Maine Secretary of State Gets Destroyed After Removing Trump From the Ballot


By Bonchie

As RedState reported, another state has “removed” Donald Trump from the ballot following accusations of violating the 14th Amendment. I put the word “removed” in quotes for a reason, which I’ll get to in a moment, but in the aftermath, the Maine Secretary of State behind the move is getting destroyed.

I’ll start with a more official-sounding condemnation from Sen. Thom Tillis before we get to the less kind responses.

The full post reads:

Maine’s Democrat Secretary of State just removed Trump from the ballot. This is an egregious abuse of power and why I will be introducing the Constitutional Election Integrity Act as soon as Congress returns to session to stop these partisan officials and ensure any constitutional challenge is only decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Tillis is correct in saying it’s an egregious abuse of power. It’s so broad and so arbitrary on the legal merits that if allowed to stand, Republican officials would have more than enough cause to remove Joe Biden from the ballot in their states. Again, that’s a clue on what’s really going on here.

Naturally, Shenna Bellows, the secretary of state in question, had previously stumped for “voting rights” and demanded that others be allowed to vote for who they want.

You see, voting is a “fundamental right,” according to Bellows, unless we are talking about the right to vote for a presidential candidate she holds an inherent hatred of. In that case, it’s fine to spit on the democratic process and strip that person from the ballot based on nothing more than feelings and twisted legal reasoning.

Once again, an AWFL has decided to play authoritarian for the “greater good.” They know best, and you don’t dare suggest otherwise, you fascist.

So why did I put “removed” in quotes at the beginning of this piece? I did so because it’s obvious what’s actually going on here. Just as with the Colorado Supreme Court ruling removing Trump from the ballot, Bellows stayed her own decision (meaning it doesn’t go into effect), giving the final say to the U.S. Supreme Court.

What does that tell you? It tells you that none of these cheap stunts are meant to succeed technically. It’s essentially a foregone conclusion that the U.S. Supreme Court will not only keep the stays in place, but they will ultimately rule against the states trying to use the 14th Amendment without any due process to bar Trump from the ballot.

In the end, Bellows doesn’t believe she’ll win. She just wants her name in lights while setting up the U.S. Supreme Court to play the bad guy for half the country.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Quite an ugly leftist.

She violated the due process clause of the 14th Amendment while using section three of the same amendment to remove Trump for insurrection for which he has not been charged or convicted.

Maine Republicans threaten to impeach secretary of state for kicking Trump off the ballot

Maine Secretary of State Gleefully Explains Why She Unilaterally Barred Trump From 2024 Ballot….and It’s Worse Than You Think (VIDEO)

This ruling vacates the rule of law. The dingbat cites commentary about J6 insurrection but avoids the fact the President Trump has not been charged or convicted of insurrection.
She bastardized section three of the fourteen amendment while ignoring the due process clause.

The 14th Amendment requires no conviction. Those banned from office after the Civil War were not tried and convicted.

Yes it does. You are not guilty of committing a crime until you are CONVICTED of committing the crime. Up until then, it is a suspicion. Hell, you don’t even have an INSURRECTION, how can you have someone guilty of instigating it?

Last edited 2 months ago by Just Plain Bill

Shortly after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, Congress passed legislation that would allow prosecution of insurrection.

Excellent. Then there’s a basis not only for banning Trump from office, but for prosecuting him as well.

He tried to execute his duties by assuring Democrat election fraud did not overturn an election. When election fraud is deciding elections, all rules, regulations and articles, even those found in the Constitution ARE terminated.

Democrats are fascists. There is no denying the truth.

There was no “massive & widespread fraud & deception” except for Trump’s. For that, there’s “massive & widespread” EVIDENCE.


for starters.

You’ve been pushing the State Farm Arena thing for three years now. Nobody gives a shit.

Well, I know those like you and Greg don’t because you approve of election fraud. However, as this was the first major incident of blatant election fraud on the evening of November 3rd, 2020, I see no point in addressing all the examples until this one is explained.

But, there is but one explanation: Democrat election fraud.

The 25th Amendment about Impeachment Clinton and Obama committed Treason which you’ll not see in the New York Times since that leftists rag has covered up for the enemy for years

Then give up. It will never change.

So, any state AG can kick any candidate off of any ballot for any reason. Good to know.

The 14th Amendment requires no conviction.

biden has committed insurrection. How ridiculous a statement.

Except if the country is a lawless banana republic.

Nope. Such a candidate has to have previously broken their oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Trump no only tried to overturn an election with a fraudulent elector plot and a mob—he has publicly stated all laws and regulations—even those found in the Constitution, must sometimes be disregarded.

Fake news

The mob’s siege of the Capitol was televised, Dilbert. So were the January 6 Committee hearings.

Oh yeah. President Trump was not leading the unarmed insurrection. That would have been the FBI director.
The j6 hearings produced zip, zero, nada

Let me correct myself. I forgot about Cassidy Hutchings compelling testimony about how President Trump was strangling the beast driver trying to get to the Capitol to lead the insurrection.

Oh but then when the book came out she had to revise and extend her testimony because it was nothing more than a fabrication.

Why did benny thompson destroy so much of the evidence accumulated by the unconstitutional j6!select committee?

What B.S. of the illegality showing’s of the Biden administration . Even Hitler’s SS kept documents to obfuscate the tragic reasoning’s of their so called justified murders !! Biden’s minions are falling & burning liken unto the German Zeppelin of 1908 . Cause by their continual lying and cover-ups .

What a guy; he can whip the asses of two USSS agents at the same time, and drive a car!

What a guy!!

How thankful we must be as Americans. Without the unconstitutional select J6 committee we never would have known of President Trump super human skills.

One word ,,,,,CUTE : ] .

Not everyone is crazy.

No, just whiny, crybaby, sore loser leftists.

Your so lame that your don;t even understand when your receiving an insult . From someone else comments . Obama would describe your type of intellect as no more than inept Knuckle-dragger . You should be ashamed of yourself .

There was no “siege”. There was a peaceful protest that the Capital police turned into a riot by firing on a peaceful crowd.

Then maybe they just should have complied. Isn’t that what we’re always hearing from the Right?

Complied with what? Capital Police opened fire on them for no reason. There was no warning, no prior declaration that the area, which the FBI operatives had removed the barricades from, was restricted.

We saw tons of video of police trying to stop insurrectionists from proceeding any further into the Capitol, with the insurrectionists then simply shaking their heads and elbowing the cops out of the way. They could have complied there, for example.

Tons? How much is a “ton” of digital data? Sounds like a lot. What we saw was Capital Police opening doors and letting peaceful protesters in to walk around taking selfies.

…And “peacefully” smearing their feces on the wall, and “peacefully” stealing things from legislators’ offices, and “peacefully” refusing to stay out of areas in the Capitol that the police were telling them to stay out of, and “peacefully” crushing that cop in the doors, and “peacefully” beating cops with flagpoles.

Oi! So much peace!

Don’t forget setting a police department on fire with the police officers still in it.

Oh, wait, that was BLM and Antifa.

Remember, groomer, the videos you saw were the ones the J6 Committee wanted you to see. Everyone knows left wingers are idiots.

Remember, groomer, the videos you saw were the ones the J6 Committee wanted you to see.

And? They wanted us to see the bad stuff that happened, and we did. It happened, regardless of who showed the videos.

They wanted you to see the parts that the operatives manipulated. They didn’t want you to see the peaceful protest or the officers opening locked doors, ushering in protesters or even guiding them around the building. Note that when the suppressed video was released, one of your more famous cases, Jacob Chansley was released, shown NOT to have been violent. The suppressed video showed the Capital Police opening fire with gas and grenades on a peaceful crowd. It also shows officers brutally beating protesters. So, in order to manipulate the weak minds of the stupid and prejudiced, they only released selected video (with a phony, fabricated sound track) for propaganda purposes.

Seems to have worked as they desired.

All peaceful until Capital Police fired on the peaceful crowd. A riot instigated by Democrats and the FBI. It’s documented and confirmed by witnesses.

Oh, and only leftists use their own shit as a weapon. I think they even eat it. How does it taste?

Oh that siege where when the mob taking over the USA leaves politely when asked, that siege?

Greg get help.

leaves politely when asked


Yes part of the footage they hid from you so you would suck the koolaid.

Rules for Radicals ; Always blame someone of a differences of opinion , for the exact issues and narrative for what you’re doing wrong . Greg; if your a real human ? Your in dire need of a brain transplant . I dust my shoes off from any more of your non-sense and leave with a ta-ta .

12/29/23 – Suddenly, Trump Is Interested in Democracy – As Maine throws him off the ballot, the president who betrayed democracy is now pleading for its protections.

Donald Trump won the presidency with fewer votes than his opponent?

We’re a republic, not a democracy.

State Republican parties in Wisconsin, North Carolina, and other states gerrymandered themselves into supermajorities?

We’re a republic, not a democracy.

Forty-one senators block laws favored by 59? A single senator blocks promotions across the Defense Department?

We’re a republic, not a democracy.

Florida voters restored voting rights to felons, only to see the reform disregarded by the state legislature?

We’re a republic, not a democracy.

States rule that Trump is an insurrectionist under the terms of the Fourteenth Amendment, barring him from their ballots?

Let the people decide!

There’s not much use in pointing out hypocrisy in the Trump era. Trump and his core supporters are governed only by the Cartman principle—“I do what I want!”—and to that principle, they are always faithful.

Yet even if it changes nothing to understand the game that’s being played, the understanding is still worth having in its own right.

