2020 US General Election

[Letters]

I'm not sure one man, one vote was a great idea.

A rare moment of agreement.
Benevolent dictatorship ftw.

[Niall_Quinn]

You know there's like a million investigations into Trump and his businesses, right?

You know literally dozens of his associates have been charged with actual crimes, right?

You know he literally pardoned people convicted of actual crimes that benefitted him, right?

I know that's one take on what happened, minus the conflicting evidence. See my prior post. If you can argue reasonably there's a debate to be had. If not, no point.

Dozens of his associates have been selectively charged with political and process crimes, including crimes manufactured by the FBI. I advised you to read the transcript of the Whitmer trial. You should do that. It explains how "crimes" are measured in a deeply politicised "justice" system.

And yes, there are endless investigations into Trump. It's a political tactic, not a quest for justice.

Who did he pardon that has particularly offends your passion for justice? What are the particulars?

Even if I conceded all your perfectly biased assertions, will it be enough for you to concede that what you are referring to as justice is being prosecuted and administered in a biased manner? As I have previously said, I'm all for the president's door being knocked down and justice meted out. But I don't get too hopeful when I see criminals posturing as defenders of democracy purging their political enemies. Wouldn't want to see that the other way either because it can only lead to what we have seen before all throughout history.

Besides. You still haven't detailed any crimes, bar the one he was talked out of committing. Being investigated doesn't mean he's guilty. Using his powers of pardon doesn't mean he's guilty. Third parties being prosecuted doesn't mean he's guilty. Where are all the actual crimes? Maybe you think his enemies have gone soft and refused to convict him, despite their endless inestigations and impeachments?

Where are the crimes?

"Crimes" as in sins against the establishment maybe?

Did he commit the "crime" of failing to start wars?

Did he commit the "crime" of disrupting another Clinton's rise to authority?

For me the very office of president is a criminal offense. Which president doesn't have a litany of criminal behaviour strewn across their legacy? But who would ever prosecute it as a crime?

Maybe a crime can only be called as much if the accused is Donald Trump?

[Letters]

Yes, both the WTC towers and WTC B7 were demolished by explosives. Of course they were. You saw it with your own eyes.

I saw two buildings collapse.
I don't have the expertise to know the cause, although the fact that two planes smacked into them seems like it was fairly likely to be a factor.
Do you have expertise in this area? If not then who told you what to believe about this?

[Niall_Quinn]

I've zero expectations when it comes to American justice and how easily power and money subverts it.

However, anyone who thinks Trump is not guilty of crimes is, quite simply, a deluded fanatic.

Why do you say this?

Trump may well be guilty of many, many crimes in the moral sense. But in reference to the established justice system (which is designed to provide two tier service to the rich and the poor respectively), where are the codified crimes?

If you are going by the law then Trump is guilty of zero crimes that I'm aware of. If you are taking a moral stance, why the (dare I say "fanatical") focus on Trump? Aren't they all committing crimes left, right and centre? Why are Trump's "crimes" so unique in your mind?

Maybe it's not his "crimes" that worry you? Maybe you've just been caught up in runaway hysteria?

[Niall_Quinn]

I saw two buildings collapse.
I don't have the expertise to know the cause, although the fact that two planes smacked into them seems like it was fairly likely to be a factor.
Do you have expertise in this area? If not then who told you what to believe about this?

It was 3 buildings. I have a decent grounding in physics. When you throw a ball in the air, under most circumstances it will fall back down. Is this a permissible level of "expertise" to try my hand at basketball? If I throw a ball in the air and somebody catches it and runs off with it, then tells me the ball continued to ascend into space, what level of expertise would you say I'd need to satisfy to call bullshit and a further explanation?

I read all the NIST material, watched all their conferences, read as much of the pro/ con analysis I could find and reached my own obvious conclusions based on thoroughly understood Newtonian mechanics. The NIST literally had to defy the laws of physics to make their much ridiculed case for BLDG7. Which you'd know if you kept up at the time or caught yourself up since.

