Sunday ;a few hours after another would be assassin tried to kill Trump ...and with early voting beginning ;60 Minutes decided it would be a great time to run a hyperbolic over exaggerated segment about the January 6 mostly peaceful riot.

Watch 60 Minutes: Prosecuting the Jan. 6 Capitol rioters - Full show on CBS (https://www.cbs.com/shows/video/vHqSoJ2UW4xKn0UR0LMkDfV2D2U0X6ZJ/)

The "threat to democracy" theme is all the Dems have to run on . So the compliant press has their marching orders . It was a campaign ad ;an infomercial .Trump should demand equal time.

Even the FBI determined that the riot was not a coordinated event.It was not a coup . It just happened .

Exclusive: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was coordinated - sources | Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources-2021-08-20/)

Did Trump act irresponsibly by not using his influence to defuse it ? Yes. That doesn't make his a threat to democracy any more than the Dems organizing fundraising efforts to bail out the Floyd rioters .

Kamala Harris on X: "If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota. https://t.co/t8LXowKIbw" / X (https://x.com/KamalaHarris/status/1267555018128965643?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5 Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1267555018128965643%7Ctwgr% 5Ef37f301422da2c9b08587f3677d0e01d780ea380%7Ctwcon %5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fpol itics%2F2020%2F09%2F03%2Fkamala-harris-tweeted-support-bail-fund-money-didnt-just-assist-protestors%2F)

Can you imagine the massacre (metaphorically speaking to be clear) that would happen in this election if the press actually behaved professionally and objectively?

a bloodbath

IT is time for some court marshals' . It is bad enough that the military ignored the President's directive ;but they withheld this information as Trump has been subject to impeachment and criminal prosecution over the events of January 6.

This was released by the Committee on House Administration's Subcommittee on Oversight . It proves that Trump wanted the National Guard deployed to protect the Capitol and DC ;and that the Pentagon deliberately ignored the request. It also proved that the Pentagon's IG report about January 6 is a fabrication and coverup.

“Pentagon leadership prioritized concerns of optics over their duty to protect lives,” said Chairman Loudermilk. “President Trump met with senior Pentagon leaders and directed them to make sure any events on January 6, 2021 were safe. It is very concerning that these Senior Pentagon officials ignored President Trump’s guidance AND misled Congressional Leaders to believe they were doing their job, when they were not. The DoD IG’s report is fundamentally flawed. It does not draw conclusions from the interviews they conducted, but pushes a narrative to keep their hands clean. We have many questions for them, and we will continue to dig until we are satisfied the American people know the truth."






Transcripts Show President Trump's Directives to Pentagon Leadership to "Keep January 6 Safe" Were Deliberately Ignored - Press Releases - United States Committee on House Administration (https://cha.house.gov/2024/9/transcripts-show-president-trump-s-directives-to-pentagon-leadership-to-keep-january-6-safe-were-deliberately-ignored)

They did place the DC National Guard a couple miles away from the Capitol with strict orders to not deploy to the Capitol unless Sec Army Ryan McCarthy gave the order . He gave the green light 2 hrs after the riot began.

Jack Smith's indictments should be dropped in light of this information.

Some more of those "inconvenient truths".

Elie Honig former US prosecutor and current CNN legal analyst . There he has frequently sided with the DOJ against Trump . That is what makes his current article in NY Mag interesting.

Jack Smith Is Making a Reckless Gamble in Trump Prosecution (nymag.com) (https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/jack-smith-donald-trump-january-6-prosecution.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email)

He says Smith is ignoring SCOTUS guidelines on immunity.

But as I noted ;Smith's primary goal at the point is not the actual conviction of Trump . He will make an opening salvo in the trial immediately before the election. Look for it as early as Thursday . He informed Judge Chutkan Saturday it could be up to 180 pages long.


