Trump Consciousness

Bart V

straw materialist
Member


He could have saved so many lives by really leading, instead of shrugging responsibility of to the states.
He would have gained so much credibility, he would have been untouchable in the elections.
The idiotic argument that Corona was a Democrat conspiracy to break Trump is absurd.
Any other president, Democrat or Republican, would have seen this as an opportunity to be seen as some sort of "wart time" president.
But not President pussygrabber of course, only denial of science, looking for magic bullets, lying and lots of people dying.
He is a murderer, and his weapon is incompetence.

How is history going to judge him in a few years? Will he bee seen as the mass murderer he is?
 
Boycott
  1. Major League Baseball,
  2. Coca-Cola,
  3. Delta Airlines,
  4. JPMorgan Chase,
  5. ViacomCBS,
  6. Citigroup,
  7. Cisco,
  8. UPS,
  9. Merck.


https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/13442


Statement by Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America​
For years the Radical Left Democrats have played dirty by boycotting products when anything from that company is done or stated in any way that offends them. Now they are going big time with WOKE CANCEL CULTURE and our sacred elections. It is finally time for Republicans and Conservatives to fight back—we have more people than they do—by far! Boycott Major League Baseball, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, JPMorgan Chase, ViacomCBS, Citigroup, Cisco, UPS, and Merck. Don’t go back to their products until they relent. We can play the game better than them. They didn’t even get approval of State Legislatures, which is mandated under the U.S. Constitution. They rigged and stole our 2020 Presidential Election, which we won by a landslide, and then, on top of that, boycott and scare companies into submission. Never submit, never give up! The Radical Left will destroy our Country if we let them. We will not become a Socialist Nation. Happy Easter!​
 
Last edited:
For a couple of minutes and before 13:42 GMT today 8th April 2021 on BBC World News a clip was talking about children and there was a number of things on a list in the background. Had thought that had seen the word 'kidnapping' from a distance. Then thought it must have been something else as it was like a kids kind of clip. Then a close up of the list was shown a little further on and it said something about
'kindnapping a piece if sky' as part of a childrens story which couldn't really be read previously when it was at a distance. The BBC consider very carefully what is broadcast, down to the very last word and shade of colour etc. What the fuck is this weird shit?
I think it's part of some satanic belief that by showing their evil even in indirect ways it somehow consolidates their 'cabal' , whether it's video clips, statues, prominent figures. Fucking freeks
 
Last edited:
I think for now this is the last time i address the employed troll subject in the way i have been generally in different threads over the last few months
Imo all employed trolls (the ones who dont realise how bad their employers are)
whoever they may be (no names from me), they know who they are, i think you all suffer from DAS (Dribbling Ass Syndrome), not just verbally but literally
 
I remember hearing some months ago that Meghan Markle, Harry's wife, was looking to do some kind of deal with Disney. I hope she has thought better of it as in my opinion there are individuals behind Disney who are part of this satanic ritual abuse cult as i think is the case with Netflix
 
The supreme court refused to hear any cases about election fraud, and now the administration they allowed to steal the election has the opportunity to remake the court.

https://t.me/real_DonaldJTrump/13462

Statement by Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America

Wouldn’t it be ironic if the Supreme Court of the United States, after showing that they didn’t have the courage to do what they should have done on the Great Presidential Election Fraud of 2020, was PACKED by the same people, the Radical Left Democrats (who they are so afraid of!), that they so pathetically defended in not hearing the Election Fraud case. Now there is a very good chance they will be diluted (and moved throughout the court system so that they can see how the lower courts work), with many new Justices added to the Court, far more than has been reported. There is also a good chance that they will be term-limited. We had 19 states go before the Supreme Court who were, shockingly, not allowed to be heard. Believe it or not, the President of the United States was not allowed to be heard based on “no standing,” not based on the FACTS. The Court wouldn’t rule on the merits of the great Election Fraud, including the fact that local politicians and judges, not State Legislatures, made major changes to the Election—which is in total violation of the United States Constitution. Our politically correct Supreme Court will get what they deserve—an unconstitutionally elected group of Radical Left Democrats who are destroying our Country. With leaders like Mitch McConnell, they are helpless to fight. He didn’t fight for the Presidency, and he won’t fight for the Court. If and when this happens, I hope the Justices remember the day they didn’t have courage to do what they should have done for America.​
 
Hard to make this stuff up. Trump hand picked 3 of the SCOTUS justices and now he excoriates the court for not participating in his fantasy.

