Kaibear: "Best possible result for the Republican Party would be for Trump to be found guilty of ANYTHING that would prohibit him from winning the Republican nomination in 2024 ."

Legally, even a conviction would not prevent Trump from running for President. Legal experts have already affirmed that fact.

This is all about the Suburban Woman vote. The Donks want Trump stained as a serial adulterer, which is why the Stormy Daniels name matters. If they can force Trump to be in a New York courtroom in January and February, that hurts his ability to campaign, and experts have already said that even a conviction would see 12 months to 18 months in the appeals process, guaranteeing the matter could be kept hot and fresh all through the election.

Males will vote for Trump if he gets the nomination. But more women than men vote, and Democrats want Republicans, not just Trump, stained as the morally creepy party, just ignore Joe and Bill Clinton and all those guys.

The 'best case' for Democrats is for Trump to lead the GOP race most of the primary season, but not win the nomination. That way, Dems hope to have an angry Trump split the GOP vote and guarantee whatever idiot or corpse the Democrats run will win.

There are a lot of ways that plan could blow up in the Democrats' face, but that's for a different thread.

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

Are you saying if there was a crime don't prosecute because?????

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

It's not a political prosecution if a crime that ordinary people would be prosecuted for was actually committed. The Trump prosecution fails that test spectacularly

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

Um, no. Are you this stupid, or just being obtuse again?

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

It's not a political prosecution if a crime that ordinary people would be prosecuted for was actually committed. The Trump prosecution fails that test spectacularly

---

Add to that the fact that there was evidence of John Wiley taking bribes, and it was the FBI and federal prosecutors who nailed him. But yeah, according to quash, that's the same thing as being charged with a crime under a novel legal theory by a partisan DA who ran his campaign on convicting Trump. Exactly the same.

The shocking thing is there are three idiots who actually starred his post. I suspect I can guess who they are...

You should probably ask how many of these videos of rw women being mobbed by leftists you need to see before you admit there’s a problem… https://t.co/VLbTZrJkoN

— Aimee Terese (@aimeeterese) April 6, 2023

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

It's not a political prosecution if a crime that ordinary people would be prosecuted for was actually committed. The Trump prosecution fails that test spectacularly

---

Add to that the fact that there was evidence of John Wiley taking bribes, and it was the FBI and federal prosecutors who nailed him. But yeah, according to quash, that's the same thing as being charged with a crime under a novel legal theory by a partisan DA who ran his campaign on convicting Trump. Exactly the same.

The shocking thing is there are three idiots who actually starred his post. I suspect I can guess who they are...

---

I've already said that I don't see how a state prosecutor pursues a federal crime so quit trying to hang that on me like it means something.

Are you really saying that if proven the indictments wouldn't be a crime? That would be astonishing but you've been there before...

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

It's not a political prosecution if a crime that ordinary people would be prosecuted for was actually committed. The Trump prosecution fails that test spectacularly

---

Add to that the fact that there was evidence of John Wiley taking bribes, and it was the FBI and federal prosecutors who nailed him. But yeah, according to quash, that's the same thing as being charged with a crime under a novel legal theory by a partisan DA who ran his campaign on convicting Trump. Exactly the same.

The shocking thing is there are three idiots who actually starred his post. I suspect I can guess who they are...

---

I've already said that I don't see how a state prosecutor pursues a federal crime so quit trying to hang that on me like it means something.

Are you really saying that if proven the indictments wouldn't be a crime? That would be astonishing but you've been there before...

---

He's not. The state crime of falsifying business records gets an enhancement to felony if it was done as part of commission of another crime (in this case they allude to election and tax crimes), and wouldn't you know it one of the co-conspirators has already plead guilty to federal election crimes...

Even if you lose that enhancement though, the underlying crimes as alleged seem very provable.

I have no idea how novel or routine that is in NY, but that is my understanding of what's happening.

HuMcK said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

It's not a political prosecution if a crime that ordinary people would be prosecuted for was actually committed. The Trump prosecution fails that test spectacularly

---

Add to that the fact that there was evidence of John Wiley taking bribes, and it was the FBI and federal prosecutors who nailed him. But yeah, according to quash, that's the same thing as being charged with a crime under a novel legal theory by a partisan DA who ran his campaign on convicting Trump. Exactly the same.

The shocking thing is there are three idiots who actually starred his post. I suspect I can guess who they are...