The Government believes that a comprehensive brief by the Government will be of great assistance to the Court in creating that robust record, and the Government thus seeks leave to exceed the typical limit for a single motion. See Local Crim. R. 47(e) (limiting opening motions and oppositions to 45 pages and replies to 25 pages). The Government has substantially drafted its opening motion and estimates that the filed version will not exceed 180 pages. The Government estimates that roughly half of its motion will consist of a detailed factual proffer, and that extensive footnote citations to an exhibit appendix increase the motion’s size by more than 30 pages.
gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.237.0_3.pdf (courtlistener.com) (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.237.0_3.pdf?utm_source=sub stack&utm_medium=email)

His lead prosecutor has said


That part of the brief would include things that are both in and outside the indictment. We anticipate that the brief would have a substantial number of exhibits. Those exhibits would come in the form of either grand jury transcripts, interview transcripts, 302s, documentary exhibits, things of that nature, things that would allow the Court to consider both the circumstances and the content, form and context, all in the words of the Supreme Court, that the Court needs to have in order to make its [immunity] determinations.”

The September 26 Brief We'll Get in the Trump January 6 Case - emptywheel (https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/09/07/the-september-26-brief-well-get-in-the-trump-january-6-case/)

Smith will make an opening argument public that Trump's team will not have access to until it is released. It will take them days to reply . The judge gave Trump's team until Oct 17 to reply and Smith until October 29 to reply to Trump's opposition.

You see the timeline here ? All this will be publicly argued in the closing days of the campaign.
Honig writes of Smith's competence.

“Despite the rush to crown him as some infallible giant-slayer immediately upon his appointment as special counsel in November 2022, the reality is Smith’s career is stained with high-profile failures born of prosecutorial overreach. He supervised, at various points, spectacularly failed prosecutions of Virginia governor Bob McDonnell, former North Carolina senator and presidential and vice-presidential candidate John Edwards, and New Jersey senator Bob Menendez.”

He did not mention the various slap downs SCOTUS gave Smith in these get Trump cases.

None of that is as important as the show trial .

John Solomon in Just the News adds details.

Turns out Sec Miller did not like Trump very much . At one point he compared Trump to Castro. Trump's request for 10,000 guard was ignored and a much smaller force was made available.

Bombshell transcripts: Trump urged use of troops to protect Capitol on Jan. 6 , but was rebuffed | Just The News (https://justthenews.com/accountability/watchdogs/bombshell-transcripts-trump-urged-use-troops-protect-capitol-jan-6-was)

Perhaps Trump was too imprecise???

“The President just says, ‘Hey look at this. It’s going to be a large amount of protesters come in here on the 6th, and make sure that you have sufficient National Guard or Soldiers to make sure it’s a safe event,’” Milley told the inspector general in one of two interviews he did in spring 2021 during a probe of the Pentagon’s response to Jan. 6.

Every Federal agency that had any role in Jan 6 have already released their internal IG report . All except 1 that is .

Flashback Jan 15 2021

DOJ internal watchdog opens investigation into Capitol riots - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/15/doj-internal-watchdog-capitol-riots-investigation-459634?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email)



It is listed as "ongoing"

Review Examining the Role and Activity of DOJ and its Components in Preparing for and Responding to the Events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021


The DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is initiating a review to examine the role and activity of DOJ and its components in preparing for and responding to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. The DOJ OIG will coordinate its review with reviews also being conducted by the Offices of Inspector General of the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of the Interior. The DOJ OIG review will include examining information relevant to the January 6 events that was available to DOJ and its components in advance of January 6; the extent to which such information was shared by DOJ and its components with the U.S. Capitol Police and other federal, state, and local agencies; and the role of DOJ personnel in responding to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. The DOJ OIG also will assess whether there are any weaknesses in DOJ protocols, policies, or procedures that adversely affected the ability of DOJ or its components to prepare effectively for and respond to the events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6. If circumstances warrant, the DOJ OIG will consider examining other issues that may arise during the review.
The DOJ OIG is mindful of the sensitive nature of the ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions related to the events of January 6. Consistent with long-standing OIG practice, in conducting this review, the DOJ OIG will take care to ensure that the review does not interfere with these investigations or prosecutions.


Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), Other DOJ Components, United States Marshals Service (USMS)


Ongoing Work (justice.gov) (https://oig.justice.gov/ongoing-work?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email)

Meanwhile FBI Director Wray refuses to give details to Congressional investigations because their review is "ongoing"

Meanwhile in trial deliberations we learned that FBI had agents and asserts embedded with Proud Boys and Oath Keepers .

In Proud Boys Jan. 6 Sedition Trial, FBI Informants Abound - The New York Times (nytimes.com) (https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/us/proud-boys-fbi-informants.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email)

Informant Likely to Testify as Defense Witness in Jan. 6 Sedition Trial - The New York Times (nytimes.com) (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/us/politics/oath-keepers-trial-january-6.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email)

and at the Capitol .How many ? That is anyone's guess.

Exclusive | FBI lost count of number of informants at Capitol on Jan. 6: ex-official (nypost.com) (https://nypost.com/2023/09/19/fbi-lost-count-of-number-of-informants-at-capitol-on-jan-6-ex-official/)

How many of the embedded assets were actively involved in criminal activity themselves ? I can't document that but more than one person on social media have made the claim that known informants and possibly agents participated in the riot or egged protesters on.

Almost 4 years later we deserve to know the truth .

If we had anything even approaching an honest, unbiased national news media, these kinds of things would be minimized. They do this because they know the room will remain dark.

Nothing to see here . Any other conclusion makes you a conspiracy theorist.

DOJ Inspector General Horowitz sorta gave reasons for his foot dragging last week at Congressional hearings He paused his investigation so as to not interfere in the department’s “ongoing criminal cases” into January 6.In other words key evidence about Jan 6 was not investigated so as not to interfere in the investigation . Got it

So his investigation about FBI informants at the Jan 6 rally will not conclude until after the election
Got it .

Watchdog report on Justice Department’s Jan. 6 response won’t be done by election - POLITICO (https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/25/january-6-inspector-general-report-delay-00181085)

DOJ inspector general does not deny FBI informants were among Jan 6 crowd (yahoo.com) (https://www.yahoo.com/news/doj-inspector-general-does-not-174905191.html)

Does a 4 year delay represent election interference by the DOJ ? How many "confidential sources " were in the crowd and how much they were paid will be an unknown with voters heading to the polls ?

Remember when just the suggestion that there may have been paid FBI agents in the crowd was considered a wild conspiracy theory ?

Judge Chutkan unsealed the Smith new indictment . So much for that DOJ 60 day rule.
This is the 2024 version of the Steele Dossier .
Smith's 'hail Mary' is hoping this influences the election. Trump wins and his investigation is over . Kam wins then Trump is convicted . It is that simple. But conviction is secondary to defeating him at the polls.
AG Garland will have fulfilled his primary objective .

this new indictment is the DOJs 3rd attempt in 3 election cycles to interfere with the goal of denying Trump a win.


Video: CNN legal analyst slams Jack Smith filing in Trump 2020 election case | CNN Politics (https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/04/politics/video/jack-smith-trump-filing-elie-honig-reaction-cnc-digvid)

At some point the real intent of these liberal dems becomes so obvious as to raise support for Trump.

Tampon Tim actually said this during the debate

TIM WALZ: "The thing I'm most concerned about is imprisoning your political opponents!" (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQN8ytKxC84)

What did Walz say after that?

you can read the transcript here.

Read the full VP debate transcript from the Walz-Vance showdown - CBS News (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/full-vp-debate-transcript-walz-vance-2024/)

He was speaking of January 6 while ignoring the Dems attempts at jailing Trump for political reasons from before the days he won the 2016 election. Ask Evita . To this day she denies she lost the election. Ask the Goracle and his denial of losing the election in 2000 until SCOTUS put an end to the recounts
Ask the Dem Reps who challenged the certification of Bush and Trump's elections on the floor of Congress.

