From an outsider looking in, it was inevitable something was going to happen under his regime. Even when he was elected the first thing I thought was "Been a while since a President has been assassinated." Didn't think he would last 6 months.

I feel a shamed to call those people Americans because that is not what some many fought for and lost their lives for. We fought a war to be free of England and a war against each other for the freedom of slaves. Why are we fighting with each other over something like politics? We are one country, why can't some people act like it?

Muricaaaa

In in the interests of not offending my American friends I'll just say it was a very embarrassing sight to see.

However more embarrassing are those that are attempting to rationalise or compare to the BLM protests... deary me.

USA is fucked'to my terminology,president and everywhere fighting to live from this covid'-19 . Definitely dont want that with my health history'.

With the world 3rd highest population base you are bound to have a few rebels in your towns. Hopefully the U.S. will grow stronger from this issue.

there are several words that come to mind when i think about that. Stupid, moronic, idiotic are a few examples.  Some lady needless lost her life over what was a political stunt from a guy who really cant take losing. no matter how you feel about the guy, whether the elections were fraudulent or fair, at this point is irrelevent.

people need to come to terms with the fact that Biden is gonna be in the oval office whether we want him to or not.

Surprised nah not really like a few i seen this a mile away sadly here in Australia we are heading the same way but thank fuck we have common sense gun laws and dont have to worry about some radicalized right wing wack job going lone wolf or an armed milita attempting to stage a coup.

Now this is how I see this. Trump has been found not guilty for inciting these riots, so it is not his fault for it happening. The whole riot was stupid as hell, but how do people bash this when they are fine with what BLM/Antifa have been doing to the country for many many months? You cannot have it both ways people you are either okay with riots or you are not okay with them.

The reason this even happened is over 70 million people voted for Trump and around 31% of them believe the election was robbed from them. But then when the Supreme Court were supposed to do there job and look into if there was fraud they did not do shit and rod it off like the possibility was impossible. If there really was nothing wrong with the election why is nobody proving that as much? If I was the Supreme Court I would prove all the supporters wrong and bring up all the evidence they have but nope nothing. Then nobody could say shit and we can all move on.

Another reason this shit continues to happen is this country is so fucking divided man. Nobody can handle opinions anymore, everyone is canceled just for supporting someone or saying a fucking offensive word. The mainstream media also makes us hate each other spreading there own parties propaganda instead of staying neutral like they are supposed too.

i wonder if Trump will really get impeached in the end

we could maybe make a betting pool out of it, like whoeever bets the correct amount of votes for or against can win :P

If there really was nothing wrong with the election why is nobody proving that as much? If I was the Supreme Court I would prove all the supporters wrong and bring up all the evidence they have but nope nothing. Then nobody could say shit and we can all move on.

Guilty until proven innocent is not how the system works. It isn't anybody else's fault that 31% of people refused to accept reality when they're being fed a daily diet of crackhead theories. The guy lost, and anybody who didn't think he would bitch and moan and cry fraud about it regardless of how it happened obviously wasn't paying attention, because he said as much in 2016 when he cried that it was rigged, until he won.

Part of the reason why the Supreme Court quickly shut down those lawsuits is because they didn't even have the legal ability to bring the action itself.  Texas literally tried to interpret another (several) state's own laws, which already did the rounds in their own state courts, specifically because it didn't like the result when everything was counted. It didn't raise these concerns when the laws themselves were passed, but only after the result was something they didn't like. And their remedy asked for the most extraordinary thing possible, a nuclear ask, which was to effectively invalidate millions of people's votes. A nuclear ask. 

Even in a scenario where they accept the case and write as much about why the case itself was so ridiculous, that 31% isn't going to accept a single thing that goes against their narrative that isn't "stolen", not even mentioning the not insignificant amount of them that are under the belief that the legal system is already rigged, and the Chief Justice and a decent part of his cohorts are part of some minor sex, murdering, blood drinking goblin illuminati. 

