January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[a fan]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.



https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

[old salt]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

[MDlaxfan76]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

So, here's the real question, Salty, given what you lay out above: Do you now see that the cancer that has been Trump is not merely the one man, but rather ALL of the toadies and sycophants and power-grubbers...and the gullible voters who bought into the 'culture wars' and other con artist 'populist' game Trump and co have been running for the past 6 years, really, closer to 14 years?

I know you argued that Trump was tapping into legit gripes that should not be ignored (fair points made), but do you see now that the problem for the GOP won't go away until ALL of the MAGA election denier and 'culture war' populists get tossed from power, shamed out of the GOP?

Can this party ever be clean as long as these a-hole election deniers and bigots etc remain in control of the GOP, not rejected by the GOP?

Forget the Dems and their faults and foibles, different problem...it's darn hard for me to imagine voting for any national R's until they reject the scum suckers..

[a fan]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

[MDlaxfan76]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

[old salt]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

[old salt]

This is what I posted.

We need to start arresting & rounding up citizens for seditious speech !

Maybe there was actually something to the plots in Peru & Germany.

I don't lump all 74 million Trump voters into one basket.

[MDlaxfan76]

This is what I posted.

We need to start arresting & rounding up citizens for seditious speech !

Maybe there was actually something to the plots in Peru & Germany.

I don't lump all 74 million Trump voters into one basket.

Nor do I.

But until the GOP rejects as its leaders anyone who is an election denier or who courts the worst of bigots, the "Trump voters" who do not reject them are the problem.

[MDlaxfan76]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

So...respond to Norman...and all those others...the here and now...

[old salt]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

So...respond to Norman...and all those others...the here and now...

I don't know anything about Norman. How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ? That usurps the prerogative of the voters in his district who sent him to DC to represent them. Far be it from me to call to invalidate the results of a lawful election.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

So...respond to Norman...and all those others...the here and now...
[/quote]I don't know anything about Norman. How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ? That usurps the prerogative of the voters in his district who sent him to DC to represent them. Far be it from me to call to invalidate the results of a lawful election.

He’s an empty barrel…. What a caricature you have become.

[old salt]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

So...respond to Norman...and all those others...the here and now...
[/quote]I don't know anything about Norman. How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ? That usurps the prerogative of the voters in his district who sent him to DC to represent them. Far be it from me to call to invalidate the results of a lawful election.

He’s an empty barrel…. What a caricature you have become.

Who is Norman ? The golfer ? afan was comparing Trump to Nixon, telling me how I felt about Watergate.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

So...respond to Norman...and all those others...the here and now...
[/quote]I don't know anything about Norman. How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ? That usurps the prerogative of the voters in his district who sent him to DC to represent them. Far be it from me to call to invalidate the results of a lawful election.

He’s an empty barrel…. What a caricature you have become.

Who is Norman ? The golfer ? afan was comparing Trump to Nixon, telling me how I felt about Watergate.

Kenny Norman

[MDlaxfan76]

Red herring deflection. Got rid of Nixon because of what he did (authorized).

Nope. Listen to the tapes again-----you'll find the same language you're defending here. It never went to court, and was never proven that Nixon had anything to do with anything. It was grown men, just like you, who understood what Nixon's INTENT was with the whole mess.

Listen for yourself. A good lawyer could play the same stupid, petty games you're playing here with the folks surrounding Trump. A good lawyer could direct all of this to Mitchell, or any number of other fall guys. Or claim that Nixon was the one who set up the recording, and was playing the whole room. Or, or, or......

But enough good men and women in your party CHOSE not to do that. Take a look at the impeachment vote. It wasn't unanimous EVEN AFTER these tapes were played. But enough CHOSE the Nation over politics. And it's painfully obvious that you and millions of partisans just like you, both D's an R's....wouldn't man up, and would choose your party first.

His strategy was to invalidate the election via the certification process.

You've been told twice now that the texts we are discussing are from AFTER the certification process. And as usual, when you hear something you don't like, you move on, and won't concede even the simplest of points. You exit the "conversation'...that isn't a conversation at all. It's you defending your team, and when you can't do that, you bail. Every. Time.

The difference between Nixon and Trump's guys in 2022 is that Trump's (and idiots like Norman) requests weren't fulfilled. That's it. That's the difference. You think that this makes those requests ok, and not dangerous.

Norman is still in government. Still in power. I'm THRILLED that citizens like you don't care. Our Republic is in SOOPER shape because of guys like you.

https://millercenter.org/the-presidency ... moking-gun

First -- you don't know where I stood on Nixon. I was pleased to see him leave office.

Second -- I'd have been fine if Trump had been convicted in his impeachment trial for his post election actions, including Jan 6th.
I'd have been relieved that he could not run for office again, we wouldn't still be talking about him & the GOP would have moved on.
That was not a realistic hope because he still had too many supporters to generate enough votes in the Senate.
Maybe they'll finally nail him with something & he won't run or get the nomination again, but I'm not counting on it.
imo, the GOP has no hope of regaining the WH until he leaves the stage.