Trump lost the 2020 presidential election. He plotted to overturn that election, first by fraud, then by violence. His scheme to cheat Joe Biden out of the presidency amounted to the single most spectacular effort to defy the will of the voters since the slave states started a civil war rather than accept Abraham Lincoln’s election. Trump’s actions appear both criminal and anti-constitutional. For the alleged crimes, he’s been indicted by both state and federal prosecutors. For the constitutional offense, he now faces disqualification from the ballot in a growing number of states.

Trump was disqualified in Maine yesterday. Colorado also disqualified him, but has for the moment stayed the enforcement of the disqualification. Minnesota ruled that Trump is not disqualified yet but may be in the future.

Will these state disqualifications survive Supreme Court review? Even if they are legal, are they prudentially wise ways to protect American democracy against Donald Trump? We all have our own opinions. (Mine was originally negative, but I am becoming disqualification-curious.)

Trump himself launched his presidential career by arguing that President Barack Obama should not have been able to run for president because Obama was not a natural-born citizen of the United States. In 2016, Trump argued that his rival Ted Cruz should be disqualified as a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination because Cruz was born in Canada. (Unlike Trump’s fantasies about Obama, Trump was right on the facts about Cruz—just wrong on the law.)

In 2020, Trump tried to disqualify voters who’d exercised their right to vote by mail or whose ballots had for any reason not yet been counted by midnight on Election Day.

Trump and his supporters have conjured a series of self-serving rules. Where antique anti-majoritarian devices work for them, the antique anti-majoritarian devices prevail. Where crude gaming of filibusters and gerrymandering works for them, the crude gaming must prevail. Where fraud and violence work for them, fraud and violence must prevail. And where invoking democratic ideas works for them—well, you can complete the sentence.

How should people who are serious about democratic principles respond to this avalanche of bad faith? Democratic ideals don’t cease to be true just because they can be exploited by dishonest actors. Yet democracy also cannot become an optional principle that authoritarians can use when it suits them and then discard without consequences when it becomes an obstacle to their goals. Democratic systems have constitutions and constitutional remedies precisely to protect themselves against those who toggle in this way between breaking inconvenient rules and demanding the benefit of favorable ones.

A key provision of the suddenly famous Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment is that it applies only to those who previously swore an oath of office. It’s not a general punishment for revolts against legal authority. It is a highly targeted penalty applied to those who—like Trump—try to play the system both ways, swearing to execute the laws and then rebelling against the laws they swore to enforce.

Maybe prudence genuinely does recommend leaving Trump’s disgraced name on primary and general-election ballots. But remember that old joke about the man who murdered both of his parents and then asked for mercy as an orphan? It needs to be replaced by a new joke about the ex-president who trashed democracy when he had the power, and then pleaded for the protection of democracy so he could have one more chance to trash democracy again.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Trump defended and respected the Constitution. Democrats shit on and ignore it.

Greg the Stupid

Crown him with many crowns. :] Stupid is as stupid does,…king-greg . The essence of a madman like King George of London .

This person is a lunatic.

WATCH: 2021 Video of Maine Secretary of State Discussing “Election Sabotage” and the ACLU, SPLC Role Working to Bar Trump From Ballots in Key States Surfaces

Last edited 2 months ago by TrumpWon

What she says makes sense, totally and completely.

She bellows but says nothing but leftist, whiny propaganda. She doesn’t have the authority to keep Trump off the ballot just because she’s a butt-hurt bitch.

Here is gregs take. From one raving lunatic to another.

Greg on Maine Secretary of State Gets Destroyed After Removing Trump From the Ballot: “What she says makes sense, totally and completely.”
Dec 29, 13:35

What she says makes sense, totally and completely.

Yeah, to people like him, who don’t mind seeing the Constitution trashed in order to destroy someone they hate simply because they hate, this makes sense.

America doesn’t survive from Philosophies & whims . Only by the Constitutional Laws . Which this bellowing wind bag called Bellows , seems NOT to recognize as authority .

“We need to organize to make sure we have better leaders in positions of power to fight back against [election sabotage],” Bellows said before admitting that far-left organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) are working to bar Trump from the ballot.

The tenacles of the fascistic Deep State reaches far and wide to do everything in its power in order to maintain power. The most recent example is the radical dimms using their power and influence to deny the voters to opportunity to vote for their favorite candidate.

Yes, that’s what she said. There’s no contradiction. Trump brazenly tried to steal an election by unconstitutional means.

What do you think the phony elector plot was all about? What don’t you understand about phony elector credentials, fraudulently submitted? They knew damn well it was illegal.

Oh, look… Greg complaining about a lawful, constitutional process. I guess it’d be OK if they just “decided” she was no longer AG?

So sure she,like the Colorado loons, put a stay on the order, just another attention seeking C.

Women like her sure put a stink on C.

Just goes to prove about you , Greg ,…you really don’t have any original thoughts . But to your credit though ,…your vocabulary is clock full of vulgarity . What people of a better demeanor ? Would call TRASH TALK . Man, your looking smaller and smaller everyday .

Comrade Greggie, you really need mental health help. You keep up this TDS and you are going to blow your own brains out.

Stop believing the crap put out by those like a Secretary of State that clearly doesn’t understand not only her own state’s laws but the originality of Art. II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution.

Perhaps laws schools, like the radically leftist Harvard, should make Constitutional law a requirement. Now, law students don’t even take it most of the time. But hey, you’ll buy the stupidity of a ill informed, uneducated Secretary of State who was an election in 2000 and headed an ACLU office for 8 years. Maine is getting dumber and dumber. Maybe that’s why intelligent people are fleeing it as fast as they can.

Retired 05 ; I’m beginning to believe Greg is a non-human , Maybe a Bot or a AI impostor. Like you said any human with this much of an emotional disorder could be suicidal . The drugs wouldn’t help him . Maybe make him worse . He wouldn’t be first .

Mr. Jeffrey, Comrade Greggie has been spreading his b/s on this site for a long time. But he is a chameleon. His color changes with the wind, as it does with all left wingers. For years, he railed against the war in Iran and Afghanistan, the military industrial complex and the out of control spending on the part of the government.

Now he supports giving billions of $$ to the grifter Zelenskyy, never mentions the military industrial complex, seemingly approves of the invasion on our southern border and truly believes Joe Biden is coherent. And like most left wingers, he is a hater; he hates Trump, any other Republican, hates Russia (although totally unaware of the cause of the Ukraine/Russia issue), would personally kill every unborn baby he could get his hands on if he could, hates Christianity.

No, he’s not AI. He’s way too stupid to be AI.

Yes, that’s what she said. There’s no contradiction. Trump brazenly tried to steal an election by unconstitutional means.

She’s as much a delusional liar as the rest of you. You can look for it until the cows come home, but you’ll never find an insurrection that Trump was involved in nor an insurrection that occurred at the Capital on January 6th. What you have is a totally failed Democrat party that puts absolute power above all else, including due process and the Constitution. Your party is comprised of frightened crybabies that can’t take responsibility for their own action.

Do you understand that phony credentials were fraudulently filed for 81 fake electors from 7 states as part of a White House orchestrated plot?

That the January 6 mob was fired up and sent off to the Capitol to stop a constitutional process, so that the fake electors could come into play?

There’s NO QUESTION about what happened. If Pence hadn’t refused, the lying son-of-a-bitch you worship would have stolen the election he claims his opponent attempted to steal.

Trump’s fake electors: Here’s the full list

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

I don’t think it’s that you don’t understand. I think it’s that Trump’s followers DON’T CARE. Their professed concern for democracy, for the rule of law, and for the Constitution is complete bullshit.

They want him back, no matter what it takes.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

There were no “phony” electors. There was no “insurrection”. Furthermore, the 2020 election was decided by Democrat election fraud.

Democrats and the left hate the Constitution and the United States. Everything they do is an effort to destroy them.

Really? 12/06/23 – Nevada grand jury indicts six Republicans who falsely certified that Trump won the state in 2020

There were no “phony” electors.

They broke both state and federal laws—all but one group, which put Kenneth Chesebro on the spot by asking him point blank if what they were doing was legal. When he acknowledged that it probably wasn’t, they added a declaration that their votes were to be counted only if the courts upheld challenges to their state vote counts.

No court did. Not one. All court challenges failed in every state.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

More Democrat abuse of the judicial system. You know what else broke state and federal laws? Democrat’s election fraud, by the bushel load.

Be more descriptive Greg ,..What is your personal thought of what an ” elector plot ” is ? See if you can accumulate enough electrons scattered in your head to formulate your cause of your decipherable ability it’s meanings ? Not,…some else’s narrative . Prove your worth !

12/29/23 – GOP rep warns House has final say over election after states deem Trump ineligible for ballots

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) issued a warning to states moving to keep former President Trump off the presidential ballot, saying the House of Representatives has the final say over whether electors from those states are certified on Jan. 6, 2025.

“Maine, Colorado, and other states that might try to bureaucratically deny ballot access to any Republican nominee should remember the U.S. House of Representatives is the ultimate arbiter of whether to certify electors from those states,” Massie posted Friday on X, formerly Twitter. 

Billionaire Elon Musk, owner of X, replied to Massie’s tweet about certification: “Interesting.”

Trump was declared ineligible by Colorado’s Supreme Court last week and by Maine’s secretary of state on Thursday under the 14th Amendment’s insurrection clause, pointing to Trump’s denial of 2020 election results and actions leading up to a mob of his supporters attacking the Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, as it met to certify electors from each state…

They might imagine that they do. If they try to go there, they may quickly discover they don’t have a final say over anything. The rule of law is all that gives them their power.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

In May 2022, Massie was the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against a non-binding resolution denouncing antisemitism. Massie tweeted that he voted against the bill because it promoted censorship.