Guilty until proven innocent is not how the system works. It isn't anybody else's fault that 31% of people refused to accept reality when they're being fed a daily diet of crackhead theories. The guy lost, and anybody who didn't think he would bitch and moan and cry fraud about it regardless of how it happened obviously wasn't paying attention, because he said as much in 2016 when he cried that it was rigged, until he won.

The system was set up to look into potential fraud and not throw it away as soon as they saw the accusations. If they can't handle the pressure of their jobs, get someone else who can. You say those people are being fed crackhead theories when many people are allowing injustice to happen because they don't like Trump. From 2016-2020 it was all, "HE'S NOT MY PRESIDENT!" But when someone disagrees now we are at fault?

Part of the reason why the Supreme Court quickly shut down those lawsuits is because they didn't even have the legal ability to bring the action itself.  Texas literally tried to interpret another (several) state's own laws, which already did the rounds in their own state courts, specifically because it didn't like the result when everything was counted. It didn't raise these concerns when the laws themselves were passed, but only after the result was something they didn't like. And their remedy asked for the most extraordinary thing possible, a nuclear ask, which was to effectively invalidate millions of people's votes. A nuclear ask. 

Well, again this is false because the supreme court has the ability to look into it but choose not to. You are just giving them excuses because there is no concrete legal reason for them to not look into it. It's simple do your job we elected you for and nobody would be pissed. Also, Texas is legally capable of acting like they are currently just looking at the ways they are doing it, nothing is illegal. Again just because you disagree with something does not mean it's wrong.

Even in a scenario where they accept the case and write as much about why the case itself was so ridiculous, that 31% isn't going to accept a single thing that goes against their narrative that isn't "stolen", not even mentioning the not insignificant amount of them that are under the belief that the legal system is already rigged, and the Chief Justice and a decent part of his cohorts are part of some minor sex, murdering, blood drinking goblin Illuminati. 

You mean the scenario of actually showing proof of everything you are saying here? So it's okay for one side to blame Russia for collusion which was found to be a load of horse shit but when the other side wants to look into possible fraud it's wrong? It's fine for a side to be so butt hurt to impeach someone for no actual reason other than to ruin his presidency? You speak about the Illuminati here like the Hollywood elite is not the one's dabbling in it but the people who support Trump and Trump himself are? It's not like they turned their back on Trump as soon as he ran Republican when they were close friends with him for years? Should we bring up here the child sex trafficking run by Hollywood which many celebs flew to an island to do unspeakable things to children. Wait who was on that list again? Biden? Clinton? Tom Hanks? But who never went to the island itself, yeah Trump who this list bashes on a daily basis. This also includes high-ranking gov officials from both political parties. 

The system was set up to look into potential fraud and not throw it away as soon as they saw the accusations. If they can't handle the pressure of their jobs, get someone else who can. You say those people are being fed crackhead theories when many people are allowing injustice to happen because they don't like Trump. From 2016-2020 it was all, "HE'S NOT MY PRESIDENT!" But when someone disagrees now we are at fault?

The system was set up as a way to adjudicate between two parties within legal guidelines that both parties, as well as the court, adhere to, and must adhere to If you can't understand how absurd it is for a state to try and argue that another state interpreted its own laws incorrectly, despite going through their own separate court processes in their own state courts, we're not going to get anywhere.  By merely accepting the case and agreeing that they had standing, you would be opening gigantic can of worms that would suddenly put every state law in every state up to the whims of another state. 

Would you be happy if California challenged every law your state passes that it disagrees with, even if it didn't directly effect them, and justified it by saying that you don't know how to interpret or read your own laws?

I am curious if you have stopped once through this exercise to ponder why these court cases and the remedies they seek only pertain to the presidential election results, and not every congressional/Senate election that these states ran concurrently? Why did Texas's claims and remedies only seek to invalidate their electoral votes and not, say, Mark Kelly winning a senate seat in Arizona?  Why didn't Texas challenge the results in Ohio, a state that went heavily towards Joe Biden at the beginning of the night, but flipped heavily after midnight and gave Trump a healthy win? That sounds pretty suspicious, right? (They counted the mail in ballots first, inverse to Pennsylvania, or Georgia.) or Florida, home of 20 years of almost consistent election fuckery? These claims were brought with only a partisan objective in mind with voter fraud as the vehicle for it, and the lawyers that brought these cases will have plenty of opportunities for discovery while they defend themselves from the 1.3 billion dollar lawsuit from Dominion is bringing against them for defamation.

