Even Republicans are beginning to notice Trump's dementia.

[SkepticThinker]

Wonderful conspiracy theory you got there. Let me know if you have anything you'd like to add to it.

Trump and his co-conspirators are going on trial in March. You should tune in and inform yourself.

 

[SkepticThinker]

This November, Trump will resume his rightful place in the Oval Office where he will cause liberal heads to explode and delicate snowflakes to melt as he resides under the skin of all those who hate him. It will be a glorious day in the history of this country!

Sooooo, you're supporting an horrible human being for President because it makes other people miserable.... ?
Yikes.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sooooo, you're supporting an horrible human being for President because it makes other people miserable.... ?
Yikes.

This is a common motive among Magas I know IRL.
Vengeance is so gosh darn popular these days.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Thanks for the hate speech tutorial.

No rebuttal from you whatsoever though.

 

[McBell]

CNN Doctor Trolls Trump Over 'Dementia' Boast With 1 Simple Sentence

Dr. Jonathan Reiner put the former president on blast for his claim about cognitive testing.

news.yahoo.com

“It is supposed to be easy for someone who has no cognitive impairment,” Dr. Ziad Nasreddine, who developed the test, told MarketWatch in 2020.​

​

Yet Trump has constantly claimed otherwise.​

​

“It’s not easy!” he told supporters on Saturday, saying only 2 percent of his followers could pass it.​

 

[Subduction Zone]

CNN Doctor Trolls Trump Over 'Dementia' Boast With 1 Simple Sentence

Dr. Jonathan Reiner put the former president on blast for his claim about cognitive testing.

news.yahoo.com

“It is supposed to be easy for someone who has no cognitive impairment,” Dr. Ziad Nasreddine, who developed the test, told MarketWatch in 2020.​

​

Yet Trump has constantly claimed otherwise.​

​

“It’s not easy!” he told supporters on Saturday, saying only 2 percent of his followers could pass it.​

View attachment 87566

I love the quote in the tweet.

 

[The Hammer]

Do you know the difference between an "allegation" and a "conviction"? If there's evidence that Biden did sexually assaulted a woman, then bring it forth. Either way, didn't your parents teach you that "two wrongs don't make a right"-- or is it that "two Wongs don't make a white"? I'm so confused!

Idk but three lefts equals a right. Lol

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

My position is not based on politics but is based on basic Judeo-Christian and humanistic morality. For a person who is supposedly Christian to support a man who "preaches" the total opposite of what Jesus, Moses, etc. taught, there's a serious question as to why are they so willing to sacrifice their faith? Jesus taught "love one another", but do you hear Trump saying anything like that? As Gandhi complained, "All too many elevated the man and forgot his message".

Who you vote for is 100% your business and would never tell you otherwise. There are many times over the years whereas I voted 3rd party as a protest vote or left a category unmarked.

I am an atheist so the teachings of Jesus are not relevant to me. Truth, morality and liberty are relevant to me.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

I do wish you would look deeper -- put your prejudices aside and look at all the facts.

But, of course, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

I can say the same about you.

 

[metis]

I am an atheist so the teachings of Jesus are not relevant to me. Truth, morality and liberty are relevant to me.

So, "love one another" is not important to you even with the above being the case? Trump's sexual assaults and constant spewing of hate is all fine & dandy with you?

 

[Laniakea]

I guess that thinking doesn't apply to you. You seem to prefer deflecting to answering. It would have taken you much less time to have answered his question: "Will you attack America if Trump asks you to?" Do you think that others will likely reserve judgment regarding your likely answer if you don't give it? That isn't realistic. Do you think that dragging this out with quibberdickery* was a good strategy?

Are you aware of the Streisand Effect? It's basically that the more you insist people look away, the more they look. You could have answered his question long ago and this would be in the past by now, but you chose to do the equivalent of 'taking the Fifth' without saying so.