What resolution?

117TH Congress 2d Session, H. RES. 1125, condemning rising antisemitism.

(4) works in tandem with the cross-party Inter Parliamentary Task Force to Combat Online Anti semitism to help craft thoughtful global initiatives designed to address online antisemitism;

(5) calls on social media platforms to institute stronger and more significant efforts to measure and address online antisemitism while protecting free speech concerns;

Well, what do you know… it DOES promote censorship.

When Democrats declare they can just keep a strong candidate they fear off ballots without any lawful authority, then anyone can do anything. If you want law and order, you might first try respecting the law and Constitution.

They might imagine that they do. If they try to go there, they may quickly discover they don’t have a final say over anything

U.S. Constitution, Amd XIV, Section 5, you f*cking moron.

Last edited 2 months ago by retire05

Republicans don’t get to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they do or don’t follow as Trump’s convenience requires.

Democrats don’t get to pick and choose who is on ballots for the opposing party. After all, this isn’t the DNC convention.

Democrats don’t get to pick and choose who is on ballots for the opposing party.

I suppose we’ll see whether or not you’re correct.

I am unless you can show me the law that says they can.

Every one of the 50 states has at some point disqualified a potential candidate from appearing on its ballots.

Give me one example where any single person disqualified a candidate for no valid reason but just a personal bias.

09/06/22 – Judge removes Griffin from office for engaging in the January 6 insurrection

SANTA FE — A New Mexico judge ordered Otero County Commissioner Couy Griffin be removed from office, effective immediately, ruling that the attack on the Capitol was an insurrection and that Griffin’s participation in it disqualified him under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. This decision marks the first time since 1869 that a court has disqualified a public official under Section 3, and the first time that any court has ruled the events of January 6, 2021 an insurrection.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, also known as the Disqualification Clause, bars any person from holding federal or state office who took an “oath…to support the Constitution of the United States” as an “officer of any State” and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or gave “aid or comfort” to insurrectionists. Griffin, as an Otero County Commissioner since January 2019, took an oath to “support and uphold the Constitution and laws of the State of New Mexico, and the Constitution of the United States.”

“This is a historic win for accountability for the January 6th insurrection and the efforts to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power in the United States. Protecting American democracy means ensuring those who violate their oaths to the Constitution are held responsible,” said CREW President Noah Bookbinder.

“This decision makes clear that any current or former public officials who took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution and then participated in the January 6th insurrection can and will be removed and barred from government service for their actions.”

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Again, an arbitrary one-man decision to commit an illegal act. There was no insurrection so there could be no insurrectionists. FOOL!

Sure the Democrats tossed Lincoln, he still won. Proud of that one?

greg is in panic mode.

I’m not the one squawking like a chicken and firing off insults and expletives.

After over a decade of your b/s lies on this website, your mere presence here is an insult to any logical thinking person, right or left.

Amd. XIV, Section 5 is unequivocal.

Last edited 2 months ago by retire05

Has it escaped your notice that the House is not the entirety of Congress?

Section 5

The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Has it escaped your notice that the House is not the entirety of Congress?

And I said it was where, f*cking moron?

You were unaware of Section 5 until I brought it up.

Just because you are a Constitutional illiterate doesn’t mean everyone is. Now, go back to pleasuring yourself.

What exactly were you trying to say? Did it have anything at all to do with Massie’s “dire warning”?

You do understand that he’s threatening to attempt to overturn yet another election, don’t you? Or did you somehow miss that?

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

What exactly were you trying to say?

I was quite clear. Your reading comprehension deficit is your problem.

Did it have anything at all to do with Massie’s “dire warning”?


You do understand that he’s threatening to attempt to overturn yet another election, don’t you?

Nope. Unlike you I don’t read into something that isn’t there.

Or did you somehow miss that?

Like you missed Section 5?

Massie is stating a GOP majority House could simply disregard electors selected in accordance with the legal election processes of each state, and accept the votes of others that give the GOP the outcome they want.

That’s the threat he’s making with regard to Jan. 6, 2025. It would be nothing less than the end of democracy and the republic, and the installation of an authoritarian leader.

Section 5? I have no clue what you’re rattling on about. Probably you don’t either.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

There’s a lot you don’t have a clue about.

No doubt. But I understand what Massie is saying well enough.

No, apparently you don’t. Not a clue.

No, you’re just the one supporting fascism.

Greg, do you hear squawking? yes we toss out insults, when you read the comments you attach a certain emotion or voices to them?
Dude these are opinions, all any of us can do is vote, you really seem to be deeply emotionally vested.
Maybe because its the 6th day of Christmas, but its 6 geese not chickens thats day 3.
Maybe you need to remember none of the people in DC GAF about anyone, they dont care about anything but their next big insider trading financial score.

Now it would help if you kept to the subject, the batshit crazy feminist that thinks she has the power to alter the presidential election of the entire country. SOS Bellows is a good name she sure is blowing alot of air fanning flames getting press, but her career may just be ended. She isnt an elected official, perhaps she should stay in her lane.

In total crybaby mode. Every unconstitutional parlor trick they throw at Trump fails. In fact, the obvious anti-American persecution only makes Trump stronger and more popular and formidable. Of COURSE he is crying.

Nothing has failed, Dilbert. The trials haven’t even begun yet.

They are collapsing around your very crybaby ears.

What would he be panicking about?

Numerous lawfare strategies are failing.

The Audacity of Shenna Bellows

Ten years ago, I wrote a column for the Bangor Daily News (back when it ran actual news) entitled “The Audacity of Shenna Bellows.” At the time, she was the Democratic Party’s sacrificial lamb running for Susan Collins’ seat in the U.S. Senate and had gone to some lengths to misrepresent the centrist Republican senator’s position on abortion rights. In her decision today, by fiat, to declare Donald Trump ineligible to be on Maine’s ballot in the coming year’s presidential election, Bellows has — in essence — said to herself, the state, and the nation: “hold my beer.”

When Bellows held an eight-hour hearing last week on this question, most political observers assumed she was just posturing. But emboldened by the state of Colorado’s recent move to strike Trump from the ballot on the grounds he is ineligible because of the insurrection clause in the 14th Amendment, Bellows has made a kamikaze dive for the national klieg lights like a star-struck moth to the flame. While some on the left will call her move courageous, sensible Mainers are burying their faces in our palms at this moment. She has embarrassed us, to put it mildly.

I’ve never been a big Trump fan. This may surprise some given the fact I had to eat a felony charge in the Russia-gate imbroglio of 2017-19, but it’s a simple fact. Still, having spent a good chunk of my career promoting democracy overseas, I must say it’s stunning to see it so subverted in my own home state.

In order to be an insurrectionist, one must be convicted. Special Counsel Jack Smith may have charged Trump, and it may be true that in our lopsided courts of criminal justice in this country, prosecutors enjoy a ridiculous success ratio. But special counsels have proven to be the exception to this rule. My old pal Robert Mueller famously failed to prove Trump was installed in the White House by Russian subterfuge, despite every possible media advantage. And John Durham failed to convict two Hillary Clinton operatives of lying to the FBI about the matter despite abundant evidence they did. It is beginning to look like the U.S. Department of Justice should call the office of special counsel the house of broken toys.

Thankfully in this country, one remains presumed innocent until twelve jurors conclude otherwise. And what that simply means is that Bellows has jumped the shark — if not for the first time, than in the most glaring instance of her vaunted career.

In order to be an insurrectionist, one must be convicted.

Where is that written in the Constitution or the law?

There are no laws in the Constitution. That is basic civics 101. Leftists abhor the Constitution.

And where does it say that one leftist non-attorney AG bitch can decide to kick the front-running candidate off of a ballot?

It’s called “due process”. See, there actually WAS a Civil War, but there never was an “insurrection” on January 6th, unless you want to count the coup attempted by Pelosi, Bowser, the FBI and the Capital Police. Without an actual insurrection, you’ll need to convict Trump of an insurrection that actually happened.

That is, of course, if you happen to have any respect whatsoever for the Constitution and due process. But, you don’t, do you? All that stands in the way of your fascist desires, doesn’t it?

Last edited 2 months ago by Just Plain Bill

From Hassan v. Colorado, 09/04/2012 :

“…Even if Article II properly holds him ineligible to assume the office of president, Mr. Hassan claims it was still an unlawful act of discrimination for the state to deny him a place on the ballot. But, as the  magistrate judge’s opinion makes clear and we expressly reaffirm here, a state’s legitimate interest in protecting the integrity and practical functioning of the political process permits it to exclude from the ballot candidates who are constitutionally prohibited from assuming office…”

The above opinion was written and entered by Judge Neil M. Gorsuch

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

No insurrection, no insurrectionist. Case closed.

There’s a reason Trump asked the SCOTUS to delay a ruling on whether he can be prosecuted. He’ll want a delayed ruling on whether a state can bump him off the ballot, too.

When he goes to trial, he’ll be found guilty. If the court rules on the states’ right to disqualify him, they’ll support the states’ right.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Meanwhile, your side of the aisle protests against Israel and supports the terrorist organization, Hamas.

I guess those left wing morons don’t realize that it is illegal to give support to a terrorist organization. But don’t worry, Jake Sullivan isn’t going to do anything to them nor is Merrick Garland. That’s their voting base. So they will ignore our laws enacted after 9/11 and pretend that everything is great.

Meanwhile, Joey Brain Dead is off again on another vacation at another wealthy friends multi million $$ house. But hey, let’s rail on Clarence Thomas because he has wealthy friends. My, my, how the yapping about Justice Thomas ended quickly when a left wing justice has issues.