The fact of the matter is that these claims were bullshit, were always bullshit, and were treated appropriately as such, that they were happy to parrot to the media but were never able to back up concretely in court, claims that were examined and adjudicated as such by not only Trump appointed judges, but examined by the DoJ vigorously, GOP governors, GOP secretaries of state deeply disappointed in the results (my own being a perfect example, attempting to be hustled to "find" 11,000 votes), the entire judiciaries of multiple states, and the Federal courts who oversee them, who reviewed a conspiracy that seemed to only reach as far as the results that others didn't want to accept because it was inconvenient to them.  A conspiracy that supposedly encompasses hundreds of thousands, or millions of people, but when the rubber hits the road and it's time to put up or shut up, we instead get this. 

But yeah, I'm sure it's all just the deck being stacked against this guy.

The system was set up as a way to adjudicate between two parties within legal guidelines that both parties, as well as the court, adhere to, and must adhere to If you can't understand how absurd it is for a state to try and argue that another state interpreted its own laws incorrectly, despite going through their own separate court processes in their own state courts, we're not going to get anywhere.  By merely accepting the case and agreeing that they had standing, you would be opening gigantic can of worms that would suddenly put every state law in every state up to the whims of another state. 
 

Dude the whole point of a system is to look into things if there is evidence of it being so. Even if the evidence is proven false, but instead of that happening, they dismissed it in a couple of days. They impeached Trump and that took a couple of months, but to ease everyone's minds about possible fraud they could not look into it any further? A couple of fucking days what a pathetic ass excuse for a joke. 

Would you be happy if California challenged every law your state passes that it disagrees with, even if it didn't directly effect them, and justified it by saying that you don't know how to interpret or read your own laws?

Did I ever say that I agreed what with Texas is doing? No, I did not. They have a right to do it and that's the bottom line. Disagree all you want. Also fuck yeah the governor of California is a fucking idiot, nobody in California likes him because of the things he does. Not like there have been hundreds of fucking reforms signed to get Newsom out of office for all the hypocritical shit he does on a daily basis. 

I am curious if you have stopped once through this exercise to ponder why these court cases and the remedies they seek only pertain to the presidential election results, and not every congressional/Senate election that these states ran concurrently? Why did Texas's claims and remedies only seek to invalidate their electoral votes and not, say, Mark Kelly winning a senate seat in Arizona?  Why didn't Texas challenge the results in Ohio, a state that went heavily towards Joe Biden at the beginning of the night, but flipped heavily after midnight and gave Trump a healthy win? That sounds pretty suspicious, right? (They counted the mail in ballots first, inverse to Pennsylvania, or Georgia.) or Florida, home of 20 years of almost consistent election fuckery? These claims were brought with only a partisan objective in mind with voter fraud as the vehicle for it, and the lawyers that brought these cases will have plenty of opportunities for discovery while they defend themselves from the 1.3 billion dollar lawsuit from Dominion is bringing against them for defamation.

You are missing the point, the Supreme Court needed to do their job and prove to everyone they could trust them. Did they do that? No. Did you know that people from all parties, Republicans, Democrats and even independents think that there was fraud in this election? It's not like a group pf people came from out of the woods and banded together for this. Everyone can agree we need some sort of reform, especially with videos that came out of people at voting ballots throwing out votes. But that's not evidence in your mind right. 

The fact of the matter is that these claims were bullshit, were always bullshit, and were treated appropriately as such, that they were happy to parrot to the media but were never able to back up concretely in court, claims that were examined and adjudicated as such by not only Trump appointed judges, but examined by the DoJ vigorously, GOP governors, GOP secretaries of state deeply disappointed in the results (my own being a perfect example, attempting to be hustled to "find" 11,000 votes), the entire judiciaries of multiple states, and the Federal courts who oversee them, who reviewed a conspiracy that seemed to only reach as far as the results that others didn't want to accept because it was inconvenient to them.  A conspiracy that supposedly encompasses hundreds of thousands or millions of people, but when the rubber hits the road and it's time to put up or shut up, we instead get this. 

