America's descent into authoritarianism, and it's titular head is a mad man

Well I "harped" on her, as you put it, because it was obviously totally inaccurate to apply to your thesis, being "no president in history -- none -- has come even close to weaponizing the legal system the way Trump has."

So is Reality Winner's prosecution part of your accusation of Trump weaponizing the the legal system? If not, why did you include it? And if you are going to go through and discard every individual part of your case, then you don't have a case.

Since I can see that you are going to throw every part of your case overboard as an individual matter as "a very minor part of the overall point, would amount to pettifogging," why don't we cut to the chase and you give me the single biggest example as proof of your thesis?

 

You don't even understand the issue.

 

Yes he was. That's how the GSA packed up and loaded this documents and shipped them down for him.

Biden's stolen documents were mostly of his time as senator so absolutely not governed by anything but the espionage act. And releasing classified information to his ghost writer? Once again, that's the espionage act.

You are wrong at every point here, that's real party loyalty.

 

Listen carefully!



Hannity: "...you would never abuse power as retribution against anybody?"

Trump: "Except for day one. Look, he's going crazy. EXCEPT FOR DAY ONE."

Translation of Trumpspeak. This means "On day one I will abuse power as retribution against anybody."

After a one-day dictatorship, why ever surrender power?

 

In other words, the economy is not as good as you claimed since the majority of the voters did not believe it was that good.

 

It is called DISINFORMATION. Nobody has ever used the "big lie" as successfully as Trump and his GOP have.

"A big lie is a gross distortion or misrepresentation of the truth primarily used as a political propaganda technique. The German expression was first used by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf (1925) to describe how people could be induced to believe so colossal a lie because they would not believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously".

Trump HAS THAT IMPUDENCE.

Big lie - Wikipedia

 

So, you don't believe the majority of the voting US population when they say the economy is not that good.

 

Only Trump and GOP DISINFORMATION says "the economy is not that good." By every metric the US economy IS good. Prices are still high because inflation was so high in mid 2022, because the US did so poorly with the Covid pandemic, which made inflation much worse than it had to be.

"The most recent U.S. recession occurred in early 2020, officially lasting from February to April 2020. This brief downturn was primarily triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to widespread business closures and a sharp contraction in economic activity."
SoFi

"As of January 2025, the U.S. economy is projected to experience moderate growth, with real GDP expected to increase by approximately 2.1% over the year. The economy is anticipated to expand at a rate of 2.1% in 2025, indicating steady economic activity. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) inflation rate is projected to cool slightly to 2.4%, aligning with the Federal Reserve's target. The unemployment rate is expected to average 4.3%, reflecting a stable labor market. Major financial institutions, such as JPMorgan Chase, reported record annual profits in 2024, driven by a resurgence in deal-making and trading activity. The 10-year Treasury yield has risen to around 4.79%, influenced by market expectations of economic growth and inflation concerns. Overall, the U.S. economy in 2025 is projected to maintain a positive trajectory, with moderate growth, controlled inflation, and a stable labor market."
Professional Forecasters’ Past Performance and the 2025 Economic Outlook

 

I laughed when he first said it, and continue to do so. Look up "hyperbole" and get back to us.

 

He won 58%-42% according to the Constitution. That's the fact. Maybe YOU should fallow your own advice instead making yourself more and more foolish by clinging to baseless blather.

 

Because, in my view, she is a whistleblower. So, if you disagree, and you are entitled to that opinion, then take her out of the examples given, and viola, the original argument remains.

You wish, but, in point of fact, well, see above.

No, because the point requires a span of Trump's actions, so no one thing is going to support the premise with a degree of sufficiency required for the point.

Take her out, and all the rest remains, strong.

Lil Mike, do you know what the word 'pettifogging' means? I ask because YOU ARE DOING IT. It means getting bogged down on a point that doesn't affect the larger point being made if it is removed from the examples given.

So, let me make this crystal clear: whether or not Reality Winner qualifies as a whistleblower is entirely beside the point, and I won't even get into the solid arguments pro and con of whether she is, or isn't, a 'whistleblower', it's unimportant, really. We could remove any mention of her from the argument, and the claim that no president has weaponized the legal system like Trump remains rock-solid.

The real issue here isn’t about her; it’s about Trump’s documented actions -- pressuring the Justice Department, targeting political opponents, abusing the pardon power, and undermining judicial independence. These are well-supported and indisputable facts that substantiate the point.

So, if you want to debate the finer points of whistleblower definitions, fine, that's a separate argument and you can start your own thread or subthread on it, but for now, let's stick to the point being made -- and don’t pretend it changes my core argument. It doesn’t.

