(01-07-2024, 01:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 08:57 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]You're apparently unfamiliar with the most fundamental concept in our criminal justice system, the presumption of innocence. The burden of proof is on the moving party.
If you want to claim Trump's alleged tweets were a call to violence, fine, present your evidence and I'll consider it objectively. If not, stop your whining.
Winger's point, which you're either ignoring or simply not astute enough to grasp, is that, had the intent been to overthrow the government, they would have brought and used weapons.
P.S. I'm sorry Santa didn't bring you a Trump doll in an orange jumpsuit for Christmas.
You're right that if this was court, the burden of proof would be on me, but it would be preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.
But I'm not suing, this is not court, and you're not Trump.
There is clearly a preponderance of evidence out there that Trump encouraged an insurrection in the days leading up to it, and continued to encourage it until about 4 PM that day.
He expected some or all of the police and national guard to be on his side and he expected Pence to leave so the procedure would be on hold indefinitely. When those things didn't happen he gave up.
You're wrong again. A preponderance of evidence is the standard the moving party must meet in a civil case. In criminal court, the greater threshold of beyond a reasonable doubt must be met to support a guilty verdict.
The preponderance of evidence you claim isn't "out there", it exists only in your self-deluded mind as you seek to validate your argument.
How do you know what Trump expected? Has he stated this publicly, or are you clairvoyant?
Can you believe this came from USA Today? Like most MSM outlets, they're typically fluffers in a Democrat bath house. Things must be getting bad.
With Claudine Gay out, Harvard can double down on DEI or embrace freedom and true diversity
...DEI has curbed free speech on campus
Gay started fumbling Harvard’s response to the Oct. 7 attack right away, offering no institutional moral clarity. And after her shocking testimony, along with two other university presidents, at a congressional hearing on antisemitism last month, it became obvious that Gay held a double standard on which students deserve protection.
Yet that is what DEI policies and principles do – they create a hierarchy of oppressor and oppressed. Contrary to its purported mission, DEI divides us as human beings and uplifts the “oppressed” at all costs.
The growth of these diversity and inclusion bureaucracies come not only at a large fiscal cost – but a cost to freedom as well. It’s not a coincidence that universities’ heavy-handed speech codes have flourished along with this administrative bloat.
“The mass bureaucratization of universities has been a disaster for free speech and academic freedom on campus,” Greg Lukianoff, who heads the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), recently told me. “Those staffers have been leading the charge for cancellations, new speech codes, new microaggression policies.”...
(01-07-2024, 03:24 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Can you believe this came from USA Today? Like most MSM outlets, they're typically fluffers in a Democrat bath house. Things must be getting bad.
With Claudine Gay out, Harvard can double down on DEI or embrace freedom and true diversity
...DEI has curbed free speech on campus
Gay started fumbling Harvard’s response to the Oct. 7 attack right away, offering no institutional moral clarity. And after her shocking testimony, along with two other university presidents, at a congressional hearing on antisemitism last month, it became obvious that Gay held a double standard on which students deserve protection.
Yet that is what DEI policies and principles do – they create a hierarchy of oppressor and oppressed. Contrary to its purported mission, DEI divides us as human beings and uplifts the “oppressed” at all costs.
The growth of these diversity and inclusion bureaucracies come not only at a large fiscal cost – but a cost to freedom as well. It’s not a coincidence that universities’ heavy-handed speech codes have flourished along with this administrative bloat.
“The mass bureaucratization of universities has been a disaster for free speech and academic freedom on campus,” Greg Lukianoff, who heads the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), recently told me. “Those staffers have been leading the charge for cancellations, new speech codes, new microaggression policies.”...
Harvard should fall back in line after a while. They've lost mega $$$ from donors.. That can only last so long. They have tenured "professors" to pay..
(01-07-2024, 05:12 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 03:24 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Can you believe this came from USA Today? Like most MSM outlets, they're typically fluffers in a Democrat bath house. Things must be getting bad.
With Claudine Gay out, Harvard can double down on DEI or embrace freedom and true diversity
...DEI has curbed free speech on campus
Gay started fumbling Harvard’s response to the Oct. 7 attack right away, offering no institutional moral clarity. And after her shocking testimony, along with two other university presidents, at a congressional hearing on antisemitism last month, it became obvious that Gay held a double standard on which students deserve protection.
Yet that is what DEI policies and principles do – they create a hierarchy of oppressor and oppressed. Contrary to its purported mission, DEI divides us as human beings and uplifts the “oppressed” at all costs.
The growth of these diversity and inclusion bureaucracies come not only at a large fiscal cost – but a cost to freedom as well. It’s not a coincidence that universities’ heavy-handed speech codes have flourished along with this administrative bloat.
“The mass bureaucratization of universities has been a disaster for free speech and academic freedom on campus,” Greg Lukianoff, who heads the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), recently told me. “Those staffers have been leading the charge for cancellations, new speech codes, new microaggression policies.”...
Harvard should fall back in line after a while. They've lost mega $$$ from donors.. That can only last so long. They have tenured "professors" to pay..
Don't remember who it was from but they are running all MIT tenured professors work through AI to check for plagiarism. They will then move on to Harvard.
Colleges could find themselves without any professors to brainwash students. If they actually fired people instead of just saying oh well, this could end the college racket.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
(01-07-2024, 05:33 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 05:12 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]Harvard should fall back in line after a while. They've lost mega $$$ from donors.. That can only last so long. They have tenured "professors" to pay..