That fact of the matter is if you defend other's people accusations and present the people who think there was fraud as idiots, you are being hypocritical plain and simple. 

Dude the whole point of a system is to look into things if there is evidence of it being so. Even if the evidence is proven false, but instead of that happening, they dismissed it in a couple of days. They impeached Trump and that took a couple of months, but to ease everyone's minds about possible fraud they could not look into it any further? A couple of fucking days what a pathetic ass excuse for a joke.

Key emphasis on if, which clearly wasn't sufficient enough to overturn even a single state's results in their own court systems or made into a substantive case to present by their states investigative bodies, notwithstanding Texas's own attempt, which was to invalidate plenty of states electoral votes.  

Did I ever say that I agreed what with Texas is doing? No, I did not. They have a right to do it and that's the bottom line. Disagree all you want. Also fuck yeah the governor of California is a fucking idiot, nobody in California likes him because of the things he does. Not like there have been hundreds of fucking reforms signed to get Newsom out of office for all the hypocritical shit he does on a daily basis.

They have a right to do it and that's the bottom line.

Clearly they didn't, and don't, as evidenced by the fact that they were denied the ability to present their case based on that concept alone.  You seem to be under the belief that the legal system not only operates on guilty until proven innocent, but that it is also the court's job to prove a parties case instead of the party themselves, while also being apparently entitled to a hearing under any reason, no matter how frivolous and regardless of whether or not you yourself are affected by it.  If you can't take a step back and think about how ridiculous that sounds in any other context for day to day legal matters and just as a matter of principle, I'm not sure what to tell you, dude.

You are missing the point, the Supreme Court needed to do their job and prove to everyone they could trust them. Did they do that? No. Did you know that people from all parties, Republicans, Democrats and even independents think that there was fraud in this election? It's not like a group pf people came from out of the woods and banded together for this. Everyone can agree we need some sort of reform, especially with videos that came out of people at voting ballots throwing out votes. But that's not evidence in your mind right.

You are missing the point. They're doing their job by shutting down arguments that shouldn't even be in their court room to begin with. And nobody said there wasn't fraud in the absolute sense - every election has a small handful of cases. Never in the thousands. Never in the tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands.  They came nowhere close to changing a single result at the top of the ticket, let alone several states, that all happened to vote a particular way, and you conveniently did not answer the question on why Texas seemed to be cool with the other statewide results - didn't bother to assert fraud and criminal behavior there, even though those names are on the same ballot - but seemed to be intimately concerned with fraud at the presidential level.  I can give you a hint why, because the argument had no foundations in good faith and was only designed with partisan intent in mind. 

Setting aside Texas, anybody with an iota of understanding knows that Trump was never going to concede in any circumstances.  The dude spent three months trying to convince people that an old Powerball ticket actually was the big winner, despite God knows how many eyeballs looking at his numbers and comparing them to the jackpot and knowing that it was false.  He was never going to leave quietly, and he has said so plainly for the past 5 years.  Team Trump had their day in court.  In multiple states.  In multiple jurisdictions. In state court, in State Supreme court, in Federal appeals court, filled with judges he himself appointed. Nothing they presented in court came even close to substantiating the shit they alleged, and thus no action was taken.

Every single legal remedy was exhausted. No Powerball. End of story, move on.

the co conspirators who act as jurors will aquit the the treasonous man, the case should still be heard.

With a vote of 57-43, the Senate acquitted former President Donald Trump in his unprecedented second impeachment trial in the wake of the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6.

It's rather interesting that Mitch McConnell voted against the impeachment but shortly thereafter acknowledged President Trump's role in inciting the events at the Capitol. I wonder if that might prove any credible backing for a criminal or civil complaint, probably to be filed within the district instead of the House of Reps...