Comments by "pplr1" (@pplr1) on "LegalEagle" channel.

@stolenname94 You claiming the undoctored footage was doctored doesn't make it doctored. It just makes your comment untrustworthy. Also last year a BLM march went past me on the street. Nobody was beat up and no buildings were damaged. Now in the Twin Cities a police station was lit on fire, but a white racist was eventually arrested for firing shots into the station. He was caught pretending to be BLM because he wanted to start a race war. Now there were a lot of vandals and looters that were not white racists but Democrats-especially Biden-didn't excuse them. Seems Republicans are more likely to be operating by double standards.
17
@BigFootTheRealOne Problem with your theory is that last I checked it was Republicans looking for any way to avoid being held accountable.
12
@LO0oLaminatedonut Haven't heard that but even if it was true (not sure it is) then (1) it sounds like they were brought into court and a blind eye was not turned and (2) what they did (if some actually did something) was still not as an attempt to steal a Presidential Election which is what Trump tried.
3
@aaronjjacques Democrats saying there was no election fraud doesn't make it so. However election officials and Judges with court cases about the election where claims and evidence had to be presented saying there was no election fraud adds a lot of credibility to anyone (including Democrats) saying there was no election fraud. This is something Trump lacked when he lied about there supposedly being election fraud. And I say lied because many of Trump's claims actually were checked out and found to be false-such as when he tried saying people should stop counting votes even though the way an honest election is done is by counting all the votes. As for the Mueller investigation (trying to be sure if you mean that and not the 1st impeachment where is proof), if there is nothing there then why did all these people working for Trump lying to law enforcement?
3
The Man I believe a majority of the Trump related court filings ended up being dismissed. For example one of the swing states that comes to mind is Wisconsin where Trump's effort to steal the election by suing to get tens of thousands of ballots tossed failed. In particular the state reserve Appeals court Judge ruled that state laws had not been broken. A majority of the Supreme court for that particular state (Wisconsin) upheld the Appeals court ruling that the ballots at hand were valid. The Trump campaign had wanted 4 groups of ballots thrown out in 2 Counties. (1) All mail in ballots, (2) all mail in ballots by individuals who were listed as indefinitely confined, (3) all ballots in Dane County that the individual voters had brought to Election officials in "Democracy in the Park" events where people turned in mail in ballots directly to Elections staff rather than mailing them in, and (4) all ballots from voters that early voted. The primary Counties the Trump campaign wanted to steal the election in were Dane and Milwaukee Counties by having US Citizens' ballots from those 2 counties not count in the election. An Appeals Court Judge made the initial ruling because the Trump campaign's effort to steal the election was done in the form of 2 separate filings at the County level in Dane and Milwaukee Counties and these 2 separate cases were combined into 1 for the sake of efficiency and speed and it may have been a summary ruling (I'm not sure). Below is link to a newspaper article on that particular court case. The article also mentioned when the SCOTUS decided not to hear Texas's attempt to steal the election in favor of Trump but that is a separate case and filing where the pro-stealing the election for Trump lawyers including Texas's likely corrupt and partisan state AG did not have their case heard in court. In the Wisconsin State Courts the Trump related legal team did get their time in court where Trump's lawyers could provide whatever evidence they felt would assist them and argue for stealing the election in favor of Trump. The Judge there ruled against depriving tens of thousands (or hundreds of thousands depending on which of the 4 groups someone wants to reference) of US Citizens their votes as a method by which Trump could steal the election and thus effectively ruled against Trump stealing the 2020 Presidential election in that state. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/12/11/wisconsin-judge-hears-trump-election-case/3887419001/
3
@stolenname94 Oh, so they missed the 1 time Trump said peaceful for the have dozen times Trump said something not peaceful. Also that Trump was still pushing his lies. Also I've seen more than enough conservatives acting badly or violently to know they are quite capable of doing it, arguably more likely than liberals.
