There were cameras all over the place, and once the surviving victims feel safe enough to talk, they'll have a lot to say. Do we really need his testimony?
Yes, it's necessary to prosecute all cases "by the book" for morality, legality, and to avoid dismissal on a technicality or a not guilty verdict due to insufficient evidence/prosecution; for the (currently-living) masses to be able to analyze, research, discuss and accept it; and for posterity/history. And even then, there will be those now and in the future who will not believe it.
Brainwashing-driven "beliefs" are emotionally-driven and d-mn-near impossible to revise, even with clear-cut, irrefutable evidence and logic.
For example, there was a talking head on tv with terminal TDS who, before either the 2020 or the 2024 election, said Buydan could be shown with dead babies (or something like that) and he'd still vote for him because he hated PDJT so much.
People like him will be in that % who are lost forever but thorough, air-tight prosecutions with as much evidence and testimony as possible will awaken some of the currently-lost.
Sam Harris did not comment on finding dead babies in Joe Biden's basement. Harris made a statement regarding Hunter Biden and the potential contents of his laptop. Harris stated, "Hunter Biden literally could have had the corpses of children in his basement – [he] would not have cared."
This statement, made during a podcast discussion about the 2020 election and the Hunter Biden laptop controversy, was intended to emphasize that even if the worst accusations against Hunter Biden were true, it wouldn't change his view that Donald Trump was a more dangerous candidate.
It's a thing that's big on social media. People claiming Trump has already done it.
Trump's coy response was a must do. Imagine what Diddy's attorneys could do with any declaration on the case by the President. I remember Nixon did this once in a case that everyone considered obvious and courtroom hell broke out. Trump has to remain neutral.
Trump's coy response was a must do. Imagine what Diddy's attorneys could do with any declaration on the case by the President. I remember Nixon did this once in a case that everyone considered obvious and courtroom hell broke out. Trump has to remain neutral.
My thoughts exactly.
Reading the transcript, Trump has to take a neutral and impartial stance on this.
Trump probably knows Diddy is guilty and so do his aides and advisors, but they are probably keeping their mouths relatively shut to avoid saying anything that can or might compromise the case against Diddy.
No. But I do remember the brouhaha because it was big. And I just remembered something similar. Remember that even Obama had to hold a beer summit over indicating a cop was wrong in questioning his favorite professor. We are talking about a time when obama was the most "precious" president ever.
I still can't believe how they were able to move Obama up through the political pyramid from "community organizer" to President, in just a few years! The guy had LITERALLY never been in charge of any organization, and people voted for him to be head of the most important organization on Earth!
When obama became a candidate, I remember a discussion on fox about a novel written by one of the participants, about how a charismatic black guy, using white guilt and black yearning to attain the presidency won. It was never mentioned again to my knowledge.
If I had known then what I know now...and I can't even remember who.
Never been in one, but I did eat at an upscale CIA-chef (that Culinary Institute of America, not the CIA normally mentioned here on GAW :) ) restaurant a few years ago and although I remember it was great, I don't remember what specific dish I had :)
I am a bit surprised, but then Trump did get it out that he's a bystander in the matter. They were/are setting a trap and by they, I mean the deep state.
I’d go with Doocy is part of the plan. Get the question out there. No one else is asking and Trump’s answer is a little cryptic. I think they need to get people to start talking about it.
I think you're right. Trump still likes Fox News, and he seems to like Peter Doocy. POTUS gave Peter several questions in a row and seemed to be interested.
A synonym for "stool pigeon" is informant, especially when referring to someone providing information about wrongdoing. Other words that could be used include snitch, rat, stoolie, or canary. "Ditty bird" is a less common term for a snitch or informer, particularly in criminal contexts
A synonym for "stool pigeon" is informant, especially when referring to someone providing information about wrongdoing. Other words that could be used include snitch, rat, stoolie, or canary. "Ditty bird" is a less common term for a snitch or informer, particularly in criminal contexts
I forget what those word puzzles are where you change one letter per move to change it into the target word & each "move" must be a legitimate word along the way... know what I mean?