So every time you rag on Trump, I am going to point out the corruption of your lying party. Wanna talk about Hunter, James and Joseph Biden, Comrade?

Biden has provided aid to Israel despite the worse than useless MAGA morons in the House gridlocking assistance. He’s done the same for Ukraine.

Biden administration again bypasses Congress for weapons sale to Israel

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Biden has provided aid to Israel

Biden hasn’t done shite, moron. Biden doesn’t even know what day it is. He’s pumped full of drugs like Aracept when Sullivan needs Biden to appear in public and then hopes Biden doesn’t wander off. He’s president because your side cheats and Dr. Jill wants to be First Lady when she should be in jail for elder abuse.

So Sullivan, and Blinken, decide to “sell”, NOT GIVE, arms to Israel when they claim Biden has given Ukraine billions of $$ while Zelenskyy is the biggest grifter on Earth.

Meanwhile, your side continues to protest Israel and support Hamas. And don’t give me any crap about Palestine. There is no such place. It’s Gaza, and the Gazans support Hamas. Just like you support the radicals in this country.

You are a stupid, stupid person.

I should care what you think?

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

No, you should f**k off as far off as you can possibly go and take your fascism and anti-Semitism with you.

All Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden has to do to secure the aid is secure our border. Note that, since election fraud put him in office, the situation on the southern border has gotten WORSE every year. Every month, a new (bad) record of incompetence is established. The equivalence of two military divisions cross the border every day and that is getting worse, too.

California, New Mexico, Arizona, Texas and Florida should all kick Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden or any other Democrat candidate that does not denounce the current dereliction of duty on the border and pledge to reenact all of Trump’s measures, including the border wall, off their ballots. Because AG’s and courts of those states can make that call.

Last edited 2 months ago by Just Plain Bill

The illegal alien invasion will be a top 2024 election issue right behind the economy that biden has intentionally destroyed.

comment image

Border Crisis Overflows Shelters in Detroit, Activists Call on Residents to Take Illegals Into Their Homes

California to Become First State to Give Illegal Aliens Taxpayer-Funded Health Insurance

comment image

Bless his little heart, greg must be so proud of this biden accomplishment.

Flooding the nation with illegal immigrants is their goal.

Next month will be even worse.

He asked for the ruling, not for it to be delayed. Maybe, if this case is so important and vital, it should have been brought sooner instead of only when Trump appeared so strong in the campaign that it would take MASSIVE voter fraud to overcome, so lawfare needed to be employed.

If and when he is found guilty, it will be appealed until it gets to a non-DNC court and overturned. There is no shred nor sign of merit in the case.

Of course. All it takes to confirm the Democrat election fraud is to finally get a judge that is not a leftist ideologue or coward (or both) to allow a case to be heard.

Every state should have a Gableman, GA needs one desperately, Fulton County what a nightmare. Our so called elections committee needs to be disbanded, for years they have been telling clerks to break laws. Fulton County doesnt seem to know that there are rules and laws to be followed.
comment image

Last edited 2 months ago by kitt


You need President Trump as your President if you want this country to return to normal.

Trump’s reelection would be the end of all normalcy—even the things you like and take for granted. He’s a wrecking ball.

Consider the chaos he’s already creating. I don’t want a “May they rot in hell! Merry Christmas!” a-hole leading the nation. I don’t care whether he’s evil or crazy. Same difference.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

No, Comrade Greggie, you would prefer to have a puppet who, along with his entire family, brings disgrace to our nation.
You’re an useful idiot.

You have nothing useful to say to me. I have nothing further to say to you.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Comrade Greggie, cowardice on full display.

Fuck off, troll. You’re a waste of my time.

 I have nothing further to say to you.

your next post:

Fuck off, troll. You’re a waste of my time.

You can’t even stick to your own statements so obviously, I’m not a waste of your time.

Maybe I should bookmark this so when you whine about being insulted I can remind you what a coward you are, and have been for at least a decade.

OK, now you can go back to pleasuring yourself.

Or do you get some fan of Dylan Mulvany to do that for you? Is Michael your buttbuddy?

Bless gregs little heart. Compliments to you for really getting under his skin.

They really fear Trump using the same tactics as they did against them, and the trump voters voters, turned on themselves.

I say if we want our country back, we actually run it the way it should be, not a revenge fest.
Obama and Hillary need to pay back the treasury the money spent on the Russian Hoax.
Fauchi and the Scarf wench need to answer for the murderous rampage. Stripped of all unearned benefits.
Our “intelligence Agencies curbed , the Patriot act purged, etc.

Nah, you prefer the “If you don’t support me, you ain’t black, if you don’t support me and my ruinous policies, you are semi-fascist” asshole that forced his young daughter to shower with him.

Normalcy? geeze I thought normal was having a President that could form a basic sentence.
comment image

Biden isn’t the issue. Trump is the issue. The GOP should put forward a rational alternative to Biden.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

What grade do you give biden?

Why is Biden not the issue?

Last edited 2 months ago by TrumpWon

Because Biden isn’t a vengeful lunatic who has openly stated he can ignore all rules, laws, regulations—even those in the Constitution. Because Biden wouldn’t become the unwitting tool of armed far-right extremists eager to slip the leash.

The GOP could win with a rational candidate. Trump isn’t about the GOP winning. Trump is only about Trump. The GOP is just the horse he stole.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

So you are 100% behind biden?

I’m 100% behind anyone who can keep Trump out of the White House, and who understands that compromise on both sides is essential to deal with our problems.

RFK jr?

RFK is unelectable. It isn’t clear whether he’d take more votes away from Biden or Trump.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden is a corrupt, vengeful, cowardly piece of shit.

Fantasy land you are in an alternate universe created by fear mongering morons.

I think Biden is doing a good job under extraordinarily difficult national and world circumstances. The presidency has become a high-wire act without a net. One slip and we’re all f**ked, but the GOP is shaking the wire. They did the same with Clinton and with Obama, but the danger now is MUCH greater. All they care about is hanging on to power when their presumptive candidate isn’t competent to wield it.

If Putin prevails, there will be hell to pay. If the war in Gaza spreads, there will be hell to pay. If budget compromises aren’t made including both tax increases and spending cuts, there will be hell to pay. If corporations aren’t rationally regulated to rein in greed, there will be hell to pay.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

I think Biden is doing a good job under extraordinarily difficult national and world circumstances. 

Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden CREATED the disasters and he is doing an absolutely terrible job of mitigating the disasters HE created. A person would have to be a completely blind idiot not to see the reality.

You can’t be serious.

I AM serious. One slip and catastrophe ensues—with the Middle East, with Russia, with China, with North Korea, with Iran. That’s Biden’s tightrope walk. He made none of these problems, but he’s had to deal with them.

bidens tightrope walk?

He can’t even walk up a flight of stairs to an airplane, or walk off of a stage or ride a bike. You are a moron.

Now this;

Because biden is weak and compromised.

‘Rocket Man’ Kim Jong Un Sets His Defense Industry on a War Footing – North Korean Dictator Steps up Nuclear Capabilities for a Confrontation With the US

Had to be something he heard on a cable opinion show.
They swung Trump on a rope for his entire Presidency yet he made historic peace deals, no new wars broke out, it almost looked like the end of the Korean war. Illegal crossings were at historic lows, he didnt beg Mexico, he told them this is what we want and this is what will happen if you do not assist.

What historic peace deals are you referring to? The surrender to the Taliban? The historic peace deal between Israel and the Islamic world? The reining in of Iran or North Korea? The containment of Putin? I’m not seeing it.

Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden IS the issue. He is a total and absolute disastrous failure and, knowing he hasn’t a snowball’s chance in hell of ever winning a fair election, he is abusing every power he can get his withered fingers on to bring lawfare to bear on Trump. Trump is an honest and capable leader compared to the incompetent, racist, failed, corrupt, treasonous pedophile, Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden.

Oh yes Biden is a huge issue everything he has touched as been destroyed.

That’s just something you say. In fact, he’s pushed back Putin without triggering war with Russia, and backed Israel without triggering open war with Iran. His administration has brought inflation under control and dodged a recession that many said was inevitable. He’s avoided government shutdowns that would have done enormous unnecessary damage to the economy. He’s resisted rollbacks of environmental protections. All of this against ENORMOUS resistance and incessant attacks.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

He has not pushed Putin back.
Inflation is out of control
The face value of the national debt is above 34 trillion.

Where have you been, under a rock?

Inflation is down from 7.11% last year to 3.14%. I filled up my gas tank for $2.66/gal earlier this week.

Trump has no 2024 platform but retribution, a government purge of all who oppose him, a claim he can end the war in 24 hours with a phone call, hints that he’ll deploy troops within the US, “Drill Baby Drill” when US gas and oil production are already at record levels, and a claim that he’s going to somehow round up and deport all undocumented aliens and end birthright citizenship. Oh yeah—and he’s once again going to end the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something wonderful—details to come later.

Unlike Biden, Trump can walk on water and fly by flapping his arms.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Oh yeah—and he’s once again going to end the Affordable Care Act and replace it with something wonderful—details to come later.

You’d think that after eight years of saying that same thing he—or anybody in his camp—would have come up with something by now.

Apparently, you are unfamiliar with how Congress works. Odd, for a “teacher”.

Trump himself has said many, many times that he was going to present a healthcare plan and set Congress to work on getting it passed. He started saying that while he was running for his only term in office. The details were always “two weeks” in the future.

Presidents often present the big vision for a new initiative in either a speech or a press conference. But you know that. You just want to look stupid, for some reason.