Its such a great example of the division of power. Thankfully the founding fathers anticipated wannabe dictators like Trump.
 
Hard to make this stuff up. Trump hand picked 3 of the SCOTUS justices and now he excoriates the court for not participating in his fantasy.

Its such a great example of the division of power. Thankfully the founding fathers anticipated wannabe dictators like Trump.
How about everyone has the right to a fair trial? Why won't they even look at the case seems like an interesting question. It's probably not because some of the judges don't want to either. Personally i think they are legally mandated to hear the case and should be sacked if they don't
 
How about everyone has the right to a fair trial? Why won't they even look at the case seems like an interesting question. It's probably not because some of the judges don't want to either. Personally i think they are legally mandated to hear the case and should be sacked if they don't
Everyone does have a right to a fair trial if they've been accused of a crime by a prosecuting body. There is no such accusation that has been brought forth by a prosecutor anywhere (to my knowledge).

They did "look at the case" so to speak. As we know, they found the allegations lacking evidence to warrant their consideration of potentially overruling lower court judgements (all of which went against Trump's legal teams).

The SCOTUS has significantly more cases brought to them through appeal than they ever actually consider. Its been that way since the dawn of the court; there's no special treatment (or mistreatment if you prefer) for Trump.

Of course none of this proves there wasn't fraud significant enough to have impacted the election results. Conversely, none of this indicates a grand conspiracy either. Its just our legal system's due process; nothing more.
 
Everyone does have a right to a fair trial if they've been accused of a crime by a prosecuting body. There is no such accusation that has been brought forth by a prosecutor anywhere (to my knowledge).

They did "look at the case" so to speak. As we know, they found the allegations lacking evidence to warrant their consideration of potentially overruling lower court judgements (all of which went against Trump's legal teams).

The SCOTUS has significantly more cases brought to them through appeal than they ever actually consider. Its been that way since the dawn of the court; there's no special treatment (or mistreatment if you prefer) for Trump.

Of course none of this proves there wasn't fraud significant enough to have impacted the election results. Conversely, none of this indicates a grand conspiracy either. Its just our legal system's due process; nothing more.
No, not buying that. Firstly if someone has been wronged the court system owes them the space to seek justice. Secondly i think if there wasn't a strong case the court would have been more than happy to look at it and not have half the US breathing down there necks for ever more. From what i've seen there is plenty of evidence of election fraud which they refused to even look at. Maybe a documentary of a make a believe court manned by real judges would be a good way of informing people what happenned from a strictly legal point of view. As for not being able to audit paper ballots i would have thought that ballots where public property that could be audited by any citizen. Also in this day and age anyone who thinks that voting should go through computer software etc is a moron (and national security liability) who probably shouldnt be allowed to vote lol
 
No, not buying that. Firstly if someone has been wronged the court system owes them the space to seek justice. Secondly i think if there wasn't a strong case the court would have been more than happy to look at it and not have half the US breathing down there necks for ever more.
You're free to feel this way of course, but it doesn't change the legal and judiciary system in the U.S.

On your first point, Trump's team had more opportunity to seek legal/judiciary consideration than most citizens. Primarily due to the simply fact that Trump built a stockpile of money from his massive donor base to fund the legal efforts. What was it, 30+ motions filed with various courts across the country? Space wasn't limited or curtailed; quite to the contrary the space was ample. Again, in every case the allegations were found lacking by dozens of judges. The process was followed, its just that Trump and many others didn't like the result. That's understandable but a different thing than bemoaning a lack of space to seek justice.

On your second point, the courts don't make a practice of hearing weak cases just to rule against them for show. Look for any precedence on this point and you won't find any. The legal system is generally quite careful of the concept of "precedence" and tends to strive for consistency in determining all things: process, thresholds, standards, etc.

The judicial system either got it right or wrong, but there just isn't any evidence of a conspiracy here.
 
Top