Back in 2020, President Trump pardoned Gen Flynn while his case was still open - and being screwed with by Judge Sullivan. The Govt moved to dismiss the charges and the Judge wouldn't let it die.
Rape is a state crime. Kidnapping is usually a state crime unless people were transported over state lines -- but even then it would be state and federal, erase the federal charges and the state charges still apply.
While it doesn't apply to this case, there are caveats.
State crimes can be Federal crimes depending on the victim(s) or the suspect(s) that committed the crimes, and also depending on where the crimes took place.
Examples - if Noem or Bondi (for example) were raped the feds could take the case as they are both cabinet members. If a crime was committed in the Capitol Building, or on other Federal property the feds could take that case as well. On more non-example - a real case - is the attempted assassination of Justice Kavanaugh. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh_assassination_plot
If he gives up Obama and the rest of them,he could get life in prison instead of death.
I'd allow it
There were cameras all over the place, and once the surviving victims feel safe enough to talk, they'll have a lot to say. Do we really need his testimony?
It takes the testimony of a big name,to take down a former president,or make it a lot easier.....
Yes, it's necessary to prosecute all cases "by the book" for morality, legality, and to avoid dismissal on a technicality or a not guilty verdict due to insufficient evidence/prosecution; for the (currently-living) masses to be able to analyze, research, discuss and accept it; and for posterity/history. And even then, there will be those now and in the future who will not believe it.
Brainwashing-driven "beliefs" are emotionally-driven and d-mn-near impossible to revise, even with clear-cut, irrefutable evidence and logic.
For example, there was a talking head on tv with terminal TDS who, before either the 2020 or the 2024 election, said Buydan could be shown with dead babies (or something like that) and he'd still vote for him because he hated PDJT so much.
People like him will be in that % who are lost forever but thorough, air-tight prosecutions with as much evidence and testimony as possible will awaken some of the currently-lost.
Sam Harris did not comment on finding dead babies in Joe Biden's basement. Harris made a statement regarding Hunter Biden and the potential contents of his laptop. Harris stated, "Hunter Biden literally could have had the corpses of children in his basement – [he] would not have cared." This statement, made during a podcast discussion about the 2020 election and the Hunter Biden laptop controversy, was intended to emphasize that even if the worst accusations against Hunter Biden were true, it wouldn't change his view that Donald Trump was a more dangerous candidate.
Thanks for the correction/update. A sad testament about how deluded some people are about PDJT.
It's a thing that's big on social media. People claiming Trump has already done it.
Trump's coy response was a must do. Imagine what Diddy's attorneys could do with any declaration on the case by the President. I remember Nixon did this once in a case that everyone considered obvious and courtroom hell broke out. Trump has to remain neutral.
My thoughts exactly.
Reading the transcript, Trump has to take a neutral and impartial stance on this.
Trump probably knows Diddy is guilty and so do his aides and advisors, but they are probably keeping their mouths relatively shut to avoid saying anything that can or might compromise the case against Diddy.
Thank you for the comment. Do you remember the case name that Nixon screwed up?
No. But I do remember the brouhaha because it was big. And I just remembered something similar. Remember that even Obama had to hold a beer summit over indicating a cop was wrong in questioning his favorite professor. We are talking about a time when obama was the most "precious" president ever.
I still can't believe how they were able to move Obama up through the political pyramid from "community organizer" to President, in just a few years! The guy had LITERALLY never been in charge of any organization, and people voted for him to be head of the most important organization on Earth!
When obama became a candidate, I remember a discussion on fox about a novel written by one of the participants, about how a charismatic black guy, using white guilt and black yearning to attain the presidency won. It was never mentioned again to my knowledge.
If I had known then what I know now...and I can't even remember who.
I can't remember what I had for lunch yesterday :)
But I bet you remember the first meal you had in a Michelin restaurant...