---

I've already said that I don't see how a state prosecutor pursues a federal crime so quit trying to hang that on me like it means something.

Are you really saying that if proven the indictments wouldn't be a crime? That would be astonishing but you've been there before...

---

He's not. The state crime of falsifying business records gets an enhancement to felony if it was done as part of commission of another crime (in this case they allude to election and tax crimes), and wouldn't you know it one of the co-conspirators has already plead guilty to federal election crimes...

Even if you lose that enhancement though, the underlying crimes as alleged seem very provable.

I have no idea how novel or routine that is in NY, but that is my understanding of what's happening.

---

I haven't seen the state's case yet, but wasn't the false information in a federal document, not a state one?

Possibly, the indictment and statement of facts only refer to "New York business records" and falsified invoices. I'm sure that is something Trump's defense will want to hash out.

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

We will see what happens. Is there actually anyone who thinks Trump didn't violate the law with campaign finances?

And the guy spent his 4 years antagonizing the shot out of Democrats. I have no idea what else anyone expected. New York was investigating him constantly.

---

Doesn't matter what you and I believe. The point is that violations of federal campaign finance laws are not even in Bragg's power to prosecute as a district attorney. Yet in order to convict, Bragg will need to prove Trump tried to conceal federal campaign finance violations that he has not been charged with and that are not actually named in the indictment. It's absolutely absurd banana republic bull *****

Regardless of how one feels about trump, we should all be concerned with what's happening in New York.

---

He had to charge the cover-up as the acts being covered are barred by limitations. It's basic prosecution.

---

To the contrary, he didn't have to do anything. He chose to try to seek an indictment of something unprecedented, and without solid legal footing. And now he's got to prove that a federal crime occurred many years ago to prove his case, despite lacking the jurisdiction to prosecute same..

There's nothing basic about it. But good to know you're cool with political prosecutions.

---

First, you're good with political prosecutions, too, you just can't admit it now.
Second, I have no idea how the court is going to treat state prosecution of federal crimes. SDNY already passed on it.
Third, why the reference to "many years ago"? If you're talking about limitations the bar won't hit until April 15.

---

What political prosecution do you think I'm OK with? And what evidence do you have to support your statement? This should be interesting. Good luck!

---

Whitewater, JW Price, etc

---

What a bunch of bull***** I've never even addressed white water on these boards. I do recall saying that the Republicans prosecution of Clinton was a huge mistake.

As for John Wiley price, the idea that the FBI's case against him was a political prosecution is total BS. It's well known that old John was taking bribes. You should see his classic car collection. The federal prosecutor ****ed that one up. That's on them. That was in no way a political prosecution.

---

I see. So a political prosecution is OK as long as an actual crime was committed.

And here we are.

---

It's not a political prosecution if a crime that ordinary people would be prosecuted for was actually committed. The Trump prosecution fails that test spectacularly

---

Add to that the fact that there was evidence of John Wiley taking bribes, and it was the FBI and federal prosecutors who nailed him. But yeah, according to quash, that's the same thing as being charged with a crime under a novel legal theory by a partisan DA who ran his campaign on convicting Trump. Exactly the same.

The shocking thing is there are three idiots who actually starred his post. I suspect I can guess who they are...

---

I've already said that I don't see how a state prosecutor pursues a federal crime so quit trying to hang that on me like it means something.

Are you really saying that if proven the indictments wouldn't be a crime? That would be astonishing but you've been there before...

---

Do two things and then get back to me if you're still having difficulty understanding what I am saying. Please look up the following definitions:

1) Unprecedented;
2) Political prosecution.

When an elected DA who ran on the position of indicting Trump tries to overcharge a politician with something that is unprecendented, as here, that is a good indicator the prosecution is political in nature.

The FBI and US federal prosecutor indicting a politician for bribery isn't unprecedented and necessarily political, especially when there is solid evidence of bribes, as in JWPs case. He was lucky his prosecutor was inept and that a Dallas jury decided his fate.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/04/gop-beware-braggs-case-is-just-the-start-of-trumps-legal-jeopardy/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=second

