Unfortunately, cannot disagree, He would do huge favors to drain his funds on a good defense attorney and trolling the media with truths that do NOT involve him. Or simply sit and enjoy retirement and the fact he is a martyr for truth in the US, whether he died in vane or died (figuratively) to inspire the reset.

13B said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

13B said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

13B said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

If the 2020 election was stolen the correction is either to put Trump in office as the voters intended or to do a re-vote... Obviously

---

Which is what Trump wants, which would require ignoring the constitution. I'm glad you acknowledge that, others it seems don't understand the clear message Trump is sending in his post.

---

What exactly does one have to ignore in the constitution that says how to rectify a fraudulent/stolen election?

---

Article Ii which sets forth how a president is elected and removed.

There is no revote or declaration of rightful winner like Trump wants

---

But how does it address fraudulent elections?

---

The Founding Fathers were naive to think those in power, particularly the Dems, to set aside the Constitution. The solution was supposed to be impeachment and free, fair elections.

But, MSM and the libs executed "A Massive Fraud of th(e) type and magnitude allow(ed) for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great "Founders" did not want…".


Reading comprehension is lost on the average Dim and CM, who have a combined IQ of their pet turtles.

---

I agree with you 100%. It must be like the blue/yellow dress phenomenon some people can only see it one way or willful ignorance because "orange man bad"! I would prefer Desantis over Trump at this stage but I think some just search for wrong meaning in anything Trump says and yet Poopypants can say whatever and bears little scrutiny.

---

Its because OrangeManGod that you and others refuse to look at what Trump actual wrote on his Truth Social post.

Hell, the poster you quoted had to change the words to push the spin he is selling. Trump didn't write "allowed," He wrote "allows," As in not past tense.

Trump stated possibilities of what he thinks should happen now. Neither of which is allowed by any rule, law or the constitution.

Trump then says massive fraud allows for these rules, etc. to be terminated.

Aggiehawg, who we all can bet was a tenacious litigator back in her day, won't defend this statement by Trump. You know why? She doesn't have TDS. Unlike some others of you.

When a poster starts calling those that can read what Trump clearly wrote (like aggiehawg, BMX Bandit, Aggie93, and Zarathursta for example) "average Dims" or "CMs" it really shows that poster has lost the argument.

I know, I know, you will say I have TDS because thats all you have. I voted for Trump, and will do so again if he beats DeSantis and the field. Let's not try to change what he actually suggested and wrote.

I have great respect for aggiehawg but it doesn't mean I have to agree with her on every issue and I am certainly not calling her or the others you cited Dims or CMs or suffering from TDS.

I simply have a different comprehension of what he said. The fact that it is debatable what he meant is problematic, hugely so,

But let's play the game that Trump intended that the Constitution should be "terminated". Do we think Trump plan to install a dictatorship with no Constitution in place and that he and his offspring would rule the States in perpetuity?

Did he call for folks to take up arms and fight our military and police and burn flags and buildings? No, though another party thinks that's cool.

I think there are more than a couple of folks that say throw out the US Constitution and start again, because its being used and manipulated and for the most part just flat it IGNORED / DISREGARDED by team blue.

It's a shame people cannot get past words and look at meaning.

Regardless of the content, which is insane and unhinged as usual, has anyone ever figured out why trump doesn't understand capitalization or basic grammar? I guess the Q lunatics at least hilariously attempted to find a hidden meaning, but I've always been curious why trump worshippers just ignore it.

Either way, more of this please. Every nonsensical rant brings us closer to him finally going away forever and having DeSantis take over the party.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Regardless of the content, which is insane and unhinged as usual

---

Stealing elections are not OK, and those who engineered the stolen election should be executed for treason.

Before all the CM's get too froggy....what is the difference between calling for the suspension of the Constitution and simply ignoring it?

There is something amazing that about the Left going nuts over Trump calling for the suspension of the Constitution when they simply ignore the plain language of the 2nd Amendment and are now openly hostile to the First on a regular basis.

What percentage of victim studies academia wish for the same thing simply based on the fact that it was written by old, dead, White men?

Your outrage here is an act.

TexAgs91 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Regardless of the content, which is insane and unhinged as usual

---

Stealing elections are not OK, and those who engineered the stolen election should be executed for treason.

---

Someone stole an election? Wow surely there is a ton of proof of that right? Or at least proof that hasn't been laughed out of every courtroom it's been brought to?

Also no comment on Dear Leader writing with a 3rd grade level mastery of the English language?

You live under a rock?

TexAgs91 said:

---

You live under a rock?

---

Wow, that would be a huge scandal. You should probably get whatever evidence you have to all of the trump appointed judges who have immediately dismissed every other claim.

Also, sharing this again in case you missed it.

Quote:

---

Also no comment on Dear Leader writing with a 3rd grade level mastery of the English language?