Last edited 2 months ago by Michael

And, he did. It was voted on and lost, by one vote. McCain’s vote.

Wow! Drive inflation up to over 7%, then celebrate when if falls to half that! Jack gas prices up $3, then cheer when it come down $1.50! Yet, they have learned no lessons, admit no mistakes and, once the election is over, will again drive the economy into the shitter.

All Trump has to do is kick Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden’s wrinkled ass out of the White House, shitcan all his policies and put the policies that worked, which Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden reversed, back in operation. It ain’t rocket science, scooter.

Unlike Biden, Trump can walk.

There. Fixed it.

A world of pure delusion.

Trump’s reelection would be the end of all normalcy

The same leftist threat from 2016.

It’s the same MAGA candidate.

And the same terroristic threats of chaos, disruption and violence from the left.

What grade would you give came-la as border czar?

About the same grade I’d give republicans for putting forward any actual workable solutions.

The solution is to put all of Trump’s policies back in place and replace Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden with Trump.

What has she done?

Why did mayorkas lie to the American people when he said the border was closed?

Last edited 2 months ago by TrumpWon

He lied to congress we should see his house surrounded by several swat teams and a CNN crew any minute now.

Last edited 2 months ago by kitt

Toxic to anti-American, anti-Constitution leftist fascists. That’s who oppose him.

She hasn’t not been destroyed, though the predictable death threats from Trump trolls have been coming in.

Oh, you mean like the death threats against the Colorado justices… that aren’t? Bullshit, as usual.

Oh, but she got “swatted”. Do you think it’s as funny when it happens to her as when it happens the MTG?

If former presidents were immune from prosecution, sitting presidents could commit any criminal act to retain office without fear of consequence.

Biden could simply order that Trump be shot, and then pardon the trigger man.

Anyone who thinks the Supreme Court is going grant presidents such license is crazy. Trump will be granted no such blanket immunity.

Trump knows this. That’s why he’s trying to delay the case. It’s also why the Appeals Court will quickly bump it up to the Supreme Court.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

Biden could simply order that Trump be shot, and then pardon the trigger man.

No doubt, that is already on the table. Everything else is failing. But, this would only affect Democrats, as they are who is corrupt and it would take all these lawfare weapons out of their hands.

Trump is trying to have the totally and obviously bogus cases THROWN OUT, not delayed.

Biden could simply order that Trump be shot, and then pardon the trigger man.

This is sick thinking. Curt, IMHO this needs to be addressed on this forum. We here are better than this and allowing this type of virulent commenting is a disservice to those of us who may from time to time get amped up but have never suggested killing anyone.

I attribute this to the TDS that has infected the brain of greg. I am thoroughly disgusted by his suggestion and call on you to take some sort of action.

The left is deranged and this type of incivility has been suggested by non other than the husband of victoria nuland, a guy by the name of kagan.

I didn’t take Greg’s comment as a direct threat, though it has to be acknowledged that the threat exists and the left would be pleased. They view murder as a viable means of communication and there is no doubt that there are those on the left thinking along these lines.

You need to address the fact that finding former presidents immune from prosecution would grant license to do ANYTHING to retain office. THAT WOULD BE THE LOGICAL OUTCOME. It would grant such license the current president, and to every future president. We would have tyrants, not presidents.

If former presidents were immune from prosecution, sitting presidents could commit any criminal act to retain office without fear of consequence.

Biden could simply order that Trump be shot, and then pardon the trigger man.

Anyone who thinks the Supreme Court is going grant presidents such license is crazy. Trump will be granted no such blanket immunity.

Trump knows this. That’s why he’s trying to delay the case. It’s also why the Appeals Court will quickly bump it up to the Supreme Court.

When the Democrats control the DoJ and use it as their own little GESTAPO, then for all practical purposes, the Democrats can and have commit any crime they want with immunity. Just look at how Hunter skated on numerous serious crimes, Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden’s theft of classified documents, influence peddling, money laundering and extortion, Pelosi’s insider trading, Obama’s illegal spying, Hillary’s mishandling of classified information and perjury, Comey’s perjury, Brennan’s perjury, Clapper’s perjury, Mayorkas’ perjury, Wray’s perjury… the list simply goes on and on.

You’re ignoring the fact that immunity from prosecution would allow presidents to do ANYTHING to retain office.

But, when Democrats break laws and violate the Constitution with impunity, what does it matter? THAT is my first concern.

Currently, Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden IS doing ANYTHING to retain office, and it’s mostly illegal and unconstitutional, yet you cheer it on.

So you’d be OK with the SCOTUS decreeing that former presidents are totally immune to criminal prosecution when Biden is in office, or when any other Democratic president is in office?

Seems they already are it was Obama that began the phoney Cross fire hurricane, he sold guns to mexican cartels, droned American citizens abroad, funded Irans nuclear program, armed terrorists, Bengahzi, libya, coup in Ukraine, ect, ect

Trump was president for four years. Why didn’t he do anything?

Trump tried to get the Crossfire Hurricane documents released. He declassified them and took them with him, which is why he is being prosecuted. Whenever he went against the AG or FBI director, YOU ALL called him a “dictator”. The DoJ and FBI protects themselves relentlessly and will attack and destroy anyone that tries to clean it up.

But it appears no one but Trump is interested in doing the cleaning. YOU certainly aren’t.

As I’ve said every time, I am NOT. But the bigger problem is Democrats abusing the system to effectively make themselves immune from all accountability. Why don’t you oppose what is actually happening first, then worry about hypotheticals?

You are ignoring the fact that they can be impeached.
The constitution has this covered relax.

McConnell announced Trump would be found not guilty before the Senate trial. How effective was that?

Impeachment is political. The only penalty is removal from office. Suppose a President ordered all of his political enemies rounded up and shot. The worse penalty would be to remove him from office—assuming there were enough political enemies left to do so.

If a former president can’t be criminally prosecuted, that scenario becomes a real possibility. Basically, the only remedy people would be left with is assassination.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

You live in a paranoid fantasy, stop listening to the talking heads they are not your friends.

That’s logic, not paranoid fantasy or talking head gibberish. That would be the logical consequence of total immunity from prosecution. A president could do ANYTHING to retain office without fear of consequences.

Would you want the SCOTUS to give that license to Biden? They’ll be deciding before January 2025, you know.

Last edited 2 months ago by Greg

It does not sound like logic ,rounding up people like Biden is. Im sure when they get a trial it will be lethal injection.

It is perfectly logical—a very simple if/then conditional proposition: IF former presidents are immune from prosecution for anything they do while in office, THEN they can do anything they want to retain office without fear of prosecution.

They could lie, cheat, steal, or even murder. They could disregard “all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,” to remain in office.

It does not sound like logic ,rounding up people like Biden is. I’m sure when they get a trial it will be lethal injection.

Last edited 1 month ago by Greg

However, IF we elect the President, as opposed to simply installing them through election fraud as Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden was installed, THEN you don’t get the corrupt, treasonous pedophiles that have been stealing from the public for 50 years.

Seems thats exactly what Obama did.

That’s what I keep saying; Greg is whining about a hypothetical while his party has been doing it for years.

It isn’t hypothetical. It’s precisely what Trump asserts the Supreme Court should rule. If reelected, he would then be free to to ANYTHING he wished, untouchable for any past or future crimes.

It would be like giving absolute power to an angry toddler.

This should be mandatory reading: 11/30/23 – A Trump dictatorship is increasingly inevitable. We should stop pretending.

Let’s stop the wishful thinking and face the stark reality: There is a clear path to dictatorship in the United States, and it is getting shorter every day. In 13 weeks, Donald Trump will have locked up the Republican nomination. In the RealClearPolitics poll average (for the period from Nov. 9 to 20), Trump leads his nearest competitor by 47 points and leads the rest of the field combined by 27 points. The idea that he is unelectable in the general election is nonsense — he is tied or ahead of President Biden in all the latest polls — stripping other Republican challengers of their own stated reasons for existence. The fact that many Americans might prefer other candidates, much ballyhooed by such political sages as Karl Rove, will soon become irrelevant when millions of Republican voters turn out to choose the person whom no one allegedly wants.

For many months now, we have been living in a world of self-delusion, rich with imagined possibilities. Maybe it will be Ron DeSantis, or maybe Nikki Haley. Maybe the myriad indictments of Trump will doom him with Republican suburbanites. Such hopeful speculation has allowed us to drift along passively, conducting business as usual, taking no dramatic action to change course, in the hope and expectation that something will happen. Like people on a riverboat, we have long known there is a waterfall ahead but assume we will somehow find our way to shore before we go over the edge. But now the actions required to get us to shore are looking harder and harder, if not downright impossible.

The magical-thinking phase is ending. Barring some miracle, Trump will soon be the presumptive Republican nominee for president. When that happens, there will be a swift and dramatic shift in the political power dynamic, in his favor. Until now, Republicans and conservatives have enjoyed relative freedom to express anti-Trump sentiments, to speak openly and positively about alternative candidates, to vent criticisms of Trump’s behavior past and present. Donors who find Trump distasteful have been free to spread their money around to help his competitors. Establishment Republicans have made no secret of their hope that Trump will be convicted and thus removed from the equation without their having to take a stand against him.

All this will end once Trump wins Super Tuesday. Votes are the currency of power in our system, and money follows, and by those measures, Trump is about to become far more powerful than he already is. The hour of casting about for alternatives is closing. The next phase is about people falling into line.

