The auto-pen scandal is going to be massive

[BPPLEE]

And that crime was NY state law 175.10: Falsifying business records in the first degree. 34 counts.


Of course it didn't...there is nothing in the Constitution that prevents a convicted felon from running for president. Whoever imagined this intent you think was the motivation seems ill informed.


Well, the primary happened well before the verdict was reached, but whether the 34 felony convictions helped him get elected is doubtful. I suspect most of those who voted for him would have done so no matter what the outcome of his criminal trial. I highly doubt many changed their minds solely due to Trump's criminal conviction.

-- A2SG, though, I suppose it's possible they only voted for Trump because Bernie Madoff wasn't around any more....

He was being charged during the primary. Unless you think his charm , intelligence and political savvy got him elected.
Doubtful

 

[A2SG]

He was being charged during the primary.

And you think Republicans voted for him during the primary solely because he was charged with a crime? Really? Is that what republicans look for in their candidates these days?

I suppose it would shed light on a few things, though....

Unless you think his charm , intelligence and political savvy got him elected.
Doubtful

I have no earthly idea why anyone would vote for him, to be perfectly honest, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask.

-- A2SG, maybe you should ask Trump voters if they voted for him because he's a convicted felon, or if there could have been other reasons....

 

[BPPLEE]

And you think Republicans voted for him during the primary solely because he was charged with a crime? Really? Is that what republicans look for in their candidates these days?

I suppose it would shed light on a few things, though....


I have no earthly idea why anyone would vote for him, to be perfectly honest, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask.

-- A2SG, maybe you should ask Trump voters if they voted for him because he's a convicted felon, or if there could have been other reasons....

No, you're spinning it. I said they thought it was unfair, not that they wanted to vote for a convicted felon (which I don't believe he was during the primary)

 

[Beth77]

I have no earthly idea why anyone would vote for him, to be perfectly honest, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask.

Because we're tired of the Washington elitists robbing us of a better life.

 

[A2SG]

Democratic elites routinely commit serious crimes and nothing ever happens to them.

You mean like Illinois state rep Michael Madigan or Senator Robert Menendez?

Or, for that matter, Donald Trump. He committed 34 felonies, but nothing happened to him after he was convicted. Well, except that he was elected President.

-- A2SG, yup, two tiers of justice all right....

 

[A2SG]

No, you're spinning it. I said they thought it was unfair,

Then they didn't see the evidence, like the jury did.

not that they wanted to vote for a convicted felon (which I don't believe he was during the primary)

Nope, you implied that people voted for him because he was indicted. Of course he hadn't been found guilty yet. That came later.

-- A2SG, why would republicans prefer someone indicted on several charges as a presidential candidate anyway?

 

[Bradskii]

If you think his prosecution didn't help him you are left with him outsmarting the Democrats and being a master politician.
Is that what you want to go with?

What I go with doesn't reflect well on the US electorate at all. And I truthfully don't personally know anyone who disagrees with me.

 

[A2SG]

Because we're tired of the Washington elitists robbing us of a better life.

And you prefer a convicted felon, guilty of 34 felony counts of fraud, do it instead?

-- A2SG, seems an odd rationale to me; but it's yours, and you're entitled to it.....

 

[BPPLEE]

Then they didn't see the evidence, like the jury did.


Nope, you implied that people voted for him because he was indicted. Of course he hadn't been found guilty yet. That came later.

-- A2SG, why would republicans prefer someone indicted on several charges as a presidential candidate anyway?

Because they thought the charges were politically motivated and unfair.
Something you keep trying to spin into something else.
As lawyers say, "Asked and answered "
I don't intend to answer it again

 

[BPPLEE]

What I go with doesn't reflect well on the US electorate at all. And I truthfully don't personally know anyone who disagrees with me.

Of course

 

[BPPLEE]

You mean like Illinois state rep Michael Madigan or Senator Robert Menendez?

Or, for that matter, Donald Trump. He committed 34 felonies, but nothing happened to him after he was convicted. Well, except that he was elected President.

-- A2SG, yup, two tiers of justice all right....

Oh but he's a convicted felon as y'all keep reminding us. That was supposed to stain him so bad that he wouldn't be elected

 

[A2SG]

Because they thought the charges were politically motivated and unfair.

Then they didn't bother to check the evidence, and relied on their own biased opinions instead.

Something you keep trying to spin into something else.

There's no spin here: the jury, selected by both the prosecutors and the defense attorneys as impartial, viewed the evidence and decided, unanimously, that Trump was guilty on all 34 counts. That's a fact.

As lawyers say, "Asked and answered "
I don't intend to answer it again

Your call. I'm still confused as to why certain voters preferred to vote a convicted felon guilty of fraud on multiple occasions into office as president, but if you're unable to explain that, I guess I'll just remain confused about that.

-- A2SG, and we all will have to live with the repercussions of that decision....