---

Found this update from Pence this morning interesting. Pence for his faults is a very measured person in his comments and is also impeccably honest.

Trump can be a narcissistic ahole most of the time, but there are plenty of instances of him being a genuine human being. On the other side of the aisle, I am not sure a genuine word has EVER been muttered from Biden, unless its him telling a prepubescent girl that her boobs are coming in nicely and her hair smells nice. I think he is genuine in his pedo tendencies.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pence-trump-appeared-genuinely-remorseful-days-jan-6

Quote:

---

"I walked into that back room and the president looked up at me and I sensed he was deeply remorseful about what had happened," Pence recalled. He said Trump immediately asked how Pence's family was doing.

"I responded sternly, 'They're fine Mr. President,'" Pence said.

The former vice president said Trump asked him if he had been scared on January 6.

---

Quote:

---

"I said no, I was angry. I was angry about our differences and I was infuriated at what I saw that day," Pence said. "In that moment he seemed genuinely remorseful."

Besides being remorseful about what Pence went through, Trump appeared to also harbor regrets over the events of that day in general.

"The president lamented what had happened," Pence recalled. "He said what if we hadn't had the rally. It's so terrible to end like this."

---

fka ftc said:

---

Found this update from Pence this morning interesting. Pence for his faults is a very measured person in his comments and is also impeccably honest.

Trump can be a narcissistic ahole most of the time, but there are plenty of instances of him being a genuine human being. On the other side of the aisle, I am not sure a genuine word has EVER been muttered from Biden, unless its him telling a prepubescent girl that her boobs are coming in nicely and her hair smells nice. I think he is genuine in his pedo tendencies.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pence-trump-appeared-genuinely-remorseful-days-jan-6

Quote:

---

"I walked into that back room and the president looked up at me and I sensed he was deeply remorseful about what had happened," Pence recalled. He said Trump immediately asked how Pence's family was doing.

"I responded sternly, 'They're fine Mr. President,'" Pence said.

The former vice president said Trump asked him if he had been scared on January 6.

---

Quote:

---

"I said no, I was angry. I was angry about our differences and I was infuriated at what I saw that day," Pence said. "In that moment he seemed genuinely remorseful."

Besides being remorseful about what Pence went through, Trump appeared to also harbor regrets over the events of that day in general.

"The president lamented what had happened," Pence recalled. "He said what if we hadn't had the rally. It's so terrible to end like this."

---

---

He sure hasn't acted remorseful since then. The opposite. Especially towards Pence.

I cannot disagree with you. But surprised Pence brings this up today.

November 2020 seems more and more to have been a fatal blow to Trump's ego. And now over 2 years later he gets some vindication but has no ability to recover the loss.

fka ftc said:

---

I cannot disagree with you. But surprised Pence brings this up today.

November 2020 seems more and more to have been a fatal blow to Trump's ego. And now over 2 years later he gets some vindication but has no ability to recover the loss.

---

Screw Pence.

Quote:

---

I cannot disagree with you. But surprised Pence brings this up today.

---

Well if you watch the video you linked, he technically didn't bring anything up today. The interview was earlier this week.

Touche.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Regardless of the content, which is insane and unhinged as usual, has anyone ever figured out why trump doesn't understand capitalization or basic grammar?

---

Well, Trump did lose a debate to Biden...

I'm starting to wonder if Trump can articulate a thought out response or even have a normal conversation. It seems like he can only communicate through sound bites and one liners.

You serious Clark? He has given 2 hour speeches with barely referencing a teleprompter.

And if consider twitter is limited on characters, it would make sense his tweets are succinct.

Bizarre world we live in. Trump is not dumb. Narcissistic... yes.

fka ftc said:

---

You serious Clark? He has given 2 hour speeches with barely referencing a teleprompter.

And if consider twitter is limited on characters, it would make sense his tweets are succinct.

Bizarre world we live in. Trump is not dumb. Narcissistic... yes.

---

The hate pours through him, he's got nothing for what took place on the left and some of the establishment right his 4 years in office.

Im Gipper said:

---

13B said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

13B said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

13B said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

If the 2020 election was stolen the correction is either to put Trump in office as the voters intended or to do a re-vote... Obviously

---

Which is what Trump wants, which would require ignoring the constitution. I'm glad you acknowledge that, others it seems don't understand the clear message Trump is sending in his post.

---

What exactly does one have to ignore in the constitution that says how to rectify a fraudulent/stolen election?

---

Article Ii which sets forth how a president is elected and removed.

There is no revote or declaration of rightful winner like Trump wants

---

But how does it address fraudulent elections?

---

The Founding Fathers were naive to think those in power, particularly the Dems, to set aside the Constitution. The solution was supposed to be impeachment and free, fair elections.

But, MSM and the libs executed "A Massive Fraud of th(e) type and magnitude allow(ed) for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great "Founders" did not want…".