In fact, it has already begun. As his nomination becomes inevitable, donors are starting to jump from other candidates to Trump. The recent decision by the Koch political network to endorse GOP hopeful Nikki Haley is scarcely sufficient to change this trajectory. And why not? If Trump is going to be the nominee, it makes sense to sign up early while he is still grateful for defectors. Even anti-Trump donors must ask whether their cause is best served by shunning the man who stands a reasonable chance of being the next president. Will corporate executives endanger the interests of their shareholders just because they or their spouses hate Trump? It’s not surprising that people with hard cash on the line are the first to flip.

The rest of the Republican Party will quickly follow. Rove’s recent exhortation that primary voters choose anyone but Trump is the last such plea you are likely to hear from anyone with a future in the party. Even in a normal campaign, intraparty dissent begins to disappear once the primaries produce a clear winner. Most of the leading candidates have already pledged to support Trump if he is the nominee, even before he has won a single primary vote. Imagine their posture after he runs the table on Super Tuesday. Most of the candidates running against him will sprint toward him, competing for his favor. After Super Tuesday, there will be no surer and shorter path to the presidency for a Republican than to become the loyal running mate of a man who will be 82 in 2028.

Republicans who have tried to navigate the Trump era by mixing appeals to non-Trump voters with repeated professions of loyalty to Trump will end that show. As perilous as it is for Republicans to say a negative word about Trump today, it will be impossible once he has sewn up the nomination. The party will be in full general-election mode, subordinating all to the presidential campaign. What Republican or conservative will be standing up to Trump then? Will the Wall Street Journal editorial page, which has been rather boldly opposing Trump, continue to do so once he is the nominee and it is a binary choice between Trump and Biden? There will be no more infighting, only outfighting; in short, a tsunami of Trump support from all directions. A winner is a winner. And a winner who stands a reasonable chance of wielding all the power there is to wield in the world is going to attract support no matter who they are. That is the nature of power, at any time in any society.

But Trump will not only dominate his party. He will again become the central focus of everyone’s attention. Even today, the news media can scarcely resist following Trump’s every word and action. Once he secures the nomination, he will loom over the country like a colossus, his every word and gesture chronicled endlessly. Even today, the mainstream news media, including The Post and NBC News, is joining forces with Trump’s lawyers to seek televised coverage of his federal criminal trial in D.C. Trump intends to use the trial to boost his candidacy and discredit the American justice system as corrupt — and the media outlets, serving their own interests, will help him do it.

Trump will thus enter the general-election campaign early next year with momentum, backed by growing political and financial resources, and an increasingly unified party. Can the same be said of Biden? Is Biden’s power likely to grow over the coming months? Will his party unify around him? Or will alarm and doubt among Democrats, already high, continue to increase? Even at this point, the president is struggling with double-digit defections among Black Americans and younger voters. Jill Stein and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. have already launched, respectively, third-party and independent campaigns, coming at Biden in the main from the populist left. The decision by Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) not to run for reelection in West Virginia but instead to contemplate a third-party run for the presidency is potentially devastating. The Democratic coalition is likely to remain fractious as the Republicans unify and Trump consolidates his hold.

Biden, as some have pointed out, does not enjoy the usual advantages of incumbency. Trump is effectively also an incumbent, after all. That means Biden is unable to make the usual incumbent’s claim that electing his opponent is a leap into the unknown. Few Republicans regard the Trump presidency as having been either abnormal or unsuccessful. In his first term, the respected “adults” around him not only blocked some of his most dangerous impulses but also kept them hidden from the public. To this day, some of these same officials rarely speak publicly against him. Why should Republican voters have a problem with Trump if those who served him don’t? Regardless of what Trump’s enemies think, this is going to be a battle of two tested and legitimate presidents.

Trump, meanwhile, enjoys the usual advantage of non-incumbency, namely: the lack of any responsibility. Biden must carry the world’s problems like an albatross around his neck, like any incumbent, but most incumbents can at least claim that their opponent is too inexperienced to be entrusted with these crises. Biden cannot. On Trump’s watch, there was no full-scale invasion of Ukraine, no major attack on Israel, no runaway inflation, no disastrous retreat from Afghanistan. It is hard to make the case for Trump’s unfitness to anyone who does not already believe it.

Trump enjoys some unusual advantages for a challenger, moreover. Even Ronald Reagan did not have Fox News and the speaker of the House in his pocket. To the degree there are structural advantages in the coming general election, in short, they are on Trump’s side. And that is before we even get to the problem that Biden can do nothing to solve: his age.

Trump also enjoys another advantage. The national mood less than a year before the election is one of bipartisan disgust with the political system in general. Rarely in American history has democracy’s inherent messiness been more striking. In Weimar Germany, Hitler and other agitators benefited from the squabbling of the democratic parties, right and left, the endless fights over the budget, the logjams in the legislature, the fragile and fractious coalitions. German voters increasingly yearned for someone to cut through it all and get something — anything — done. It didn’t matter who was behind the political paralysis, either, whether the intransigence came from the right or the left.

Robert Kagan: Our constitutional crisis is already here

Today, Republicans might be responsible for Washington’s dysfunction, and they might pay a price for it in downballot races. But Trump benefits from dysfunction because he is the one who offers a simple answer: him. In this election, only one candidate is running on the platform of using unprecedented power to get things done, to hell with the rules. And a growing number of Americans claim to want that, in both parties. Trump is running against the system. Biden is the living embodiment of the system. Advantage: Trump.

Which brings us to Trump’s expanding legal battlefronts. No doubt Trump would have preferred to run for office without spending most of his time fending off efforts to throw him in jail. Yet it is in the courtroom over the coming months that Trump is going to display his unusual power within the American political system.

It is hard to fault those who have taken Trump

to court. He certainly committed at least one of the crimes he is charged with; we don’t need a trial to tell us he tried to overturn the 2020 election. Nor can you blame those who have hoped thereby to obstruct his path back to the Oval Office. When a marauder is crashing through your house, you throw everything you can at him — pots, pans, candlesticks — in the hope of slowing him down and tripping him up. But that doesn’t mean it works.

Trump will not be contained by the courts or the rule of law. On the contrary, he is going to use the trials to display his power. That’s why he wants them televised. Trump’s power comes from his following, not from the institutions of American government, and his devoted voters love him precisely because he crosses lines and ignores the old boundaries. They feel empowered by it, and that in turn empowers him. Even before the trials begin, he is toying with the judges, forcing them to try to muzzle him, defying their orders. He is a bit like King Kong testing the chains on his arms, sensing that he can break free whenever he chooses.

And just wait until the votes start pouring in. Will the judges throw a presumptive Republican nominee in jail for contempt of court? Once it becomes clear that they will not, then the power balance within the courtroom, and in the country at large, will shift again to Trump. The likeliest outcome of the trials will be to demonstrate our judicial system’s inability to contain someone like Trump and, incidentally, to reveal its impotence as a check should he become president. Indicting Trump for trying to overthrow the government will prove akin to indicting Caesar for crossing the Rubicon, and just as effective. Like Caesar, Trump wields a clout that transcends the laws and institutions of government, based on the unswerving personal loyalty of his army of followers.

I mention all this only to answer one simple question: Can Trump win the election? The answer, unless something radical and unforeseen happens, is: Of course he can. If that weren’t so, the Democratic Party would not be in a mounting panic about its prospects.

If Trump does win the election, he will immediately become the most powerful person ever to hold that office. Not only will he wield the awesome powers of the American executive — powers that, as conservatives used to complain, have grown over the decades — but he will do so with the fewest constraints of any president, fewer even than in his own first term.

What limits those powers? The most obvious answer is the institutions of justice — all of which Trump, by his very election, will have defied and revealed as impotent. A court system that could not control Trump as a private individual is not going to control him better when he is president of the United States and appointing his own attorney general and all the other top officials at the Justice Department. Think of the power of a man who gets himself elected president despite indictments, courtroom appearances and perhaps even conviction? Would he even obey a directive of the Supreme Court? Or would he instead ask how many armored divisions the chief justice has?

Will a future Congress stop him? Presidents can accomplish a lot these days without congressional approval, as even Barack Obama showed. The one check Congress has on a rogue president, namely, impeachment and conviction, has already proved all but impossible — even when Trump was out of office and wielded modest institutional power over his party.

Another traditional check on a president is the federal bureaucracy, that vast apparatus of career government officials who execute the laws and carry on the operations of government under every president. They are generally in the business of limiting any president’s options. As Harry S. Truman once put it, “Poor Ike. He’ll say ‘do this’ and ‘do that’ and nothing at all will happen.” That was a problem for Trump is his first term, partly because he had no government team of his own to fill the administration. This time, he will. Those who choose to serve in his second administration will not be taking office with the unstated intention of refusing to carry out his wishes. If the Heritage Foundation has its way, and there is no reason to believe it won’t, many of those career bureaucrats will be gone, replaced by people carefully “vetted” to ensure their loyalty to Trump.

What about the desire for reelection, a factor that constrains most presidents? Trump might not want or need a third term, but were he to decide he wanted one, as he has sometimes indicated, would the 22nd Amendment block him any more effectively from being president for life than the Supreme Court, if he refused to be blocked? Why should anyone think that amendment would be more sacrosanct than any other part of the Constitution for a man like Trump, or perhaps more importantly, for his devoted supporters?

A final constraint on presidents has been their own desire for a glittering legacy, with success traditionally measured in terms that roughly equate to the well-being of the country. But is that the way Trump thinks? Yes, Trump might seek a great legacy, but it is strictly his own glory that he craves. As with Napoleon, who spoke of the glory of France but whose narrow ambitions for himself and his family brought France to ruin, Trump’s ambitions, though he speaks of making America great again, clearly begin and end with himself. As for his followers, he doesn’t have to achieve anything to retain their support — his failure to build the wall in his first term in no way damaged his standing with millions of his loyalists. They have never asked anything of him other than that he triumph over the forces they hate in American society. And that, we can be sure, will be Trump’s primary mission as president.