 

[A2SG]

Oh but he's a convicted felon as y'all keep reminding us. That was supposed to stain him so bad that he wouldn't be elected

The trial only provided the evidence that proved his guilt on all 34 felonies. If certain voters chose to ignore that fact and vote for a convicted felon, that's their business.

-- A2SG, I'll never understand it, but that's my own lookout, I guess.....

 

[BPPLEE]

Then they didn't bother to check the evidence, and relied on their own biased opinions instead.


There's no spin here: the jury, selected by both the prosecutors and the defense attorneys as impartial, viewed the evidence and decided, unanimously, that Trump was guilty on all 34 counts. That's a fact.


Your call. I'm still confused as to why certain voters preferred to vote a convicted felon guilty of fraud on multiple occasions into office as president, but if you're unable to explain that, I guess I'll just remain confused about that.

-- A2SG, and we all will have to live with the repercussions of that decision....

You just did it again. He wasn't a convicted felon during the primary and you just keep saying the same thing over and over.

 

[BPPLEE]

Then they didn't bother to check the evidence, and relied on their own biased opinions instead.


There's no spin here: the jury, selected by both the prosecutors and the defense attorneys as impartial, viewed the evidence and decided, unanimously, that Trump was guilty on all 34 counts. That's a fact.


Your call. I'm still confused as to why certain voters preferred to vote a convicted felon guilty of fraud on multiple occasions into office as president, but if you're unable to explain that, I guess I'll just remain confused about that.

-- A2SG, and we all will have to live with the repercussions of that decision....

I've already explained and you're still confused.

 

[A2SG]

You just did it again. He wasn't a convicted felon during the primary and you just keep saying the same thing over and over.

I said that republicans voted for someone indicted on several charges, including criminal charges of fraud, during the primaries, but slightly less than half the voters in 2024 voted for a convicted felon, guilty of fraud on multiple occasions, as president. All of that is true and factual, no spin involved.

I've already explained and you're still confused.

You may have tried, but your reasons, that they saw the indictments and subsequent felony convictions, as "unfair" only show that some people choose to ignore evidence and rely on biased opinions instead. It doesn't explain why republicans specifically and other voters prefer a convicted felon guilty of fraud on multiple occasions as their president.

But if you can't adequately explain it, then I guess it will have to remain a mystery.

-- A2SG, and history will be the ultimate judge....

 

[BPPLEE]

I said that republicans voted for someone indicted on several charges, including criminal charges of fraud, during the primaries, but slightly less than half the voters in 2024 voted for a convicted felon, guilty of fraud on multiple occasions, as president. All of that is true and factual, no spin involved.


You may have tried, but your reasons, that they saw the indictments and subsequent felony convictions, as "unfair" only show that some people choose to ignore evidence and rely on biased opinions instead. It doesn't explain why republicans specifically and other voters prefer a convicted felon guilty of fraud on multiple occasions as their president.

But if you can't adequately explain it, then I guess it will have to remain a mystery.

-- A2SG, and history will be the ultimate judge....

Sorry that you are incapable of understanding
History will show that your candidate was so bad that she was beaten by a convicted felon that didn’t know when to keep his mouth shut

 

[A2SG]

Sorry that you are incapable of understanding

And I'm sorry the entire nation will have to deal with the negative repercussions of their ill-informed and overly biased decision.

History will show that your candidate was so bad that she was beaten by a convicted felon that didn’t know when to keep his mouth shut

I guess Harris will go down in history along with such notable and memorable figures as Alf Landon, Wendell Willkie and Thomas Dewey.

-- A2SG, to say nothing of William Jennings Bryan....

 

[Bradskii]

Of course

It's not actually a matter of course. You'll have to take my word on this, but I am definitely the most left leaning out of all the people I know. Most are in the centre, some tend to the left, but a few are reasonably conservative.

You are living in a world where people are generally 100% for Trump or 100% against him. The rest of us just look on and wonder what in heaven's name you guys are up to. It really does look like you've lost the plot.

We recently had a state minister resign (rather then be sacked) for using the government car to which she had access for a private lunch. That literally is a sackable offence down here where politics is still normal. You voted into office someone who had been convicted of fraud. And had been found to have effectively raped a woman. And that's ignoring the immense list of his other character faults.

It's beyond bizarre.

 

[BPPLEE]

It's not actually a matter of course. You'll have to take my word on this, but I am definitely the most left leaning out of all the people I know. Most are in the centre, some tend to the left, but a few are reasonably conservative.

You are living in a world where people are generally 100% for Trump or 100% against him. The rest of us just look on and wonder what in heaven's name you guys are up to. It really does look like you've lost the plot.

There’s a segment of supporters who are 100% for Trump but there are plenty of people who voted for him who aren’t.
I’m not 100% behind him, he’s doing some things that I question and some things that I don’t support
It’s 2:40 am here, I am just up because I am watching a family member with dementia. What time is it there?