Reading comprehension is lost on the average Dim and CM, who have a combined IQ of their pet turtles.

---

I agree with you 100%. It must be like the blue/yellow dress phenomenon some people can only see it one way or willful ignorance because "orange man bad"! I would prefer Desantis over Trump at this stage but I think some just search for wrong meaning in anything Trump says and yet Poopypants can say whatever and bears little scrutiny.

---

Its because OrangeManGod that you and others refuse to look at what Trump actual wrote on his Truth Social post.

Hell, the poster you quoted had to change the words to push the spin he is selling. Trump didn't write "allowed," He wrote "allows," As in not past tense.

Trump stated possibilities of what he thinks should happen now. Neither of which is allowed by any rule, law or the constitution.

Trump then says massive fraud allows for these rules, etc. to be terminated.

Aggiehawg, who we all can bet was a tenacious litigator back in her day, won't defend this statement by Trump. You know why? She doesn't have TDS. Unlike some others of you.

When a poster starts calling those that can read what Trump clearly wrote (like aggiehawg, BMX Bandit, Aggie93, and Zarathursta for example) "average Dims" or "CMs" it really shows that poster has lost the argument.

I know, I know, you will say I have TDS because thats all you have. I voted for Trump, and will do so again if he beats DeSantis and the field. Let's not try to change what he actually suggested and wrote.

---

I don't think the tense of "allow" changes anything. You obviously have reading comprehension issues based on several things you typed above so I'm not sure where to start. That being said, If Trump meant that he wants to chunk the constitution, then yes, he is a huge dip$h!t in this case and should be ashamed to say anything of the sort. Based on the OP's source material, I don't read it that way at all. I read it as, if the left gets away with this, after all that has come out and what all was suppressed, they will continue to do so: ignoring rules, regs, constitution, etc. not his advocation of doing so for his own benefit.

You also say he "stated" he most certainly did not, according to the post, he ASKED a question (would he like that to happen in regards to throwing out results or a revote? I'm sure he would but it was a question not a statement)

I don't think anyone would ever call aggiehawg a Dim or CM; again, I could be wrong but I think the reference was to all the tweets clutching of pearls.

What does TDS mean to you? Also, just because I don't like seeing unfair treatment and misrepresentation doesn't mean that I don't think Trump can be a buffoon and should be quiet sometimes.

I agree with your last two sentences.

Quote:

---

I don't think anyone would ever call aggiehawg a Dim or CM; again, I could be wrong but I think the reference was to all the tweets clutching of pearls.

---

Hardly. LOL.

It was a very stupid thing for Trump to say under any circumstances. With another Special Counsel out there with a scope including the events of Jan 6th, it was emphatically a dumb thing to say because it will be spun against him.

I understand and share his frustration that our election laws largely stink and even more so when the judiciary, including SCOTUS in this instance, are so feckless.

But the question always comes back to remedies. Throwing out laws or even suggesting throwing out portions of the Constitution is not the remedy. It just muddies the water even further.

But do you really think he is advocating for throwing out laws, etc or is he merely questioning if something isn't done that would be what is essentially happening (which is how I read it)?

aggiehawg said:

---

But the question always comes back to remedies. Throwing out laws or even suggesting throwing out portions of the Constitution is not the remedy. It just muddies the water even further.

---

Salient point here. What is the path forward to fix elections that does not involve throwing rocks or throwing out the Constitution?

The Country is just as evenly divided here. I don't have a particular answer, but Hawg you have looked into the voter issues in 2020 as much as anyone.

How do we fix it? (not putting it on you to fix it, interested in your thoughts)

13B said:

---

But do you really think he is advocating for throwing out laws, etc or is he merely questioning if something isn't done that would be what is essentially happening (which is how I read it)?

---

I think he was venting more than anything else but went to an argument that went too far under the circumstances. Creating more problems for himself and his legal counsel. Painted himself into corner with little room to walk it back nor even try to defend it.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

TexAgs91 said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Regardless of the content, which is insane and unhinged as usual

---

Stealing elections are not OK, and those who engineered the stolen election should be executed for treason.

---

Someone stole an election? Wow surely there is a ton of proof of that right? Or at least proof that hasn't been laughed out of every courtroom it's been brought to?

Also no comment on Dear Leader writing with a 3rd grade level mastery of the English language?

---

The thing is Trump's legal teams didn't even really bring claims of fraud to the courts, even as Trump and his surrogates screamed to high heaven about it. Because they had no proof of it or any basis for a legal claim on it, and real lawyers with a reputation to uphold who want to keep practicing wouldn't put their name on that sort of thing. The ones around the fringe of Trumpworld who tried have been smacked down hard for wasting courts' time with egregiously false and frivolous claims.

