Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

New York Times Editorial Board Calls for Indictment of President Trump on Made-Up Charges


The MSM remains an enemy of the people

The far-left knuckleheads on the New York Times Editorial Board believe they should administer law in the United State. They claim President Trump should be arrested based on made-up charges.

The idiots at the New York Times, the Deep State’s one-stop shop for dropping garbage on the Democrat Party’s political enemies, have decided that they are the purveyors of justice in the US.

These corrupt actors pushed Russia collusion garbage for years and they believe they can lecture us on what is truth and what is a lie. This is the definition of insanity.

The New York Times editorial board called on Attorney General Merrick Garland to seek an indictment of former President Trump if “sufficient evidence” exists to establish his guilt “on a serious charge.”

The board argued in a piece published Friday that, “Mr. Trump’s unprecedented assault on the integrity of American democracy requires a criminal investigation” following the Jan. 6 select committee hearings and news of the Justice Department’s search of Trump’s Palm Beach, Fla., home for classified documents.

“This board is aware that in deciding how Mr. Trump should be held accountable under the law it is necessary to consider not just whether criminal prosecution would be warranted but whether it would be wise.”

The far-left and corrupted board claims President Trump should be arrested for crimes they can’t explain:

The board argued that despite the risks of violence that could stem from the criminal indictment of Trump, it is warranted and wise, because Trump has “brought shame” to America and “destabilized its future” with his alleged crimes.

The editorial, titled, “Donald Trump Is Not Above the Law,” began with the clear declaration: “Mr. Trump’s unprecedented assault on the integrity of American democracy requires a criminal investigation.”

The editorial board agreed that, “The disturbing details of his postelection misfeasance, meticulously assembled by the Jan. 6 committee, leaves little doubt that Mr. Trump sought to subvert the Constitution and overturn the will of the American people.”

It’s as if crooked cop Peter Strzok and serial liar Adam Schiff joined hands with other corrupt actors to try to destroy President Trump and his movement.

The US Constitution be damned, the Deep State can do whatever it wants. They can steal elections, perform coups, kill Trump supporters protesting a stolen election, indict people on false charges and hold them in jail for years with no court dates. These Trump supporters then face trials in front of DC and New York kangaroo courts. All the while they label good Americans what the Deep State actually is – fascist.

Americans are tired of the corrupt actors in the government and the media against innocent Americans.

The New York Times lives in a deep state hole and they can’t seem to find their way out and they don’t want to find their way out. They should be included in the list of those arrested for being accomplices in the coup and ignoring the US Constitution.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
[media=https://youtu.be/iTACH1eVIaA]

As he said: he could shoot someone and not lose his base.

His base will disbelieve absolutely anyone else in any circumstances.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Burnley123 Is THAT what the raid was about?
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@Budwick The law.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
@Budwick If we call executing a warrant a raid, can we call 1/6 an insurrection?

If not, what's the difference?

At the moment, I'm tempted to just say WTF, and stop quibbling over language, ideas and facts, but if we agree to do that, why bother to discuss it, and just put it to trial by combat?
Budwick · 70-79, M
@MistyCee
If we call executing a warrant a raid, can we call 1/6 an insurrection?

You ARE calling Jan 6 an insurrection.
We ARE calling the raid a RAID.

Was there something in this post quibbling over language - I mean before you quibbled over language?

just put it to trial by combat?

I am sensing some frustration on your part Misty.
Are you getting tired of everything the democrats doing being questioned?
@Budwick

I am sensing some frustration on your part Misty.
Are you getting tired of everything the democrats doing being questioned?

To quote Lisa, you're "dead on balls accurate" in terms of reading my frustration, although I think it's more than just both sides "questioning" the actions of the other and getting into hammering each other with alternate facts.

The fact that you're posting more or less verbatim an unsourced attack on an editorial piece behind a paywall you haven't bothered to navigate sort of illustrates why I'm frustrated.

Honestly, I was pissed off when Hillary called Trump supporters deplorable, but the more they prove themselves deplorable, the more I get it.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@MistyCee
The fact that you're posting more or less verbatim an unsourced attack on an editorial piece behind a paywall you haven't bothered to navigate sort of illustrates why I'm frustrated.

So, because I haven't read the NYT, I can't comment on it?
There are hundreds, maybe thousands of 'talking heads' on the Inter-web,
most of whom will raise the hackles as much if not more than the article itself.
And you, have nothing to say about the NYT virtually making an indictment of their own on Trump. No, instead YOUR issue is that I didn't read it personally.

So, I'm deplorable.
I've learned to wear THAT badge with honor.
@Budwick

So, I'm deplorable.
I've learned to wear THAT badge with honor.

I get that, and I'm frustrated with trying to not dismiss you as essentially, deplorable and not worth trying to reason with.


Personally, at least, I feel like I've tried, and maybe tomorrow, I'll try again, but at the moment, I'm mostly just frustrated, because I feel like it's pointless to argue.
TexChik · F
@Burnley123 If he shot a socialist...maybe. 🤭
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@TexChik Marjorie Taylor Green found your account on SW and built her persona on it. 😜
Budwick · 70-79, M
@MistyCee
not worth trying to reason with.

Reasoning with with another party is a two way street.
And, requires the parties to reasonable.
I'm not sure you are qualified.
I know there are others I call friends that banter with you.
Maybe I'm less of a person somehow than they -
@Budwick That sounds way too harsh. I wasn't trying to single you out. I'm just kind of burned out on SW politics the last couple of days.
TexChik · F
@Burnley123 socialists 🙄, Always talking shit about someone while ignoring the smell emanating from themselves.
sunsporter1649 · 70-79, M
TexChik · F
@sunsporter1649 perfect!
Budwick · 70-79, M
@MistyCee
I'm just kind of burned out on SW politics the last couple of days.

If I were a lefty Marxist - I guess I would feel the same.
Take a break Misty. Rest, refresh, relax, if inflation still permits, enjoy an adult beverage.
@Budwick lol. I'm still here, but more just relaxing, watching, and participating only when I feel like it.

Honestly, I think the shit will hit the fan again eventually, but for the moment, it seems like it's just dripping off of very slow moving blades.