Never been in one, but I did eat at an upscale CIA-chef (that Culinary Institute of America, not the CIA normally mentioned here on GAW :) ) restaurant a few years ago and although I remember it was great, I don't remember what specific dish I had :)
uh that would be a NO in fact FUK NO
Oh, hell, NO! 😡
How about ummmmmm NO!
“I’d have to look at the facts to make sure no one is being treated unfairly, no matter if they like me or not.” — paraphrase.
Peter?
Yeah sorry, can't edit the title either. Not sure why I said Doug
Just looked up the name
"Businessman and former Member of the US Council of Governors"
it's all good!
Does anyone actually believe he would pardon Diddy? Seriously?
Makes me wonder if Doucy has some skeletons in the closet?
Yeah why is he asking this question. Shit is getting strange.
I am a bit surprised, but then Trump did get it out that he's a bystander in the matter. They were/are setting a trap and by they, I mean the deep state.
I’d go with Doocy is part of the plan. Get the question out there. No one else is asking and Trump’s answer is a little cryptic. I think they need to get people to start talking about it.
That's a good point. Controversy breeds conversation.
I think you're right. Trump still likes Fox News, and he seems to like Peter Doocy. POTUS gave Peter several questions in a row and seemed to be interested.
Yesterday he asked karoline leavitt about Jill Biden being subpoenaed and she had her extensive answer all teed up. Looked like it was planned
You think Ducey has had a taste of that?
Might have to start calling him ‘dooo-che’😀?
Postmortem pardon maybe, but not a living pardon.
I thought Diddy was already pardoned. Wasn't there a thread about it?
Yeah, here it is here:
https://greatawakening.win/p/19BGTU3WTB/tired-of-reading-about-trump-par/
The normie sphere is pushing he's going to be guilty on RICO chargers. Source: TheQuartering on YT or Rumble.
I vote no pardon. Only life in gitmo for names.
When does a caged bird sing...
I know that a lot of old timers used to call them ditty birds.
I can’t find the phrase “diddy bird” on four search engines.
A synonym for "stool pigeon" is informant, especially when referring to someone providing information about wrongdoing. Other words that could be used include snitch, rat, stoolie, or canary. "Ditty bird" is a less common term for a snitch or informer, particularly in criminal contexts
Must be a pretty old term then as I had never heard it before, even while I spent 5 years in the federal pen.
ditty birds?
Yeah, and not the children's book series.
A synonym for "stool pigeon" is informant, especially when referring to someone providing information about wrongdoing. Other words that could be used include snitch, rat, stoolie, or canary. "Ditty bird" is a less common term for a snitch or informer, particularly in criminal contexts
Yeah man... the ole diddy baby oil flappy birds.
This discussion would be a great way to focus the liberals on the topic and get the media into a froth.
“Trump was at Diddy parties! Off with his head!”
Um, actually it was Obama…
I’m starting to think Biden admin went after diddy when he refused to do vote or die last year
Deepstate Desperate
I forget what those word puzzles are where you change one letter per move to change it into the target word & each "move" must be a legitimate word along the way... know what I mean?
How can you even talk about pardoning someone who is still on trial? The question does not make sense.
Back in 2020, President Trump pardoned Gen Flynn while his case was still open - and being screwed with by Judge Sullivan. The Govt moved to dismiss the charges and the Judge wouldn't let it die.
bidens pen pardoned many not charged w anything
Presidents can only pardon Federal charges
US presidents pardon federal offenses.
Rape is a state crime. Kidnapping is usually a state crime unless people were transported over state lines -- but even then it would be state and federal, erase the federal charges and the state charges still apply.
While it doesn't apply to this case, there are caveats.
State crimes can be Federal crimes depending on the victim(s) or the suspect(s) that committed the crimes, and also depending on where the crimes took place.
Examples - if Noem or Bondi (for example) were raped the feds could take the case as they are both cabinet members. If a crime was committed in the Capitol Building, or on other Federal property the feds could take that case as well. On more non-example - a real case - is the attempted assassination of Justice Kavanaugh. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh_assassination_plot