12 Minutes of Democrats Denying Election Results (youtube.com) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XX2Ejqjz6TA&t=2s)

In 2005, 32 Democrats in Congress attempted overturn the results of the presidential election by objecting to Ohio's electoral votes — Excess of Democracy (https://excessofdemocracy.com/blog/2020/12/in-2005-32-democrats-in-congress-attempted-overturn-the-results-of-the-presidential-election-by-objecting-to-ohios-electoral-votes)

Since 2001, Democrats Objected 3 Times to Electoral College Certification (dailysignal.com) (https://www.dailysignal.com/2021/01/04/in-past-20-years-democrats-objected-3-times-to-electoral-college-certifications/)

Trump has enough felonies that alone say he should be imprisoned. And he's OLD!!! Vitriolic Vance would take over the presidency when Trump is put in a hospital and nursing home because of his dementia.

you can read the transcript here.
No. YOU tell me what he then said.

if you are really interested I gave you the primary source.

Tom posted, "you can read the transcript here," and then posted the link.

WG replied, "No. YOU tell me what he then said." That's a rather bizarre reply from a person who was once a librarian and an author. You can't take a link and read what it says?

At any rate, here is the relevant section. Took about five minutes to get this.


TW: There's one, there's one, though, that this one is troubling to me. And I say that because I think we need to tell the story. Donald Trump refused to acknowledge this. And the fact is, is that I don't think we can be the frog in the pot and let the boiling water go up. He was very clear. I mean, he lost this election, and he said he didn't. One hundred and forty police officers were beaten at the Capitol that day, some with the American flag. Several later died. And it wasn't just in there. In Minnesota, a group gathered on the state capitol grounds in St. Paul and said we're marching to the Governor's residence and there may be casualties. The only person there was my son and his dog, who was rushed out crying by state police. That issue. And Mike Pence standing there as they were chanting, hang Mike Pence. Mike Pence made the right decision. So, Senator, it was adjudicated over and over and over. I worked with kids long enough to know, and I said, as a football coach, sometimes you really want to win, but the democracy is bigger than winning an election. You shake hands and then you try and do everything you can to help the other side win. That's, that's what was at stake here. Now, the thing I'm most concerned about is the idea that imprisoning your political opponents already laying the groundwork for people not accepting this. And a President's words matter. A President's words matter. People hear that. So I think this issue of settling our differences at the ballot box, shaking hands when we lose, being honest about it, but to deny what happened on January 6, the first time in American history that a President or anyone tried to overturn a fair election and the peaceful transfer of power. And here we are four years later in the same boat. I will tell you this, that when this is over, we need to shake hands, this election, and the winner needs to be the winner. This has got to stop. It's tearing our country apart.
NO: Margaret.
MB: Senator Vance, did you want to respond to that?
JDV: Yeah, well, look, Tim, first of all, it's really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on January the 20th, as we have done for 250 years in this country. We are going to shake hands after this debate and after this election. And of course, I hope that we win, and I think we're going to win. But if Tim Walz is the next vice president, he'll have my prayers, he'll have my best wishes, and he'll have my help whenever he wants it. But we have to remember that for years in this country, Democrats protested the results of elections. Hillary Clinton in 2016 said that Donald Trump had the election stolen by Vladimir Putin because the Russians bought, like, $500,000 worth of Facebook ads. This has been going on for a long time. And if we want to say that we need to respect the results of the election, I'm on board. But if we want to say, as Tim Walz is saying, that this is just a problem that Republicans have had. I don't buy that.

The question that should be addressed is this. Which party is it that is attempting to imprison its political opponents?

That question is obvious . Jack Smith has a 165 page indictment which is nothing more than a Dem talking point designed to undermine Trump's election chances . Judge Chutkan has approved it's release for the final days of the campaign.

