Donald Trump's 2024 POTUS campaign

[Swordsmyth]

Paxton is not corrupt and is the best AG in the nation.

 

[unknown]

They've now flipped the script and are portraying Trump as the elderly, weak, senior citizen.

 

[acptulsa]

They've now flipped the script and are portraying Trump as the elderly, weak, senior citizen.

They'll call him everything before they're through. Gotta keep Republicans pissed off or they might think about what they're doing.

 

[unknown]

Paxton is not corrupt and is the best AG in the nation.

You're missing the point there swift.

LaCivita is Trump's current campaign manager.

 

[acptulsa]

You're missing the point there swift.

LaCivita is Trump's current campaign manager.

Maybe we found out whose campaign manager really is a CIA asset.

 

[Sonny Tufts]

Paxton is not corrupt and is the best AG in the nation.

You gotta be kidding. Paxton is a politically-motivated scumbag and Trump ass-kisser who filed a totally baseless suit in the Supreme Court complaining about how another state ran its 2020 presidential election. Any first year law student could have seen that Texas had no standing, which is probably why the Texas Solicitor General refused to participate in the case. SCOTUS (including two Trump appointees) dismissed the case due to lack of standing.

He has been under indictment for securities fraud for years, but just today he cut a sweetheart deal in the case under which the charges will be dismissed if he takes legal ethics classes, pays around $270,000 in restitution to the men he allegedly defrauded and does 100 hours of community service (reportedly to be done in a food bank).

 

[acptulsa]

Paxton is not corrupt and is the best AG in the nation.

Paxton is a politically-motivated scumbag and Trump ass-kisser ...

And just exactly what characteristics did you think he was looking for in an AG?

 

[unknown]

Once again, Trump has surrounded himself with people who hate him.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You're missing the point there swift.

LaCivita is Trump's current campaign manager.

I'm not, I'm adding to the point.
But Trump just replaced him.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Maybe we found out whose campaign manager really is a CIA asset.

Yes, RFK's.

 

[Swordsmyth]

You gotta be kidding. Paxton is a politically-motivated scumbag and Trump ass-kisser who filed a totally baseless suit in the Supreme Court complaining about how another state ran its 2020 presidential election. Any first year law student could have seen that Texas had no standing, which is probably why the Texas Solicitor General refused to participate in the case. SCOTUS (including two Trump appointees) dismissed the case due to lack of standing.

He has been under indictment for securities fraud for years, but just today he cut a sweetheart deal in the case under which the charges will be dismissed if he takes legal ethics classes, pays around $270,000 in restitution to the men he allegedly defrauded and does 100 hours of community service (reportedly to be done in a food bank).

A bunch of Leftist and Bush wing (redundant) lies.
The 2020 election theft was every state's business.
The persecution of Paxton has been just as fraudulent as the lawfare against Trump and the refusal to deal with election fraud.

 

[acptulsa]

 

[Sonny Tufts]

A bunch of Leftist and Bush wing (redundant) lies.
The 2020 election theft was every state's business.

Oh, so Trump's hand-picked Justices who threw out Paxton's case are leftists? Who knew? What does that tell you about Trump's judgment in appointing them?

Texas has no more right to tell Pennsylvania how to run its election than California has the right to tell Texas how to run its internal affairs.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Texas has no more right to tell Pennsylvania how to run its election than California has the right to tell Texas how to run its internal affairs.

Analogy fail. Pennsylvania's federal elections are not merely a matter of Pennsylvania's "internal affairs". The consequences of federal-level elections affect all states, and if Texas, et al. are going to be expected to accept those consequences, then they damn well ought to have "standing" to dispute the matter, if they will.

Texas has (or ought to have) as much a right to reject the results of Pennsylvania's federal-level elections if those elections are not legitimate as Pennsylvania has a right to expect Texas to accept the results of its federal-level elections if those elections are legitimate (all that "lack of standing" shuck-and-jive to the contrary notwithstanding).