Having answered the question of whether Trump can win, we can now turn to the most urgent question: Will his presidency turn into a dictatorship? The odds are, again, pretty good.

It is worth getting inside Trump’s head a bit and imagining his mood following an election victory. He will have spent the previous year, and more, fighting to stay out of jail, plagued by myriad persecutors and helpless to do what he likes to do best: exact revenge. Think of the fury that will have built up inside him, a fury that, from his point of view, he has worked hard to contain. As he once put it, “I think I’ve been toned down, if you want to know the truth. I could really tone it up.” Indeed he could — and will. We caught a glimpse of his deep thirst for vengeance in his Veterans Day promise to “root out the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, and Radical Left Thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our Country, lie, steal, and cheat on Elections, and will do anything possible, whether legally or illegally, to destroy America, and the American Dream.” Note the equation of himself with “America and the American Dream.” It is he they are trying to destroy, he believes, and as president, he will return the favor.

What will that look like? Trump has already named some of those he intends to go after once he is elected: senior officials from his first term such as retired Gen. John F. Kelly, Gen. Mark A. Milley, former attorney general William P. Barr and others who spoke against him after the 2020 election; officials in the FBI and the CIA who investigated him in the Russia probe; Justice Department officials who refused his demands to overturn the 2020 election; members of the Jan. 6 committee; Democratic opponents including Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.); and Republicans who voted for or publicly supported his impeachment and conviction.

But that’s just the start. After all, Trump will not be the only person seeking revenge. His administration will be filled with people with enemies’ lists of their own, a determined cadre of “vetted” officials who will see it as their sole, presidentially authorized mission to “root out” those in the government who cannot be trusted. Many will simply be fired, but others will be subject to career-destroying investigations. The Trump administration will be filled with people who will not need explicit instruction from Trump, any more than Hitler’s local gauleiters needed instruction. In such circumstances, people “work toward the Führer,” which is to say, they anticipate his desires and seek favor through acts they think will make him happy, thereby enhancing their own influence and power in the process.

Nor will it be difficult to find things to charge opponents with. Our history is unfortunately filled with instances of unfairly targeted officials singled out for being on the wrong side of a particular issue at the wrong time — the State Department’s “China Hands” of the late 1940s, for instance, whose careers were destroyed because they happened to be in positions of influence when the Chinese Communist Revolution occurred. Today, there is the whiff of a new McCarthyism in the air. MAGA Republicans insist that Biden himself is a “communist,” that his election was a “communist takeover” and that his administration is a “communist regime.”

It’s therefore no surprise that Biden has a “pro-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) agenda,” as the powerful chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), put it this year, and is deliberately “ceding American leadership and security to China.” Republicans these days routinely charge that their opponents are not just naive or inadequately attentive to China’s rising power but are actual “sympathizers” with Beijing. “Communist China has their President … China Joe,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) tweeted on Biden’s Inauguration Day. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has called the president “Beijing Biden.” The Republican Senate nominee in New Hampshire last year even called Republican Gov. Chris Sununu a “Chinese Communist Party sympathizer.” We can expect more of this when the war against the “deep state” begins in earnest. According to Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), there is a whole cabal determined to undermine American security, a “Uniparty” of elites made up of “neoconservatives on the right” and “liberal globalists on the left” who are not true Americans and therefore do not have the true interests of America at heart. Can such “anti-American” behavior be criminalized? It has in the past and can be again.

So, the Trump administration will have many avenues to persecute its enemies, real and perceived. Think of all the laws now on the books that give the federal government enormous power to surveil people for possible links to terrorism, a dangerously flexible term, not to mention all the usual opportunities to investigate people for alleged tax evasion or violation of foreign agent registration laws. The IRS under both parties has occasionally looked at depriving think tanks of their tax-exempt status because they espouse policies that align with the views of the political parties. What will happen to the think-tanker in a second Trump term who argues that the United States should ease pressure on China? Or the government official rash enough to commit such thoughts to official paper? It didn’t take more than that to ruin careers in the 1950s.

And who will stop the improper investigations and prosecutions of Trump’s many enemies? Will Congress? A Republican Congress will be busy conducting its own inquiries, using its powers to subpoena people, accusing them of all kinds of crimes, just as it does now. Will it matter if the charges are groundless? And of course in some cases they will be true, which will lend even greater validity to a wider probe of political enemies.

Will Fox News defend them, or will it instead just amplify the accusations? The American press corps will remain divided as it is today, between those organizations catering to Trump and his audience and those that do not. But in a regime where the ruler has declared the news media to be “enemies of the state,” the press will find itself under significant and constant pressure. Media owners will discover that a hostile and unbridled president can make their lives unpleasant in all sorts of ways.

Indeed, who will stand up for anyone accused in the public arena, besides their lawyers? In a Trump presidency, the courage it will take to stand up for them will be no less than the courage it will take to stand up to Trump himself. How many will risk their own careers to defend others? In a nation congenitally suspicious of government, who will stick up for the rights of former officials who become targets of Trump’s Justice Department? There will be ample precedents for those seeking to justify the persecution. Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, the Wilson administration shut down newspapers and magazines critical of the war; Franklin D. Roosevelt rounded up Japanese Americans and placed them in camps. We will pay the price for every transgression ever committed against the laws designed to protect individual rights and freedoms.

How will Americans respond to the first signs of a regime of political persecution? Will they rise up in outrage? Don’t count on it. Those who found no reason to oppose Trump in the primaries and no reason to oppose him in the general are unlikely to experience a sudden awakening when some former Trump-adjacent official such as Milley finds himself under investigation for goodness knows what. They will know only that Justice Department prosecutors, the IRS, the FBI and several congressional committees are looking into it. And who is to say that those being hounded are not in fact tax cheaters, or Chinese spies, or perverts, or whatever they might be accused of? Will the great body of Americans even recognize these accusations as persecution and the first stage of shutting down opposition to Trump across the country?

The Trump dictatorship will not be a communist tyranny, where almost everyone feels the oppression and has their lives shaped by it. In conservative, anti-liberal tyrannies, ordinary people face all kinds of limitations on their freedoms, but it is a problem for them only to the degree that they value those freedoms, and many people do not. The fact that this tyranny will depend entirely on the whims of one man will mean that Americans’ rights will be conditional rather than guaranteed. But if most Americans can go about their daily business, they might not care, just as many Russians and Hungarians do not care.

Yes, there will be a large opposition movement centered in the Democratic Party, but exactly how this opposition will stop the persecution is hard to see. Congress and the courts will offer little relief. Democratic politicians, particularly members of the youngest generation, will yell and scream, but if they are not joined by Republicans, it will look like the same old partisanship. If Democrats still control one house of Congress, they will be able to blunt some investigations, but the odds that they will control both houses after 2024 are longer than the odds of a Biden victory. Nor is there sufficient reason to hope that the disordered and dysfunctional opposition to Trump today will suddenly become more unified and effective once Trump takes power. That is not how things work. In evolving dictatorships, the opposition is always weak and divided. That’s what makes dictatorship possible in the first place. Opposition movements rarely get stronger and more unified under the pressures of persecution. Today there is no leader for Democrats to rally behind. It is difficult to imagine that such a leader will emerge once Trump regains power.

But even if the opposition were to become strong and unified, it is not obvious what it would do to protect those facing persecution. The opposition’s ability to wield legitimate, peaceful and legal forms of power will already have been found wanting in this election cycle, when Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans threw every legitimate weapon against Trump and still failed. Will they turn instead to illegitimate, extralegal action? What would that look like?

Americans might take to the streets. In fact, it is likely that many people will engage in protests against the new regime, perhaps even before it has had a chance to prove itself deserving of them. But then what? Even in his first term, Trump and his advisers on more than one occasion discussed invoking the Insurrection Act. No less a defender of American democracy than George H.W. Bush invoked the act to deal with the Los Angeles riots in 1992. It is hard to imagine Trump not invoking it should “the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, and Radical Left Thugs” take to the streets. One suspects he will relish the opportunity.

And who will stop him? His own handpicked military advisers? That seems unlikely. He could make retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff if he wanted, and it is unlikely a Republican Senate would decline to confirm. Does anyone think military leaders will disobey commands from their duly elected, constitutionally authorized, commander in chief? Do we even want the military to have to make that call? There is every reason to believe that active-duty troops and reservists are likely to be disproportionately more sympathetic to a newly reelected President Trump than to the “Radical Left Thugs” supposedly causing mayhem in the streets of their towns and cities. Those who hope to be saved by a U.S. military devoted to the protection of the Constitution are living in a fantasyland.

Resistance could come from the governors of predominantly Democratic states such as California and New York through a form of nullification. States with Democratic governors and statehouses could refuse to recognize the authority of a tyrannical federal government. That is always an option in our federal system. (Should Biden win, some Republican states might engage in nullification.) But not even the bluest states are monolithic, and Democratic governors are likely to find themselves under siege on their home turf if they try to become bastions of resistance to Trump’s tyranny. Republicans and conservatives throughout the nation will be energized by their hero’s triumph. The power shift at the federal level, and the tone of menace and revenge emanating from the White House, will likely embolden all kinds of counter-resistance even in deep-blue states, including violent protests. What resources will the governors have to combat such attacks and maintain order? The state and local police? Will those entities be willing to use force against protesters who will likely enjoy the public support of the president? The Democratic governors might not be eager to find out.