Meanwhile the DOJ is sitting on an IG report about how many agent provocateurs they had infiltrate the Jan 6 demonstration.

Tom posted, "you can read the transcript here," and then posted the link.

WG replied, "No. YOU tell me what he then said." That's a rather bizarre reply from a person who was once a librarian and an author. You can't take a link and read what it says?
Why didn't Tomder finish the sentence and tell us that too? Why? Because it negated tomder's slam.

it negates nothing. Walz is pointing fingers at Trump while it is the Dems that have been trying to imprison their political opponent . Trump was President for 4 years . How many political opponents did he throw in jail ? The Dems have been trying since the moment Trump announced he was running in 2016 . That's almost a decade of lawfare against him.

it negates nothing. Walz is pointing fingers at Trump while it is the Dems that have been trying to imprison their political opponent .
He was found guilty on 34 felony counts. He is a womanizer and has cheated on two wives! He uses women and said how easy it is to grab 'em by the pu--y! Most of the businesses he started have failed. He hates anyone not white (and women are men's lesser halves and must kiss their a--es). He hasn't read the Bible but hawks it to get money. Have you ever read anything he wrote? Didn't think so. And when speaking publically (and privately?), he has an annoying habit of moving his arms back and forth like he's playing a concertina.

He is a womanizer and has cheated on two wives! He uses women and said how easy it is to grab 'em by the pu--y! Are you talking about Bill Clinton?


Most of the businesses he started have failed.He has been a fantastically successful businessman.


He hates anyone not white (and women are men's lesser halves and must kiss their a--es).A completely foolish statement fed by TDS.


He hasn't read the Bible but hawks it to get money How do you know he hasn't read the Bible? TDS at work again?


And when speaking publically (and privately?), he has an annoying habit of moving his arms back and forth like he's playing a concertina.Oh Lawsy!! He moves his hands while he's speaking? How awful!

He was found guilty on 34 felony counts.

From a DA who campaigned that he would get Trump . From a NYC jury pool that voted overwhelmingly against Trump . For alleged crimes where the alleged victims denied that he had done anything wrong. With charges inflated . With a NY prosecutor making Federal charges that the Feds chose to not pursue . With never being told what he was being charged with until the Prosecution's closing . With the judge giving improper instructions to the jury . With his due process denied a hundred times .With convictions and penalty judgements that will be overturned . 'The appeals court panel has already indicated much of the case will be overturned .


At a hearing in Manhattan, members of a five-judge panel questioned both the size of the judgment and the validity of the case, which New York’s attorney general brought against the former president and his family business two years ago.

Trump’s Huge Civil Fraud Penalty Draws Skepticism From Appeals Court - The New York Times (nytimes.com) (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/26/nyregion/trump-civil-fraud-penalty-appeals-court.html)


Prior to Mr. Trump’s New York prosecution, it would have been unthinkable for a local or state prosecutor to prosecute a federal candidate predicated on whether or how his campaign reported—or failed to report—contributions or expenditures. In 2019 the FEC investigated whether Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign failed to disclose millions in contributions from an outside political action committee. The agency deadlocked, and no penalties were imposed. In 2022 the FEC levied $113,000 in civil penalties against Mrs. Clinton’s campaign for violating FECA because it improperly coded as “legal services,” rather than campaign expenditures, money paid to Christopher Steele for production of the “dossier” that fueled the Russia-collusion hoax. In neither instance did any state or local prosecutor indict Mrs. Clinton under state election law based on failure to disclose these contributions or expenditures properly.

Why Trump’s Conviction Can’t Stand - WSJ (https://www.wsj.com/opinion/why-trumps-hush-money-conviction-cant-stand-appeal-federal-law-pre-empts-11ae9dc3)

And when speaking publically (and privately?), he has an annoying habit of moving his arms back and forth like he's playing a concertina.


(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZS4b8qHzPo&t=7s)

and Kam the Sham laughs for no apparent reason . Not good reasons to vote for or against a candidate .