The Dems' best shot in 2024 is and has always been running against Trump the same guy who won them the Senate in 2020 and held it for them in 2022. If he is the Republican nominee, they win going away.
Don't be fooled by snapshot polls showing Trump beating Biden which Democrats are hyping because, for now, they want us to think he can win. He can't. Don't allow the intensity of Trump's base supporters to mask how deeply unpopular he is with the country writ large. He had consistently low job-approval ratings as president reaching 49 percent a couple of times but generally staying in the low 40s and going down to 34 by the time he left office (which actually seemed high under the circumstances). It was a statistical miracle that he won in 2016 with just 46 percent of the vote in, substantially, a two-candidate race. Trump could never again win a national election after the 2020 coup attempt, the Capitol riot, and his continued delusional insistence that reelection was stolen from him.
Moreover, the demagogic riffs that make MAGA crowds swoon and that Trump doubled down on at this week's Mar-a-Lago rally (because why wouldn't an arraignment be the occasion for a rally?) are exactly what most Americans find deeply disturbing about him. If he's the nominee, the Democrats will retain the White House by ten points or more, with the tide sweeping the Senate and the House their way, too. Trump would have you believe he's your crusader against wokeness. Down here on Planet Earth, he's wokeness's big chance to cement its reign.

Dems could nominate a stroke afflicted senator from Pennsylvania and beat Donald Trump in 2024 .

Hell they could nominate BETO and beat Trump by at least 3 points .

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

Just fyi, that guy didn't get convicted for just "memes". He was targeting black voters and telling them they could vote by text message, i.e. election fraud. Some of those solicitations were in the form of memes. The number he set up apparently got texts from about 5000 unique numbers on Election day 2016.

I will say for the umpteenth time, sources like Epoch Times are deliberately lying to their audience, as they have been caught doing repeatedly. The whole point of demonizing "mainstream media" is to get decent, well meaning people to turn to alternative sources that are outright propaganda outlets, and it is doing lasting damage to our country.

HuMcK said:

---

Just fyi, that guy didn't get convicted for just "memes". He was targeting black voters and telling them they could vote by text message, i.e. election fraud. Some of those solicitations were in the form of memes. The number he set up apparently got texts from about 5000 unique numbers on Election day 2016.

I will say for the umpteenth time, sources like Epoch Times are deliberately lying to their audience, as they have been caught doing repeatedly. The whole point of demonizing "mainstream media" is to get decent, well meaning people to turn to alternative sources that are outright propaganda outlets, and it is doing lasting damage to our country.

---

because main stream media is fact based and unbiased..

In an age of social media, all news that used to be based on factual information has turned to sensationalism and bias in order to get people to tune in.

If you wanna know the truth, read the court transcripts.

4th and Inches said:

---

HuMcK said:

---

Just fyi, that guy didn't get convicted for just "memes". He was targeting black voters and telling them they could vote by text message, i.e. election fraud. Some of those solicitations were in the form of memes. The number he set up apparently got texts from about 5000 unique numbers on Election day 2016.

I will say for the umpteenth time, sources like Epoch Times are deliberately lying to their audience, as they have been caught doing repeatedly. The whole point of demonizing "mainstream media" is to get decent, well meaning people to turn to alternative sources that are outright propaganda outlets, and it is doing lasting damage to our country.

---

because main stream media is fact based and unbiased..

In an age of social media, all news that used to be based on factual information has turned to sensationalism and bias in order to get people to tune in.

If you wanna know the truth, read the court transcripts.

---

Pretty much.

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Democrats are playing you like a Stradivarius. Trump surges with Republicans, not the total electorate.
Independents won't be voting for Trump.

Trump Surges ahead of DeSantis in Florida, New Poll Finds
"Five months later, things have changed substantially," Victory Insights senior pollster Ben Galbraith said in a statement. "Several other candidates have announced their candidacies, and Trump has been indicted and arrested in a highly politicized move by the Manhattan DA. DeSantis still hasn't officially announced his candidacy, but his messaging, book tour, and PAC activity certainly point to a presidential run in the coming months."
"However, it's beginning to look more like an uphill battle than previously believed," the pollster added.
Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records on Tuesday. The indictment, which Trump has decried as "political persecution," appears to have offered a boost to his presidential campaign, which raked in more than $10 million in the days after the news of the indictment broke.
https://www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-surges-ahead-of-desantis-in-florida-new-poll-finds/

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

Absolutely not. Aforementioned chicanery made sure of that.
If the democrats were Aladeen, this is what our elections have become...

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

Let it go, Elsa.

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state.

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Why do you think spite and insults will help you win anyone over?

You already have the Trump-haters on your side, maybe now you can be an adult around the normies.

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

sure..