Don't remember who it was from but they are running all MIT tenured professors work through AI to check for plagiarism. They will then move on to Harvard.
Colleges could find themselves without any professors to brainwash students. If they actually fired people instead of just saying oh well, this could end the college racket.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
That would be a major first step towards accountability.
(01-07-2024, 05:12 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 03:24 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Can you believe this came from USA Today? Like most MSM outlets, they're typically fluffers in a Democrat bath house. Things must be getting bad.
With Claudine Gay out, Harvard can double down on DEI or embrace freedom and true diversity
...DEI has curbed free speech on campus
Gay started fumbling Harvard’s response to the Oct. 7 attack right away, offering no institutional moral clarity. And after her shocking testimony, along with two other university presidents, at a congressional hearing on antisemitism last month, it became obvious that Gay held a double standard on which students deserve protection.
Yet that is what DEI policies and principles do – they create a hierarchy of oppressor and oppressed. Contrary to its purported mission, DEI divides us as human beings and uplifts the “oppressed” at all costs.
The growth of these diversity and inclusion bureaucracies come not only at a large fiscal cost – but a cost to freedom as well. It’s not a coincidence that universities’ heavy-handed speech codes have flourished along with this administrative bloat.
“The mass bureaucratization of universities has been a disaster for free speech and academic freedom on campus,” Greg Lukianoff, who heads the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), recently told me. “Those staffers have been leading the charge for cancellations, new speech codes, new microaggression policies.”...
Harvard should fall back in line after a while. They've lost mega $$$ from donors.. That can only last so long. They have tenured "professors" to pay..
It could be a VERY long wait. Harvard has the largest academic endowment in the world at slightly over 50 billion!
Since these were actual Tweets and not jokes, I think this belongs here..
![[Image: 20240107-173643.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/Qtjw05Yf/20240107-173643.png)
(01-07-2024, 05:41 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 05:12 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]Harvard should fall back in line after a while. They've lost mega $$$ from donors.. That can only last so long. They have tenured "professors" to pay..
It could be a VERY long wait. Harvard has the largest academic endowment in the world at slightly over 50 billion!
A university can plow through endowment funds when not being replenished with new donations. But Harvard has a two-pronged problem now; over-the-top leftwing hate/thought control, and even more troublesome, a climate of accepted plagiarism. Unruly pinkos on university campuses has been a fixture for decades. Nothing new there. But if the veracity of an institution of higher learning is compromised, that spells trouble.
(01-07-2024, 03:16 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 01:01 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]You're right that if this was court, the burden of proof would be on me, but it would be preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.
But I'm not suing, this is not court, and you're not Trump.
There is clearly a preponderance of evidence out there that Trump encouraged an insurrection in the days leading up to it, and continued to encourage it until about 4 PM that day.
He expected some or all of the police and national guard to be on his side and he expected Pence to leave so the procedure would be on hold indefinitely. When those things didn't happen he gave up.
You're wrong again. A preponderance of evidence is the standard the moving party must meet in a civil case. In criminal court, the greater threshold of beyond a reasonable doubt must be met to support a guilty verdict.
The preponderance of evidence you claim isn't "out there", it exists only in your self-deluded mind as you seek to validate your argument.
How do you know what Trump expected? Has he stated this publicly, or are you clairvoyant?
Talk to the Colorado Supreme Court
(01-07-2024, 09:17 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 03:16 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]You're wrong again. A preponderance of evidence is the standard the moving party must meet in a civil case. In criminal court, the greater threshold of beyond a reasonable doubt must be met to support a guilty verdict.
The preponderance of evidence you claim isn't "out there", it exists only in your self-deluded mind as you seek to validate your argument.
How do you know what Trump expected? Has he stated this publicly, or are you clairvoyant?
Talk to the Colorado Supreme Court
Newsflash:
Liberals hate Trump.. No matter what.
Even their judges..
(01-07-2024, 09:17 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 03:16 PM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]You're wrong again. A preponderance of evidence is the standard the moving party must meet in a civil case. In criminal court, the greater threshold of beyond a reasonable doubt must be met to support a guilty verdict.
The preponderance of evidence you claim isn't "out there", it exists only in your self-deluded mind as you seek to validate your argument.
How do you know what Trump expected? Has he stated this publicly, or are you clairvoyant?
Talk to the Colorado Supreme Court
And this is why you're so easily duped.
(01-08-2024, 12:21 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ] (01-07-2024, 09:17 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Talk to the Colorado Supreme Court
And this is why you're so easily duped.
I watched it live. On multiple channels. The people who experienced it at the time, including Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell, called it an insurrection. Trump also watched it live and encouraged it for four hours.
Who was duped? By whom?
(01-08-2024, 11:22 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2024, 12:21 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]And this is why you're so easily duped.
I watched it live. On multiple channels. The people who experienced it at the time, including Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell, called it an insurrection. Trump also watched it live and encouraged it for four hours.
Who was duped? By whom?
McCarthy and McConnell lololol
Those two jackasses are right up your alley to side with..
(01-08-2024, 03:09 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ] (01-08-2024, 02:36 PM)WingerDinger Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/gatewaypundit/status...Gf41A&s=19
Breaking News: Bill Clinton and Donald Trump cheated on their wife (wives). NO Way !!
Stay tuned tomorrow for breaking news about Matthew Perry's hidden drug addiction.
Leave it to you to downplay pedophilia..
Why?