And Kam like Clueless Joe plagiarizes.

The Kamala Harris plagiarism row is a disaster for her campaign (telegraph.co.uk) (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/comment/2024/10/14/the-kamala-harris-plagiarism-row-is-a-disaster-for-her-camp/)


lol she took passages from Wiki !!!!! Or should I say her ghost writer did

But she is in favor of abortion no matter how far into the pregnancy it occurs. That will win her many votes among the females of the land. And to be clear, I'm speaking of females with a vagina and a uterus, not the ones with male plumbing.

And when speaking publically (and privately?), he has an annoying habit of moving his arms back and forth like he's playing a concertina.


Oh Lawsy!! He moves his hands while he's speaking? How awful!



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GYbvbtGbYAAoT26?format=jpg&name=small

https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AA1sjtyZ.img?w=768&h=512&m=6&x=452&y=128&s=80&d=80

The compliant press is running cover for the Kam plagiarism scandal. They found an "expert " to declare it aint no biggie


“This amount of plagiarism amounts to an error and not an intent to defraud,” he said, adding that Mr. Rufo had taken relatively minor citation mistakes in a large amount of text and tried to “make a big deal of it.”

Conservative Activist Seizes on Passages From Harris Book - The New York Times (nytimes.com) (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/us/christopher-rufo-kamala-harris-book.html)

The Times headline is telling. "Conservative Activist Seizes on..." In other words, it's only the rantings of a conservative, so that fact that KH plagiarized is no big deal. After all, Trump waves his hands when he speaks!!

But she is in favor of abortion no matter how far into the pregnancy it occurs. That will win her many votes among the females of the land. And to be clear, I'm speaking of females with a vagina and a uterus, not the ones with male plumbing.
And she is so correct! Girls and women get raped, pregnancies happen with abusive husbands (and yes, she should leave him), a female might not realize she's pregnant until the third or even fourth month and a baby will cause serious health problems or even kill her, cause serious medical problems, AND the obstetrician may determine that the fetus has life-threatening problems, like has no head or other horrible physical or interbal problems. Women don't just willy nilly say, "Ho hum, gee whiz, I don't want this baby" and will get an abortion.

And it takes about eight seconds for a male to impregnate her and then he can wash his hands of any pregnancy that comes from his sexual pleasuring.

in favor of abortion no matter how far into the pregnancy it occurs. To which WG replied, "And she is so correct!" So an abortion in the seventh or eighth month is just fine. That's chilling. So much for the amazing value of human lives.


Women don't just willy nilly say, "Ho hum, gee whiz, I don't want this baby" and will get an abortion.You're living in a self-induced dream world, brought on by the need to try to defend the indefensible. Women have abortions frequently because they simply don't want the baby. The data is very clear.

Even worse, only 30% of women having abortions are white. 40% are black. Some racial motives at work here, you think? Sure looks suspicious, doesn't it?

To which WG replied, "And she is so correct!" So an abortion in the seventh or eighth month is just fine. That's chilling. So much for the amazing value of human lives.
Yes, if that abortion has been medically determined and advised, not just a willynilly wannabe. If your wife will very probably die before the baby's birth, would you sacrifice your wife for that baby that may be a medical disaster?


You're living in a self-induced dream world, brought on by the need to try to defend the indefensible. Women have abortions frequently because they simply don't want the baby. The data is very clear.
That's not true! Where are you getting this information??? Making it up? If women are having frequent abortions, tell all the men in this country to stop having sex with them! It's the man's fault that there's a baby there in the first place. If the women get abortions, where are the men who created that baby?


Even worse, only 30% of women having abortions are white. 40% are black. Some racial motives at work here, you think? Sure looks suspicious, doesn't it?
Where did you get those figures? Even so, tell those Black etc. men to stop f--king Black etc. women!!! Masturbate instead.

Here is where the data came from. I still think that the preponderance of black abortions sure makes all of you abortion supporters look mighty racist.