How much do you charge Trump or he still living for free?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Why do you think spite and insults will help you win anyone over?

You already have the Trump-haters on your side, maybe now you can be an adult around the normies.

---

he is too busy hating Trump to even notice that something outside of normal happened..

The courts decided.. lol

That one is particularly funny when courts have actually decided that there were irregularities(not fraud) with how voting was done

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Why do you think spite and insults will help you win anyone over?

You already have the Trump-haters on your side, maybe now you can be an adult around the normies.

---

he is too busy hating Trump to even notice that something outside of normal happened..

The courts decided.. lol

That one is particularly funny when courts have actually decided that there were irregularities(not fraud) with how voting was done

---

So I'll let you and the Dear Leader litigate the lost cause. Meanwhile, Dems rejoice

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Why do you think spite and insults will help you win anyone over?

You already have the Trump-haters on your side, maybe now you can be an adult around the normies.

---

he is too busy hating Trump to even notice that something outside of normal happened..

The courts decided.. lol

That one is particularly funny when courts have actually decided that there were irregularities(not fraud) with how voting was done

---

So I'll let you and the Dear Leader litigate the lost cause. Meanwhile, Dems rejoice

---

i dont have standing and my state wasnt full ****** on holding an election. Trump can go F himself, I will be doing my part to primary him.

Meanwhile Dems like you rejoice..

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Correct on both counts .

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Why do you think spite and insults will help you win anyone over?

You already have the Trump-haters on your side, maybe now you can be an adult around the normies.

---

he is too busy hating Trump to even notice that something outside of normal happened..

The courts decided.. lol

That one is particularly funny when courts have actually decided that there were irregularities(not fraud) with how voting was done

---

So I'll let you and the Dear Leader litigate the lost cause. Meanwhile, Dems rejoice

---

Trump can go F himself, I will be doing my part to primary him.

---

A lot of Trump hate there

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

whiterock said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

riflebear said:

---

Of course Trump will get a fair trial in NYC

A man who posted memes about Hillary Clinton's campaign during the 2016 presidential election has been charged with "conspiring against the right to vote."@JoshJPhilipp on this case, and the implications for freedom of speech in America.

Watch it here 👉https://t.co/Fp5jQX0b2S pic.twitter.com/KeIexBcesN

— Crossroads with Joshua Philipp (@crossroads_josh) April 8, 2023

---

Hope they find Trump guilty of incest , indecent exposure and/or cruelty to animals.

Whatever it takes to show the world the United States has changed forever.

---

of course. Engage in blatantly political prosecutions in order to virtue posture about joining the third world banana republic category. What a win.

If he really is such a sure-fire loser candidate, why are they working so hard to stop him? Why not shut up & let him coast to victory? Is it really their plan to attack him mercilessly across a broad front of PR and lawfare 10 months out from the first primary just to convince Republicans that he has all the right enemies?

---

Why? Because no other candidate allows democrats the excuse of "well maybe there are just millions of people who never voted before who hate orange man bad THAT MUCH" as their cover for voting irregularities. You can point out that he received more minority votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, and you can point out he also received more total votes than any republican presidential candidate in history, but it won't matter. The cover story is built in and backed by most of the available media in this country.

---

Do you believe Trump won the 2020 election?

---

why does a person have to beleive that Trump won to know that there were significant voting irregularities?
There were not significant irregularities that affected the outcome.

You dont know who would have won if all the states would have followed the rules that the state legislatures passed for holding elections in their state. Yes I do, and the courts ruled thusly

Its also a Moot point about who thinks what about 2020. People won't vote for a nut who keeps prattling about a lost election.
Correcting issues that happened in 2020 like not following state legislated rules when holding an election would be nice. Some states did, some did nothing. Watch for the sh show to continue in those states in 2024.

---

Focusing on 2020 election is a loser, but then so is Trump

---

Why do you think spite and insults will help you win anyone over?

You already have the Trump-haters on your side, maybe now you can be an adult around the normies.

---

he is too busy hating Trump to even notice that something outside of normal happened..

The courts decided.. lol

That one is particularly funny when courts have actually decided that there were irregularities(not fraud) with how voting was done

---

So I'll let you and the Dear Leader litigate the lost cause. Meanwhile, Dems rejoice

---

Trump can go F himself, I will be doing my part to primary him.

---

A lot of Trump hate there

---

apathy.. dont care

No hate