This is the thing that always gets me. If there was so much clear and real evidence that this massive fraud happened, to the degree that anyone halfway paying attention knows it's true and there's ample evidence, why is nobody out there making their career on it in one of the many, many places where nothing could possibly be more popular and politically expedient? Why does this remain the domain of right-wing YouTube videos and tweets and message board posts instead of lawsuits and prosecutions and methodical reporting that withstands basic scrutiny from serious people?

So, venting or not, you read Trump's tweet (in OP) as him "advocating for" not "commenting on"?

BMX Bandit said:

---

He said he wants to terminate the constitution. pic.twitter.com/LAzXoQkKB7

— CaliEsq (@CaliEsq) December 3, 2022

Enormous political scandal breaks yesterday and Trump decides he needs to go with
"Terminating the constitution"

As Aggiehawg said, this is evidence the special counsel loves. He has such a way of snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory

(In before the "derp derp CM" posters show up)

---

What platform did the trump quote originate from. I don't see and recent post from trump on twitter and the screenshot gives no indication of the source of the quote.

Is stomping your foot and venting about something that's not possibly going to happen "advocating"?

Look, Trunp said something dumb here. Is he rounding up an army to make it happen? Of course not. But he is talking about his wish to change rules to get him back in office or revote.

Quote:

---

What platform did the trump quote originate from. I don't see and recent post from trump on twitter and tge screenshot gives no indication of the source of the qoute.

---

Trump does not tweet. Tell the truth. You really don't know what social media Trump uses?

Seriously, how many people care about what trump says anymore ? How many of his followers have moved on from him ?

fka ftc said:

---

You serious Clark? He has given 2 hour speeches with barely referencing a teleprompter.

And if consider twitter is limited on characters, it would make sense his tweets are succinct.

Bizarre world we live in. Trump is not dumb. Narcissistic... yes.

---

He lost a debate to Joe Biden. You can bend over backwards and do mental gymnastics all day long about what he "really" meant, but at the end of the day this was close to the stupidest thing he could have said. The fact that we're having a long discussion about "he said it but that didn't mean he was advocating for it" proves just how careless he has become.

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

What platform did the trump quote originate from. I don't see and recent post from trump on twitter and tge screenshot gives no indication of the source of the qoute.

---

Trump does not tweet. Tell the truth. You really don't know what social media Trump uses?

---

Do you pick a fight w every stranger you come across?

You are missing my point:
1. Your (and many other's) point or interpretation of tweet-"Trump says "this" should happen"
2. My point/interpretation of his tweet-"Trump says "this" is happening and should not"

13B said:

---

So, venting or not, you read Trump's tweet (in OP) as him "advocating for" not "commenting on"?

---

He clearly states his goal is to be back in office. How he gets there is where he went off of the rails. So that's closer to advocating than commenting in my book.

Just a very, very stupid thing to say.

Quote:

---

First, let's get down to the facts. The Constitution does not permit "do-overs." There is a process whereby the states vote via the Electoral College, and Congress certifies the result. While I'm sympathetic to President Trump's claims and have little personal doubt that election fraud changed the vote in some states, that claim is hamstrung by the absence of forensic evidence to substantiate the claim. Even with the proof, it was over once the election was certified.

The Founders would not have wanted false or fraudulent elections, but they were also realists who knew that in late 18th century America, election fraud was a way of life. If you haven't read a lot about the Early Republic and roving bands of voters (why do you think a specific election day made its way into the Constitution?), give this article a try.

The very fact that the Founders did not make provisions for re-doing elections tainted by fraud is a strong indicator that they valued the finality of the process over lengthy wrangling over results.

But then, in my view, historical myopia is dwarfed by the nuttiness of the idea that the Constitution can be set aside. That, in turn, is reduced to nothing by giving the Democrats the ability to claim that they are the party that defends the Constitution. It gives the Biden White House the opportunity to issue this statement:

---

Quote:

---

First, this is the same lack of disciplined communication that marred his tenure if office. It doesn't move the ball forward; rather, it directs attention onto President Trump for, as far as I can tell, the sole purpose of directed attention to President Trump.

Second, it is a rhetorical own-goal. You can't, on the one hand, claim you are all about defending the Constitution if, at the same time, you are making a special pleading that your case is extra-Constitutional.

---

Quote:

---

Third, it calls into question President Trump's ability to campaign in 2024. It is one thing to say, "we were cheated, and we won't let it happen again." Two years after Congress certified the results, it is quite another to demand that he be QAnon-like placed into the presidency. We saw the downside of this claim in the Georgia Senate runoff in 2020 when President Trump's harping on electoral fraud caused a lot of voters to stay home because they were convinced any outcome would be fraudulent.

---

LINK

I understand your point.

What we are saying is that you are wanting Trump to have meant that. But the words say something different.

If everyone got this wrong, why wasn't Trump come out and clarified?