How many abortions occur in the US? (usafacts.org) (https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-abortions-occur-in-the-us/#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20among%20the%2033%20areas%2 0%28New%20York,women%20%2821.8%25%29%2C%20and%20wo men%20of%20other%20races%20%286.5%25%29.)

As for the rest of your post, it's all window dressing. There is only one question that's important. Is the unborn child a living human being? If it is, then the only acceptable reason for an abortion is to preserve the life of the mother, and that situation basically does not occur anymore other than ectopic pregnancies. But if the unborn child is just a useless collection of cells, then having an abortion is of no more importance than having a tooth pulled.

As to the participation of men, I have said here for years that sex should be reserved for marriage. You are the one who is unwilling to go there.

of course there is a racist motive. Margaret Sanger's intent in creating Planned Parenthood was eugenic extermination of Blacks
Margaret Sanger Introduces Her ‘Negro Project’, 1939 – Landmark Events (https://landmarkevents.org/history-highlight-week-of-june-25/)

The Judge issued a ruling that rejected .Trump discovery requests to see more of the “evidence” compiled by Special Counsel Jack Smith for the Jan 6 show trial. She also said that Trump could be in legal jeopardy for the riot without specifically authorizing it.

“It is entirely conceivable, for instance, that Defendant could share responsibility for the events of January 6 without such express authorization of rioters’ criminal actions,”

gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.263.0_8.pdf (courtlistener.com) (https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.263.0_8.pdf)

Trump wanted discovery from AG Garland and his deputy Lisa Monaco. The judge refused it claiming they were not part of the case. But they initiated the investigation.

Today the judge will unseal the redacted parts of the updated indictments just in time for the final campaign push.

Judge in Trump's Jan. 6 case rules additional evidence will be unsealed Friday - ABC News (go.com) (https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-asks-judge-jan-6-case-delay-release/story?id=114892192)

Jan 6 was a protest turned to a riot. The issue was the VP doing the ceremonial certification of the electors and the election.

Now Repubs have been repeatedly asked this campaign cycle to declare that Trump lost in 2016 .
Let's not forget that several Dems in Congress with the support of the compliant press were creating ads calling for electors to be faithless

‘Faithless’ electors, faithful citizens hold out final hope to unseat Trump (france24.com) (https://www.france24.com/en/20161218-usa-electoral-college-faithless-electors-dump-trump)

The last-ditch push for the Electoral College to stop Trump, explained | Vox (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/16/13920444/electoral-college-trump-hamilton-electors)


So in fairness ;Repubs should demand Kam the Sham to declare that if Trump wins this election that she as VP will certify the results . Put her on record if they can.

.

of course there is a racist motive. Margaret Sanger's intent in creating Planned Parenthood was eugenic extermination of Blacks
Margaret Sanger Introduces Her ‘Negro Project’, 1939 – Landmark Events (https://landmarkevents.org/history-highlight-week-of-june-25/)Exactly correct. If the shoe fits...


So in fairness ;Repubs should demand Kam the Sham to declare that if Trump wins this election that she as VP will certify the results . Put her on record if they can.Great observation.

Here is where the data came from. I still think that the preponderance of black abortions sure makes all of you abortion supporters look mighty racist.
I used etc. after black. That is Latin for "and others", meaning white, Asian, South American, Indian, Philippino, ETC.!!!


As for the rest of your post, it's all window dressing. There is only one question that's important. Is the unborn child a living human being? If it is, then the only acceptable reason for an abortion is to preserve the life of the mother, and that situation basically does not occur anymore other than ectopic pregnancies. But if the unborn child is just a useless collection of cells, then having an abortion is of no more importance than having a tooth pulled.
And if your wife or daughter has an ectopic pregnancy or is pregnant with a fetus that has no head or has other horrible physical problems or is the result of a rape, then what?


