but every bit counts. This cannot be good for his campaign.
Agreed. It may not influence anyone or it may pull a few voters away from the Trump camp, but it certainly isn't going to help Trump.
Other republican candidates are trying to do something similar by saying things that contradict their anti-choice record. Larry Hogan is running Maryland senate ads that literally say he is pro-choice and believes Roe should be the law of the land, which is of course bullshit given that he has also repeatedly praised Trump for his SCOTUS picks and has said he would obviously caucus with the Republicans in the Senate were he to win.
EPT