In terms of what actually happened, I don't know. How could I? It's a secret and not the sort anyone is likely to be blurting out. But I don't need to know anything about what actually happened to prove, using physics, what certainly didn't happen. Even then, I mean FFS, you can see the building exploding right in front of your eyes and then the third building collapsing down into a net pile, ready for immediate disposal. Or ignore physics and just go with building codes. Or ignore building codes and just go with response protocol for any structural collapse. And so on. So much there to disprove the silly lie that was told about this, though admittedly not enough there to reveal many truths.

[Letters]

It was 3 buildings. I have a decent grounding in physics. When you throw a ball in the air, under most circumstances it will fall back down. Is this a permissible level of "expertise" to try my hand at basketball? If I throw a ball in the air and somebody catches it and runs off with it, then tells me the ball continued to ascend into space, what level of expertise would you say I'd need to satisfy to call bullshit and a further explanation?

I read all the NIST material, watched all their conferences, read as much of the pro/ con analysis I could find and reached my own obvious conclusions based on thoroughly understood Newtonian mechanics. The NIST literally had to defy the laws of physics to make their much ridiculed case for BLDG7. Which you'd know if you kept up at the time or caught yourself up since.

In terms of what actually happened, I don't know. How could I? It's a secret and not the sort anyone is likely to be blurting out. But I don't need to know anything about what actually happened to prove, using physics, what certainly didn't happen. Even then, I mean FFS, you can see the building exploding right in front of your eyes and then the third building collapsing down into a net pile, ready for immediate disposal. Or ignore physics and just go with building codes. Or ignore building codes and just go with response protocol for any structural collapse. And so on. So much there to disprove the silly lie that was told about this, though admittedly not enough there to reveal many truths.

Fair enough. To be fair this is a far more reasoned response than my trolling deserved, so apologies.
Although I'd gently suggest you need to know more about engineering than physics to assess this. I will have a look at some of the stuff you mention.

[Letters]

If you are going by the law then Trump is guilty of zero crimes that I'm aware of.

Why is that the criteria by which we should assess whether orange man bad?
Mandela listed a bunch of things Trump did which he regards as bad. He doesn't have to be committing literal crimes to be thought unfit for office.
Boris literally did commit a "crime" which he was fined for, but that's not why I deem him unfit for office. It's all the other shit.

[Niall_Quinn]

Why is that the criteria by which we should assess whether orange man bad?
Mandela listed a bunch of things Trump did which he regards as bad. He doesn't have to be committing literal crimes to be thought unfit for office.
Boris literally did commit a "crime" which he was fined for, but that's not why I deem him unfit for office. It's all the other shit.

It's not my criteria, it's the charge that was levelled.

[mandela8]

Why do you say this?

Trump may well be guilty of many, many crimes in the moral sense. But in reference to the established justice system (which is designed to provide two tier service to the rich and the poor respectively), where are the codified crimes?

If you are going by the law then Trump is guilty of zero crimes that I'm aware of. If you are taking a moral stance, why the (dare I say "fanatical") focus on Trump? Aren't they all committing crimes left, right and centre? Why are Trump's "crimes" so unique in your mind?

Maybe it's not his "crimes" that worry you? Maybe you've just been caught up in runaway hysteria?

What are you talking about?

You've previously asked me for a list of reasons I wanted Trump out office for. I provided them and you ignored them.

Now your asking me for the crimes he's committed. As I've stated, he's under investigation from multiple agencies of multiple crimes. Dozens of his closest associates have been charged with crimes, many of whom agreed to plea deals to provide evidence against Trump and/or his companies. Many of the people he hired into positions are now giving evidence against him. All things you're probably as aware of as I am so me outlining them further won't service this 'debate' at all, will it?

At what point do you and your ilk apply Occam's razor?

This is all politically motivated. It's all a conspiracy. Literary dozens of agencies, hundreds of offices and thousands of people are all collaborating so set up an innocent man??
Mate, Mon tae fuck, ffs.

If it walks like a dick and talks like a dick chances are it's a fat ugly orange lying dick.

[Xhaka Can’t]

This sounds like the type of scheme that took down the Bluth family.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-...berg-1.6554683