Just once---just ONE TIME, I'd like you to read about what someone in your party does, and simply say "holy cow, that Norman guy needs to be thrown out of Congress immediately. I can't believe he called for Marshall (snicker) Law"

That's not how you EVER look at these things. Instead, you immediately start defending. Or diminishing. Or gaslighting.

Why would you let these people represent you or your party? What needs to happen to you and your fellow Republicans to say "enough"!

Because as long as you keept his mindset? The more Boeberts an Normans we will get. These aren't conservatives. They're opportunists, and they'll NEVER work to further your supposed views.

what he said...

Red herring. I wasn't commenting on Norman. I was responding to the comparison with coups in Peru & Germany.

Look at what I posted again (see next post)

So...respond to Norman...and all those others...the here and now...

I don't know anything about Norman. How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ? That usurps the prerogative of the voters in his district who sent him to DC to represent them. Far be it from me to call to invalidate the results of a lawful election.

you are even older than I am, so I'll assume some dementia: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/feature/m ... 0-election

First text cited...

[a fan]

I don't know anything about Norman.

Which tells us you're not reading the citations, and making your mindless comments anyway.

How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ?

Don't have to. You can demand he get kicked out of the Republican party, demand he get thrown off of all committees, and let him drown.

Show this bothers you. Show your party you want, as you claim, Trumpism to go away.

As for me telling you how you felt about Nixon, for the 1,000th time, you're not paying attention to your fellow posters.

What I'm telling you is that both the situation with Nixon and what happened Jan6th and these underlying texts that are being revealed, and things like Trump calling Atlanta, pressuring the SoS to throw the election are bad.

And in 1974, both you and your Republican party would stand for neither.

Yet in 2022, both you and your party has changed. They can do anything they want, and you'll stand by and make excuses for their behavior all day long.

YOU have changed. Your PARTY has changed. The underlying attempt to subvert our Government and unethical behavior is the same. And no, I'm not saying the two events were IDENTICAL, so don't come back with that horsehockey.

I can tell, and told you at the time, that Hunter's no show BS job in Ukraine was unethical, and sh*tty, and I'm SICK of that legally approved corruption.

Yet you can't take ten seconds and register your disapproval of a sitting Congressman calling for Marshall (snicker) law because his team didn't win.

[old salt]

I don't know anything about Norman.

Which tells us you're not reading the citations, and making your mindless comments anyway.

How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ?

Don't have to. You can demand he get kicked out of the Republican party, demand he get thrown off of all committees, and let him drown.

Show this bothers you. Show your party you want, as you claim, Trumpism to go away.

As for me telling you how you felt about Nixon, for the 1,000th time, you're not paying attention to your fellow posters.

What I'm telling you is that both the situation with Nixon and what happened Jan6th and these underlying texts that are being revealed, and things like Trump calling Atlanta, pressuring the SoS to throw the election are bad.

And in 1974, both you and your Republican party would stand for neither.

Yet in 2022, both you and your party has changed. They can do anything they want, and you'll stand by and make excuses for their behavior all day long.

YOU have changed. Your PARTY has changed. The underlying attempt to subvert our Government and unethical behavior is the same. And no, I'm not saying the two events were IDENTICAL, so don't come back with that horsehockey.

I can tell, and told you at the time, that Hunter's no show BS job in Ukraine was unethical, and sh*tty, and I'm SICK of that legally approved corruption.

Yet you can't take ten seconds and register your disapproval of a sitting Congressman calling for Marshall (snicker) law because his team didn't win.

I don't know about Norman & his texts. I was replying to the posts about Peru & Germany which did not mention Norman. Then you inserted the Watergate diversion.

If I was interested in Norman, I would not rely on TPM to find out. I don't feel the need to comment on everything GOP wingnuts say, any more than I expect you to comment on everything AOC & her Squadmates say,

[Typical Lax Dad]

I don't know anything about Norman.

Which tells us you're not reading the citations, and making your mindless comments anyway.

How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ?

Don't have to. You can demand he get kicked out of the Republican party, demand he get thrown off of all committees, and let him drown.

Show this bothers you. Show your party you want, as you claim, Trumpism to go away.

As for me telling you how you felt about Nixon, for the 1,000th time, you're not paying attention to your fellow posters.

What I'm telling you is that both the situation with Nixon and what happened Jan6th and these underlying texts that are being revealed, and things like Trump calling Atlanta, pressuring the SoS to throw the election are bad.

And in 1974, both you and your Republican party would stand for neither.

Yet in 2022, both you and your party has changed. They can do anything they want, and you'll stand by and make excuses for their behavior all day long.

YOU have changed. Your PARTY has changed. The underlying attempt to subvert our Government and unethical behavior is the same. And no, I'm not saying the two events were IDENTICAL, so don't come back with that horsehockey.

I can tell, and told you at the time, that Hunter's no show BS job in Ukraine was unethical, and sh*tty, and I'm SICK of that legally approved corruption.

Yet you can't take ten seconds and register your disapproval of a sitting Congressman calling for Marshall (snicker) law because his team didn't win.

I don't know about Norman & his texts. I was replying to the posts about Peru & Germany which did not mention Norman. Then you inserted the Watergate diversion.