 

The Constitution does not mention weight of support.

We are not talking about the 'win', we are talking about the weight of support.

Given unearned electors, the EC cannot measure degree, or weight, of support.

Apparently, what is very simple eludes you.

Your calling a valid point 'blather' is meaningless and partisan drivel.

The truth that trump won by a paltry 1.5% of the vote you can't handle.

You need to cling to the EC to feel better about your electing a criminal and a sex abuser.

 

No, you are wrong on this one unassailable point:

No crimes covered by criminal law are superseded by administrative law. PRA is administrative.

We've already covered the point of why Biden wasn't prosecuted, and Trump was. Your points do not refute what has already been expressed.

 

The consumer could care less about the GDP. The inflation rate means little when the inflation is already up around 20%. The unemployment rate is low because people have not gone back to work and are no longer looking for work.

While Biden is paying off student debt, it is difficult to find plumbers, electricians and other tradesmen.

Americans are not stupid. They know that they are not as well off as before the pandemic.

 

No, that is what you believe, not what I believe, or wrote.

I've already expressed, many times, on this forum, that inflation, brought about by an pandemic which was no one's fault, at least not in America, has obfuscated Biden's successes, that this fact is an unjust state of affairs and, as such, Biden has gotten a bad rap.

Are you capable of acknowledging this truth?

 

Then don't claim how good it is.

 

Trump just dictated to the middle east to "knock that **** off" and they listened.

Strong men create good times.

 

1. Your personal opinion is that Winner is a whistleblower, but there are legal conditions to be met for that to be the case. The long prison sentence argues otherwise...unless this is part of your argument that her incarceration is due to Trump actions. If so, let's see the evidence. If not...

2. It's not pettifogging. You didn't give me one big gotcha on Trump but a list of somethings. So if you are telling me this doesn't matter, why was it on your list? And why should I bother to research anything if you don't think they matter?

3. If you don't want me to go after the issues one by one, because you think that's "pettifogging," then do what I asked in my last post and "why don't we cut to the chase and you give me the single biggest example as proof of your thesis?"

 

No you excused it, we didn't cover it, and why do you think the PRA is administrative helps your case? It helps my case, because that is what he was covered by due to his position. That wasn't the case for Biden.

 

Beware of "strong men" in positions of power and authority.

 

Trump is not a strong man, though. He's a whiny, thin-skinned, noisy man who acts tough. Strong men don't boast and yell and whine the way he does.

But America is strong militarily, and he has shown himself willing to let our military do its thing with less restraint than Obama or Biden have done. Personally, I am glad for that and hope that he will loosen the reins enough to smack down troublemakers like the Houthis and Hamas and better intimidate China and Russia to gain and maintain peace where possible. But sitting in a safe place and letting the military beat up on terrorists in the Middle East doesn't mean Trump is strong. It doesn't take strength to do that.

 

What that Cheeto lied and denied a subpoenaand told his attorney to lie? PRA isn't what YOU think it is and he's NOT covered by it

"The PRA requires that all records created by Presidents (and Vice-Presidents) be turned over to [NARA] at the end of their administrations," the Archives said.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-presidential-records-act-indictment-arraignment/

Donald Trump is lying about the Presidential Records Act

The only problem is that Trump is claiming that the Act means the opposite of what it says, and after years of warnings from NARA, he should know it.

The Presidential Records Act (44 U.S.C. §2201-2209) says that all White House records related to government business are public property, and that when the president and vice president leave office, those documents must be transferred to the National Archives for preservation.

Long before his indictment, Trump violated the two key parts of the PRA — and both times, NARA alerted Trump’s team.

https://www.citizensforethics.org/n...-is-lying-about-the-presidential-records-act/

 

That's a hot take. The PRA didn't cover Trump? Heh, You keep going with that.

 

The inabilty for Cheeto's "followers" to absorb facts is astonishing

If you meant he's 180 degrees wrong on HIM deciding which stuff he keeps and which he gives up, yes. PRA is how you do it, what's done and by whom. Guess what NONE are done by ANY Prez

 

Apparently you didn't read the comment.

Inflation OBFUSCATED BIDEN'S SUCCESSES UNJUSTLY.

He got inflation down, and noone is giving him credit for it. Biden got a bad rap, unjustly so, especially with republicans beating them over the head with inflation this, inflation that, reminding them every minute of every day so they had no chance to see the good that he did.

That is what you are ignoring, which is WHY I claim how good it was.