3
aaron jacques You are wrong about what legal eagle said when asking if Trump's speech incited. He said there was an argument for both sides-not that Trump supposedly didn't. Also just because Trump said no collusion doesn't mean there was no collusion. More importantly the prior impeachment effort against Trump was justified and was due to his effort to extort a deceptive political favor from a foreign government in exchange for aid that Trump would not be right to block (thus should have flowed uninterrupted to that nation without such a favor). I'm adding the extra details of why the 1st impeachment was justified as an actual abuse of power.
2
Maybe but don't get too hopeful. Besides you may have good reason to talk about Trump depending on what Georgia, New York, and who knows how many others do.
2
@theman913 Yes and no. There is a question if lying about a sexual encounter is really a "high crime". Since plenty of politicians have done that and not been impeached it could be argued no. Keep in mind I've seen people lie to state legislatures and Congress-which is actually a crime and they have yet to be punished for it through either being charged or impeached. Additionally with this situation is that the same as trying to steal a Presidential Election through a violent attack on Congress (another branch of government)? I'd say no.
2
@theman913 Fair enough. And I have a feeling there may be even more info to come out. That said they were in a rush to get it into the Senate's hands before Trump's term was over, after that they lost control of the schedule. I'm glad much of the stuff that has come out did. Though, like I said, I'm curious what more they will find. Thank you for your thoughts.
2
@samuelblackthorne9122 While it is fair to try to be aware of the bias of one's news sources and I can appreciate your argument that you want to provide an alternative view to LegalEagle there is also a counter point as it goes to Trump. There may be media biased against him but that doesn't mean he wasn't a worse than average President on his own merits. Also I know there was media biased for him-I only have to tune into rightwing radio for that. Though after the attack on the Capitol Building in January I noticed OANN start making promotional points that really struck me as fascist, and I'm not using that word as a way of labelling anyone opposed to my political pov as some do-I actually saw a show on OANN pushing the idea that officials should just use the power they were supposedly too weak or afraid to use and that Trump should've had military tribunals for supposed traitors thus actual that show was pushing leaving democracy related expectations behind.
2
@XMooseManX I wasn't in Denver at the time so I cannot confirm or deny your remarks. If it happened as you describe then I support the people involved getting arrested. Not only is what you describe not the situation I've seen with my own eyes elsewhere but I've read reports in my area of police breaking open car windows in an attempt drag people out of vehicles and arrest those involved in a BLM march. One particular driver got a receipt later to cover the cost since some of the people in cars weren't even involved in the protest but happened to be unlucky enough to be driving through when the police did a crackdown. I'm not arguing for getting rid of the police nor anything like it. But when I see conservatives talk about BLM protests I doubt the full range of real life situations gets discussed.
2
@XMooseManX @Da Moose Not good in LA. Arrest as many looters and people doing violence as one can. By "March" you mean the Trump rally where people gathered to cheer the idea of Trump lying about and trying to steal an election? Not exactly a good place to start with the idea of "nothing crazy". Is that the March you mean? Also by trying to steal the election and have people's votes be ignored Trump was trying to fight against freedom-not protect it. Also my experience with the words "derangement syndrome" is that usually someone is trying to let off a corrupt politician for something improper and the phrase is usually used in an attempt to distract from said politician's own actions.
2
@XMooseManX Funny thing. I didn't hate Trump, at least not before he tried to steal the 2020 election for President. I often found him entertaining but figured the good of the country was more important than my amusement so I voted for Biden. Now there are specific problems I do have with Trump like his embrace of corruption (he never made a point of fighting money in politics once he was in office and even ripped up the already relatively weak ethics policy for his administration so people that worked for him could go directly into the lobbyist business (thus keeping the revolving door between lobbyists and government spinning). He was also fine with rigged elections-such as when he complained that a court tore up the gerrymandered map that citizens of Pennsylvania had been stuck with. Wasn't a fan of what he did with the EPA either-where in seemed to seek out the most corrupt people he could find to put in charge of it (with that goal in mind Pruitt was actually a great pick). Him lying about Global Warming to the point of trying to bs people in California as Global Warming is hitting them while he is visiting California wasn't a good thing either. Though in this situation one of the California state officials made the mistake-saying he wanted to "convince" Trump Global Warming is a problem. Trump knows Global Warming is a problem and he just lies about it frequently-see "playing down" covid early on for a bit of the model or the method he tries to deal with problems he cannot or does not want to deal with handling. Ok.. I guess if I step back and think about it there are reasons I could have for not liking Trump when I think about his impact on the USA. That said I still found him amusing and the reasons I gave do go into putting the country above my own amusement.