Are you aware of what's happening to Bannon now? He's trying to conceal banking records from a former attorney trying to get paid, but prosecutors in a separate fraud indictment understand the likely reason for that. From Steve Bannon just got squeezed:

"Steve Bannon is awaiting criminal trial in New York on fraud charges, which will send him to prison for several years if he’s convicted. In the meantime, Bannon is in a legal battle with his former attorney, who claims that Bannon refused to pay him about half a million dollars. The attorney is going after Bannon’s bank records and such. In an effort to stop it, Bannon is being forced to admit that his bank records contain evidence that could be used against him in his criminal trial. Bannon is arguing that he can’t be forced to turn over his bank records in the civil proceeding due to his Fifth Amendment protections.

"But in so doing, Bannon just announced to prosecutors that they should look more closely at his bank records for the evidence that he’s talking about. And prosecutors will have no problem obtaining any bank records that they don’t already have. It’s the kind of catch-22 where in order to try to get off the hook in one legal situation, you end up having to compromise yourself in another legal situation. Bannon may fend off his attorney’s fees for awhile longer, but in so doing, he just increased the odds of going to prison."

*From "Insulting English":
View attachment 87531

All that to avoid answering a simple question.
Glad I didn't read it all.

 

[Laniakea]

No, he doesn't. As per the court ruling.

Courts don't always get it right, as I often hear from the Left.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Courts don't always get it right, as I often hear from the Left.

Can you show the courts got it wrong?

 

[Laniakea]

Can you show the courts got it wrong?

Yes.
If a person is being accused of a crime, they have the right to say it didn't happen. It's also up to the accuser to prove that the accused is guilty of anything, and is not entitled to big money based on the opposition of the accused.

 

[McBell]

Yes.
If a person is being accused of a crime, they have the right to say it didn't happen. It's also up to the accuser to prove that the accused is guilty of anything, and is not entitled to big money based on the opposition of the accused.

Do you have a link to a story that actually happened in support of your claim?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes.
If a person is being accused of a crime, they have the right to say it didn't happen.

But Trump went far beyond that and made up all kinds of bizarre claims about E Jean Carroll to defame her. One of them being that she said that she thought rape was sexy and she liked it. He has repeatedly called her a liar and "whackjob." Well, she proved in court that she's not a liar, nor a "whackjob." Tough luck if Trump or his followers don't like it. That's how this works.

It's also up to the accuser to prove that the accused is guilty of anything, and is not entitled to big money based on the opposition of the accused.

E. Jean Caroll did that in a court of law.

She originally was only awarded $5 million. The $83 million, as several posters have already explained, was awarded to Carroll because Trump would not shut his mouth about her. Clearly the $5 million didn't make a big enough dent to punish him on that front, so the jury decided to reward her an amount that would actually hurt Trump. And it looks like it worked because he hasn't said a word about her since.

This isn't some new thing that they just made up because it's Trump. This is how the law works.

 

[Laniakea]

Do you have a link to a story that actually happened in support of your claim?

NEW YORK (AP) — A jury has awarded a huge $83.3 million in additional damages to advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who says former President Donald Trump damaged her reputation by calling her a liar after she accused him of sexual assault.

Trump ordered to pay additional $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll in defamation case

A jury has awarded an additional $83.3 million to former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who says former President Donald Trump damaged her reputation by calling her a liar after she accused him of sexual assault.

www.pbs.org

 

[Laniakea]

Of course. But Trump went far beyond that and made up all kinds of bizarre claims about E Jean Carroll to defame her. One of them being that she said that she thought rape was sexy and she liked it.

Calling someone a rapist is also defamation. Plenty of people have lost their reputation and much more over simple accusations like that, even after proven to be false.
Heck, I myself have been lied about and lost a job because of a lie someone told about me. Should I have also been sued for defamation when I tried to defend myself over the false allegation?

 

[McBell]

NEW YORK (AP) — A jury has awarded a huge $83.3 million in additional damages to advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who says former President Donald Trump damaged her reputation by calling her a liar after she accused him of sexual assault.

Trump ordered to pay additional $83.3 million to E. Jean Carroll in defamation case

A jury has awarded an additional $83.3 million to former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll, who says former President Donald Trump damaged her reputation by calling her a liar after she accused him of sexual assault.

www.pbs.org

So then, no, you do not .

 

[Laniakea]

So then, no, you do not .

Looks like you chose not to read it.