Disputes between states over whether such federal-level elections are legitimate or not are just the sort of thing that federal-level courts ought to exist in order to deal with, not shirk. If not, then what the hell is even the point of them?

In the limit, states should assign their electors however they damn well please - and if any state for whatever reasons (1) doesn't like how some other state does it, and (2) isn't able to arrive at a tolerable (if not satisfactory) reconciliation with the other state (via federal courts or otherwise), and (3) feels sufficiently strongly about the matter, then that state should be free to remove itself from political union with the other state. But the same assholes who tell us that no state should be granted any "standing" to dispute any other state's federal-level elections (or elector assignments) will also tell us that no state should be permitted to take its marbles and go home. (Funny how that works out, ain't it?)

 

[Swordsmyth]

Oh, so Trump's hand-picked Justices who threw out Paxton's case are leftists? Who knew? What does that tell you about Trump's judgment in appointing them?

Texas has no more right to tell Pennsylvania how to run its election than California has the right to tell Texas how to run its internal affairs.

Garbage, SCOTUS chickened out, like they have many times.

The right of Texans to have a fair election was abridged when the PA government cheated, Texans had a right to have Trump as POTUS instead of Biden in a fair election.
The details of how PA conducts elections are not any business of Texans, but cheating in a national election is.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Analogy fail. Pennsylvania's federal elections are not merely a matter of Pennsylvania's "internal affairs". The consequences of federal-level elections affect all states, and if Texas, et al. are going to be expected to accept those consequences, then they damn well ought to have "standing" to dispute the matter, if they will.

Texas has (or ought to have) as much a right to reject the results of Pennsylvania's federal-level elections if those elections are not legitimate as Pennsylvania has a right to expect Texas to accept the results of its federal-level elections if those elections are legitimate (all that "lack of standing" shuck-and-jive to the contrary notwithstanding).

Disputes between states over whether such federal-level elections are legitimate or not are just the sort of thing that federal-level courts ought to exist in order to deal with, not shirk. If not, then what the hell is even the point of them?

In the limit, states should assign their electors however they damn well please - and if any state for whatever reasons (1) doesn't like how some other state does it, and (2) isn't able to arrive at a tolerable (if not satisfactory) reconciliation with the other state (via federal courts or otherwise), and (3) feels sufficiently strongly about the matter, then that state should be free to remove itself from political union with the other state. But the same $#@!s who tell us that no state should be granted any "standing" to dispute any other state's federal-level elections (or elector assignments) will also tell us that no state should be permitted to take its marbles and go home. (Funny how that works out, ain't it?)

If the PA legislature wants to assign its Electors directly and forgo an election it has that right, but it must do it officially, and the PA executive branch doesn't get to just bypass the legislature and the legislated electoral process and cheat surreptitiously.

 

[unknown]

Ian coming on strong.

Usually they do this at an Izraeli gathering, AIPAC etc.

Anyone know if this was at a regular campaign event?

 

[unknown]

Wow.

https://x.com/AFpost/status/1824550193863213261

 

[unknown]

If you re-watch Trump's debates or speeches from 2015 2016, he really only had or mentioned 3 primary issues:

Muslims.

China.

The border.

This is literally what got him elected.

Now, he's flipped, at a time when it's much worse...

Did he say just Indian?

https://www.livemint.com/news/world...give-us-ability-to-import-11719056293357.html

 

[PAF]

Wow.

https://x.com/AFpost/status/1824550193863213261

Well, that's what I've been saying for how long now. The right-feed-the-left-feed-the-right. Follow The Money.

Not only is our tax-dollars paying the NGO's to invite them here, Trump is going to implement "Nationalized" Police-State "solutions" to handle this "critical emergency".

Every "Patriot" Act, TSA, $8+T, ANTI-Posse Comitatus republican president enacts ANTI-Bill of Rights agendas, every time. And the "R's" give piece of cake passes. It's a religion.