2
@XMooseManX "and you think bidens not doing those same things?" Even if he is then still not nearly as badly. "Do you really believe the democrats and Joe biden are any less corrupt than trump" Yes. "party intentionally suppressing that black population and keeping them suckling the welfare teet with no means of weaning meanwhile setting up a justice system that wouldn't allow for poor people to receive true justice?" Which part do I pick at first? This idea that it is Democrats who supposedly are suppressing the black population when it is the GOPers that are to this day trying to prevent black people from voting or the point that you don't mention where it wasn't welfare that hurt black families but a combination of de-unionization and moving factories abroad or at least where unions were weaker? The latter is something else many a Republicans have been for (Trump's willingness to engage is tariffs is something I don't criticize him for, though I can think of an additional tariff he could have done and didn't.. additionally most Republicans have been against tariffs and even some of Trumps backers still are.) And yes unions have been important because when they actually are arguing for all workers to receive a decent wage that means all workers. "The democrats are the party of false promises and pandering for votes." Better to pander for votes than steal or deny them to legitimate citizens. Also I'll lay false promises on Trump-after all covid was supposedly going to disappear by summer according to him, summer in 2020. "We talk about trump being a fascist but biden signed 50 something executive orders and sent troop into syria undermining all the good trump did within his first two weeks and americans ate it up like he was the principle spanking the bully." Because Biden has been. How many of those executive orders were simply undoing what he thought Trump was screwing up with his own executive orders? Also Biden didn't try to steal the 2020 election, Trump did. That matters when discussing who is more likely to be fascist. "Your getting f-d either way. I personally would rather not pander to the leftist lie." Seems like you are pandering to rightwing lies. Plus more often, maybe not always but more often, the truth seems to be with those you labelled "leftist".
2
While it is fun to listen to someone criticizing Murray I'm said you didn't seem to go into if what Jon Oliver said about Murray in the earlier episode was actually the truth or not (not just if it was known to be false or not).
1
@samuelblackthorne9122 If Obama did something as bad and as large an attack on democracy as Trump tried then he should have been impeached. But Obama did not what Trump did. Claiming the law cuts both ways is a strange thing to say when only 1 of the people discussed actually committed the offense, crime, or attack (whatever people want to call it). At best it seems like you misunderstood the situation and at worst it sounds like you want to let people off for trying to steal elections on an imaginary basis that in the past someone else may-actually didn't-but may have tried to steal a Presidential election. Said differently, at worst it sounds like you want to let someone off for trying to subvert democracy by resorting to ridiculous and unrealistic comparisons that based on things that never happened.
1
Good quote.
1
@aaronjjacques I'll have to rewatch later to see if you correct-not convinced you are. That said it would be more of a reflection on the difficulties of using that law in court than if Trump tried to steal a Presidential Election.
1
@georgec1748 Other dems are already going to investigate the attack on the Capitol Building. Additionally it was largely Republican Senators that didn't want witnesses. I was ok with them and I noticed a lot of congressional Democrats were. Not sure what you mean by tampering with evidence but if it is supposedly that they didn't mention Trump say "peaceful" they did, and the much more frequent number of times he said something that would encourage the opposite.
1
Please don't put Alex Jone's face on Spider Man, that is an insult to a fictional character as Jones himself has tried to present fiction as fact rather frequently.
1
Could you please pin links to the missing websites the Trump took down and backup copies of the websites so people can see what Trump doesn't want seen?
1