As to the participation of men, I have said here for years that sex should be reserved for marriage. You are the one who is unwilling to go there.
And husbands very unhappily get wives pregnant and wives very unhappily become pregnant -- jobs become in jeopardy, family finances can't handle another child, marital abuse is occurring, a divorce is pending, et al. (Latin for "and others). Condoms work. Birth control meds work. Abstinence works.

I used etc. after black. That is Latin for "and others", meaning white, Asian, South American, Indian, Philippino, ETC.!!!As a self-proclaimed Google expert, why haven't you located the "and others"? Isn't it strange that I'm the only one able to locate data. And for those who know a little about grammar but evidently nothing about reading, the "etc." was covered in the data. Your empty complaining is lending support to the idea that Wondergirl could have more in common with Margaret Sanger than we might think. "Oh yeah! Well sure, 40% of abortions are performed on black women, but I said et cetera!!"

As for all of your scenarios, it all comes back to what I said before. If the unborn child is a living human being, then it deserves the protection of law. If it's not, then take the option you prefer which is to kill it with no reservations. "I know it's a living human being, but we want a new car, so it just has to go!"

The only one you mentioned that is valid is the ectopic pregnancy. If nothing is done, then both mother and child will die. It is not possible to save the embryo. A fetus with "no head" would not be alive. It's a dumb statement. And there are many children born with physical problems. Should we kill them as well? After all, we shouldn't have to deal with all of these "severe physical problems".

But you are, I suppose, to be congratulated. Thanks to people like you, the occurrence of children born with Down's Syndrome has dropped significantly since they generally don't live long enough to be born thanks to abortions.

As a self-proclaimed Google expert, why haven't you located the "and others"? Isn't it strange that I'm the only one able to locate data. And for those who know a little about grammar but evidently nothing about reading, the "etc." was covered in the data. Your empty complaining is lending support to the idea that Wondergirl could have more in common with Margaret Sanger than we might think. "Oh yeah! Well sure, 40% of abortions are performed on black women, but I said et cetera!!"

As for all of your scenarios, it all comes back to what I said before. If the unborn child is a living human being, then it deserves the protection of law. If it's not, then take the option you prefer which is to kill it with no reservations. "I know it's a living human being, but we want a new car, so it just has to go!"

The only one you mentioned that is valid is the ectopic pregnancy. If nothing is done, then both mother and child will die. It is not possible to save the embryo. A fetus with "no head" would not be alive. It's a dumb statement. And there are many children born with physical problems. Should we kill them as well? After all, we shouldn't have to deal with all of these "severe physical problems".

But you are, I suppose, to be congratulated. Thanks to people like you, the occurrence of children born with Down's Syndrome has dropped significantly since they generally don't live long enough to be born thanks to abortions.
I'm tired of your nasty b--ching and unsupported arguments. I'm outta here!

You're kidding yourself. You just don't like having to face the truth. And comments such as, "I'm tired of your nasty b--ching and unsupported arguments," don't exactly set a good example for civility, now do they?

I would encourage you to stick with it and learn how to advocate for your positions more effectively. Rather sadly, the liberals have largely abandoned the field here and left it to the two surviving conservatives.

Newsweek citing former assistant US attorney from NY -AG of NJ Elie Honig ;along with legal scholar Jonathan Turley, details that all Jack Smith did was file the same charges against Trump he had done previously . To comply with recent SCOTUS decision about President's immunity ,Smith swapped out "President " Trump for "candidate " Trump.

Turley also accused Smith of violating DOJ policy of not interfering with elections. Since the trial could not happen until 2025 ,there was no reason to file the indictment before the election.

Jack Smith's 'Irregular' Trump Case Actions Raise Red Flags—Legal Analysts - Newsweek (https://www.newsweek.com/jack-smith-irregular-trump-case-actions-raise-red-flags-1971557)

Jack Smith Launched an October Surprise Against Donald Trump (https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/jack-smith-october-surprise-donald-trump.html)

They've sure got all their guns blazing.