If I was interested in Norman, I would not rely on TPM to find out. I don't feel the need to comment on everything GOP wingnuts say, any more than I expect you to comment on everything AOC & her Squadmates say,

Josh Norman

[Farfromgeneva]

Debating dumb is a Never-ending battle..

[Kismet]

I don't know anything about Norman.

Which tells us you're not reading the citations, and making your mindless comments anyway.

How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ?

Don't have to. You can demand he get kicked out of the Republican party, demand he get thrown off of all committees, and let him drown.

Show this bothers you. Show your party you want, as you claim, Trumpism to go away.

As for me telling you how you felt about Nixon, for the 1,000th time, you're not paying attention to your fellow posters.

What I'm telling you is that both the situation with Nixon and what happened Jan6th and these underlying texts that are being revealed, and things like Trump calling Atlanta, pressuring the SoS to throw the election are bad.

And in 1974, both you and your Republican party would stand for neither.

Yet in 2022, both you and your party has changed. They can do anything they want, and you'll stand by and make excuses for their behavior all day long.

YOU have changed. Your PARTY has changed. The underlying attempt to subvert our Government and unethical behavior is the same. And no, I'm not saying the two events were IDENTICAL, so don't come back with that horsehockey.

I can tell, and told you at the time, that Hunter's no show BS job in Ukraine was unethical, and sh*tty, and I'm SICK of that legally approved corruption.

Yet you can't take ten seconds and register your disapproval of a sitting Congressman calling for Marshall (snicker) law because his team didn't win.

I don't know about Norman & his texts. I was replying to the posts about Peru & Germany which did not mention Norman. Then you inserted the Watergate diversion.

If I was interested in Norman, I would not rely on TPM to find out. I don't feel the need to comment on everything GOP wingnuts say, any more than I expect you to comment on everything AOC & her Squadmates say,

The wingnut in question is (and was) a member of the House at the time of the texts. He was calling for martial law to be imposed and for the election to be overturned. He couldn't even spell it correctly which should tell you how little he knows about it.

The part that never gets mentioned by these morons is that they were all on the same ballot they want to contest but they NEVER mention any issues with any other results other than the one result they cannot accept. Others around here appear to have similar selective outrage....and then you go off and discount the phone recording between Raffensberger and former DOPUS.

Lastly, the texts are the texts. No editorializing from TPM - they just published them verbatim.

[a fan]

I don't know anything about Norman.

Which tells us you're not reading the citations, and making your mindless comments anyway.

How does afan propose to remove him from Congress ?

Don't have to. You can demand he get kicked out of the Republican party, demand he get thrown off of all committees, and let him drown.

Show this bothers you. Show your party you want, as you claim, Trumpism to go away.

As for me telling you how you felt about Nixon, for the 1,000th time, you're not paying attention to your fellow posters.

What I'm telling you is that both the situation with Nixon and what happened Jan6th and these underlying texts that are being revealed, and things like Trump calling Atlanta, pressuring the SoS to throw the election are bad.

And in 1974, both you and your Republican party would stand for neither.

Yet in 2022, both you and your party has changed. They can do anything they want, and you'll stand by and make excuses for their behavior all day long.

YOU have changed. Your PARTY has changed. The underlying attempt to subvert our Government and unethical behavior is the same. And no, I'm not saying the two events were IDENTICAL, so don't come back with that horsehockey.

I can tell, and told you at the time, that Hunter's no show BS job in Ukraine was unethical, and sh*tty, and I'm SICK of that legally approved corruption.

Yet you can't take ten seconds and register your disapproval of a sitting Congressman calling for Marshall (snicker) law because his team didn't win.

I don't know about Norman & his texts. I was replying to the posts about Peru & Germany which did not mention Norman. Then you inserted the Watergate diversion.

If I was interested in Norman, I would not rely on TPM to find out. I don't feel the need to comment on everything GOP wingnuts say, any more than I expect you to comment on everything AOC & her Squadmates say,

The wingnut in question is (and was) a member of the House at the time of the texts. He was calling for martial law to be imposed and for the election to be overturned. He couldn't even spell it correctly which should tell you how little he knows about it.

The part that never gets mentioned by these morons is that they were all on the same ballot they want to contest but they NEVER mention any issues with any other results other than the one result they cannot accept. Others around here appear to have similar selective outrage....and then you go off and discount the phone recording between Raffensberger and former DOPUS.

Lastly, the texts are the texts. No editorializing from TPM - they just published them verbatim.

As for your bolded, I explained that one in real time for the Republicans on the board. Their response was crickets, naturally, save for YA who thought it was a good point: If the ballots are compromised, why are the winning Republicans taking their seats of power? There's no answer for that question.

So....now that you know about Norman and his texts, OS.....what's your comment?

As for mine, I cannot BELIEVE that a sitting Congressman (Norman) is behind the scenes so freaking stupid that he believes that the election THAT HE WON in 2000, was fraudulent. How dumb do you have to be to think that?

Naturally, looking at his CV, he inherited his wealth and business from Daddy. Thinking isn't a requirement to be the millionaire Congressman, apparently.