Should Trump be successful in launching a campaign of persecution and the opposition prove powerless to stop it, then the nation will have begun an irreversible descent into dictatorship. With each passing day, it will become harder and more dangerous to stop it by any means, legal or illegal. Try to imagine what it will be like running for office on an opposition ticket in such an environment. In theory, the midterm elections in 2026 might hold hope for a Democratic comeback, but won’t Trump use his considerable powers, both legal and illegal, to prevent that? Trump insists and no doubt believes that the current administration corruptly used the justice system to try to prevent his reelection. Will he not consider himself justified in doing the same once he has all the power? He has, of course, already promised to do exactly that: to use the powers of his office to persecute anyone who dares challenge him.

This is the trajectory we are on now. Is descent into dictatorship inevitable? No. Nothing in history is inevitable. Unforeseen events change trajectories. Readers of this essay will no doubt list all the ways in which it is arguably too pessimistic and doesn’t take sufficient account of this or that alternative possibility. Maybe, despite everything, Trump won’t win. Maybe the coin flip will come up heads and we’ll all be safe. And maybe even if he does win, he won’t do any of the things he says he’s going to do. You may be comforted by this if you choose.

What is certain, however, is that the odds of the United States falling into dictatorship have grown considerably because so many of the obstacles to it have been cleared and only a few are left. If eight years ago it seemed literally inconceivable that a man like Trump could be elected, that obstacle was cleared in 2016. If it then seemed unimaginable that an American president would try to remain in office after losing an election, that obstacle was cleared in 2020. And if no one could believe that Trump, having tried and failed to invalidate the election and stop the counting of electoral college votes, would nevertheless reemerge as the unchallenged leader of the Republican Party and its nominee again in 2024, well, we are about to see that obstacle cleared as well. In just a few years, we have gone from being relatively secure in our democracy to being a few short steps, and a matter of months, away from the possibility of dictatorship.

Alexandra Petri: I’m starting to think Donald Trump is sounding like Hitler on purpose

Are we going to do anything about it? To shift metaphors, if we thought there was a 50 percent chance of an asteroid crashing into North America a year from now, would we be content to hope that it wouldn’t? Or would we be taking every conceivable measure to try to stop it, including many things that might not work but that, given the magnitude of the crisis, must be tried anyway?

Yes, I know that most people don’t think an asteroid is heading toward us and that’s part of the problem. But just as big a problem has been those who do see the risk but for a variety of reasons have not thought it necessary to make any sacrifices to prevent it. At each point along the way, our political leaders, and we as voters, have let opportunities to stop Trump pass on the assumption that he would eventually meet some obstacle he could not overcome. Republicans could have stopped Trump from winning the nomination in 2016, but they didn’t. The voters could have elected Hillary Clinton, but they didn’t. Republican senators could have voted to convict Trump in either of his impeachment trials, which might have made his run for president much more difficult, but they didn’t.

Throughout these years, an understandable if fatal psychology has been at work. At each stage, stopping Trump would have required extraordinary action by certain people, whether politicians or voters or donors, actions that did not align with their immediate interests or even merely their preferences. It would have been extraordinary for all the Republicans running against Trump in 2016 to decide to give up their hopes for the presidency and unite around one of them. Instead, they behaved normally, spending their time and money attacking each other, assuming that Trump was not their most serious challenge, or that someone else would bring him down, and thereby opened a clear path for Trump’s nomination. And they have, with just a few exceptions, done the same this election cycle. It would have been extraordinary had Mitch McConnell and many other Republican senators voted to convict a president of their own party. Instead, they assumed that after Jan. 6, 2021, Trump was finished and it was therefore safe not to convict him and thus avoid becoming pariahs among the vast throng of Trump supporters. In each instance, people believed they could go on pursuing their personal interests and ambitions as usual in the confidence that somewhere down the line, someone or something else, or simply fate, would stop him. Why should they be the ones to sacrifice their careers? Given the choice between a high-risk gamble and hoping for the best, people generally hope for the best. Given the choice between doing the dirty work yourself and letting others do it, people generally prefer the latter.

A paralyzing psychology of appeasement has also been at work. At each stage, the price of stopping Trump has risen higher and higher. In 2016, the price was forgoing a shot at the White House. Once Trump was elected, the price of opposition, or even the absence of obsequious loyalty, became the end of one’s political career, as Jeff FlakeBob CorkerPaul D. Ryan and many others discovered. By 2020, the price had risen again. As Mitt Romney recounts in McKay Coppins’s recent biography, Republican members of Congress contemplating voting for Trump’s impeachment and conviction feared for their physical safety and that of their families. There is no reason that fear should be any less today. But wait until Trump returns to power and the price of opposing him becomes persecution, the loss of property and possibly the loss of freedom. Will those who balked at resisting Trump when the risk was merely political oblivion suddenly discover their courage when the cost might be the ruin of oneself and one’s family?

We are closer to that point today than we have ever been, yet we continue to drift toward dictatorship, still hoping for some intervention that will allow us to escape the consequences of our collective cowardice, our complacent, willful ignorance and, above all, our lack of any deep commitment to liberal democracy. As the man said, we are going out not with a bang but a whimper.

Last edited 1 month ago by Greg

Clicked, saw “Washington Post” and clicked off. NOTHING the WaPo prints should even be read, much less mandatory. The only dictatorship is the Democrat totalitarian police state we are living under now, and it is getting worse day by day.

How many times does it take for you to be lied to before you finally start to get some hint of a clue?

Of course you stopped at that point. You’ve been conditioned to reject all media sources that don’t echo Trumpian doctrine. That’s where the comparison with a cult comes in. Objectivity is dead. Nothing contradicting doctrinal points will even be considered. Evidence has ceased to matter. Logic or any lack thereof is irrelevant.

You should understand that the things said aren’t intended for those who will never change their minds. They’re for the consideration of people who think and draw their own conclusions.

Last edited 1 month ago by Greg

No, it’s just that when a source had been CONFIRMED to be lying propaganda, as WaPo definitely has, a source lightning quick to print an anti-right or anti-American story without verification while it suppresses ANY news damaging to the left, a source that serves the left, a source that hates America, then I won’t waste time on them and CERTAINLY would not consider them “must read”.

What “evidence” do they have that Trump will suddenly, after relentlessly respecting and protecting the Constitution, become a “dictator”, particularly as they totally ignore all the dictatorial and totalitarian behavior of Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden and the DNC?

It IS hypothetical. What Trump is asking a ruling on is that he can’t be charged with a crime for carrying out the official duties of the Presidency, not that he has carte blanc to commit crimes, as the Democrats currently do.

Would you want the SCOTUS to give that license to Biden? They’ll be deciding before January 2025, you know.

He already has it, given to him by Garland. He doesn’t need immunity, if the DoJ will not even INVESTIGATE, he is immune already.

Democrats are a criminal operation.

“He already has it, given to him by Garland.”

Okay, Professor. But do you *like* it? Is it a practice which you’d like to continue? If there’s ever another MAGA president, would you still like Biden to be immune from prosecution for any crime he committed as president?

“He doesn’t need immunity, if the DoJ will not even INVESTIGATE, he is immune already.”

Okay. But Biden won’t be president forever. Do you want him to be immune from prosecution if, say, Trump were to be elected again?

No, peckerhead, I DON’T like it. Perhaps you are the only dumbass around that it hasn’t been made clear to. Bitching about this imaginary “dictatorship” of Trump and some farcical crime spree is stupid when we have a “President” and his entire family using the government as it’s personal ATM.

You need a personal assistant to guide you and point out when you are being stupid so you embarrass yourself here less frequently.

biden has been the closest thing to a dicier have ever had. President Trump respects the office and would not violate his oath.

And if/when Robin Ware/Robert L. Peters/JRB Ware/Pedo Peter/idiot Biden is impeached for the crimes the House already has evidence on, can you predict the Senate will find him not guilty? I can. He isn’t even being held accountable for crimes committed BEFORE being President… like stealing classified documents, for instance. That is pretty cut and dried, yet… nothing.

You are pretend-worried about hypotheticals and penalties for made-up crimes that never happened while REAL crimes are going unpunished because the Democrats control the process.

Hey what about all those people Trump shot on 5th avenue and we still support him.

The vaxx damage is real with Greg he is a paranoid, he gets it fed through his “experts” on TV and the loon sites he gets his info from.

Mike is just an ignoramus with a degree polluting the minds of children, with a phobia of people with faith also fed by “liberal” garbage.

I’ve interacted with “people of faith” for my whole life. I’ve gone to school with them; I’ve worked with them; I’ve been evangelized by them; I’ve been warned by them; I’ve even spent time going to church as an adult. I’ve studied religion for years for my job.

I’ve come by my contempt fair and square.

I’ve come by my contempt fair and square.

How so? Contempt for who, groomer?

If you’re not going to keep up, don’t try to take part in the discussion .

Oh, I kept up, groomer. It’s just that you really don’t know how to have a conversation on line. You just want to prove what a moron you are and how blatantly unqualified you are to teach children.

Seems you really have gay sex on your mind. Is that what you are grooming California children in? Is that why you are so hateful toward “people of faith” because you are fearful of being pushed off a roof?

You seem to be suggesting that all people of faith want to throw gays off roofs. That, I think, is simply projection on your part.

You seem to be suggesting that all people of faith want to throw gays off roofs.

I don’t suggest anything, groomer. I state flat out what I think and don’t play games like you and Comrade Greggie. So trying to misrepresent what I said is not going to work like you think it will.

That, I think, is simply projection on your part.

Projection is in your arena, not mine.

*I’m* the problem because *you’re* an asshole?

No, you’re an asshole and that’s a problem, for you.

I don’t suggest anything, groomer.