“So which one of you killed Epstein for Bill?” pic.twitter.com/Bz9XsCIE68

— Titus, at bits’ end (@hereliesthighs) April 4, 2023

Mothra said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Link to indictment and lmao its a farce. Same exact offense listed 34 times, just different dates

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

---

I am not a criminal attorney, but based on my review, this is even weaker than I suspected. They don't identify the underlying criminal conduct that make this charge a felony, other than to say Trump violated "state and federal election laws." That means, as was reported last week, they're going to try and spin this into a felony by saying it was a campaign finance violation - one of the weakest routes they can take.

Now I know why they wanted the indictment sealed. There is no bombshell allegation. It's so weak, I suspect they wanted to avoid the criticism of it going public.

As suspected, this has "political prosecution" written all over it.

---

REPORTER: "The indictment does not specifically say what those crimes were. [...] What laws were broken?"

DA BRAGG: "The indictment doesn't specify because the law does not so require..." pic.twitter.com/lczTAc0f2D

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) April 4, 2023

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

sombear said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Losing the Lottery is most probable. Multiple judges in multiple cases with completely different claims by completely different people all coming to the exact same finding is as improbable as winning fifty lotteries.

---

Trump's own lawyers have said under oath their claims were BS.

---

I rather think the actual words were different, but I am sure you heard what you wanted.

---

They outright said in some cases they had no evidence of their claims. Im sure you heard "yet."

---

D. C. Bear said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Link to indictment and lmao its a farce. Same exact offense listed 34 times, just different dates

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

---

I am not a criminal attorney, but based on my review, this is even weaker than I suspected. They don't identify the underlying criminal conduct that make this charge a felony, other than to say Trump violated "state and federal election laws." That means, as was reported last week, they're going to try and spin this into a felony by saying it was a campaign finance violation - one of the weakest routes they can take.

Now I know why they wanted the indictment sealed. There is no bombshell allegation. It's so weak, I suspect they wanted to avoid the criticism of it going public.

As suspected, this has "political prosecution" written all over it.

---

REPORTER: "The indictment does not specifically say what those crimes were. [...] What laws were broken?"

DA BRAGG: "The indictment doesn't specify because the law does not so require..." pic.twitter.com/lczTAc0f2D

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) April 4, 2023

---

Please tell me those quotes are massively out of context.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

sombear said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Losing the Lottery is most probable. Multiple judges in multiple cases with completely different claims by completely different people all coming to the exact same finding is as improbable as winning fifty lotteries.

---

Trump's own lawyers have said under oath their claims were BS.

---

I rather think the actual words were different, but I am sure you heard what you wanted.

---

They outright said in some cases they had no evidence of their claims. Im sure you heard "yet."

---

Check the thread title.

Maybe move on?

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

sombear said:

---

Wangchung said:

---

Losing the Lottery is most probable. Multiple judges in multiple cases with completely different claims by completely different people all coming to the exact same finding is as improbable as winning fifty lotteries.

---

Trump's own lawyers have said under oath their claims were BS.

---

I rather think the actual words were different, but I am sure you heard what you wanted.

---

They outright said in some cases they had no evidence of their claims. Im sure you heard "yet."

---

Check the thread title.

Maybe move on?

---

Democracy is worth a post on the internet here and there. Nothing on this earth that would make it "worth it" to ignore America deniers.

---

Alvin Bragg is effectively prosecuting a federal crime under the guise of state law. That has profound consequences. I explain them here in a way that no one has. pic.twitter.com/D2IwCXlxNT

— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) April 4, 2023

BluesBear said:

---

We sure the DA and the Judge will still be alive come December?

---

4th and Inches said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Link to indictment and lmao its a farce. Same exact offense listed 34 times, just different dates

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

---

I am not a criminal attorney, but based on my review, this is even weaker than I suspected. They don't identify the underlying criminal conduct that make this charge a felony, other than to say Trump violated "state and federal election laws." That means, as was reported last week, they're going to try and spin this into a felony by saying it was a campaign finance violation - one of the weakest routes they can take.

Now I know why they wanted the indictment sealed. There is no bombshell allegation. It's so weak, I suspect they wanted to avoid the criticism of it going public.

As suspected, this has "political prosecution" written all over it.

---

REPORTER: "The indictment does not specifically say what those crimes were. [...] What laws were broken?"

DA BRAGG: "The indictment doesn't specify because the law does not so require..." pic.twitter.com/lczTAc0f2D

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) April 4, 2023

---

So we are supposed to assume he committed campaign finance violations?

Amateur hour.

---

same one 34 times..

---

Absolute unit https://t.co/p7TuuBvpLa

— Mommy Milkers (@Mochak123) April 4, 2023

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.

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

CNN poll finds 60% approve of Trump indictment, but just 37% say Trump's actions were illegal. Then: 76% say politics played a role in indictment, 52% say a 'major role.' https://t.co/XUfuLLpGKk

— Byron York (@ByronYork) April 3, 2023

---

So most Americans are in favor of political prosecutions as well.

---

What should be the procedure for holding politicians accountable for possibly criminal behavior?

---

First, use one standard regardless of politics. Hillary Clinton paid a fine for essentially the same offense, for example.

Jon Edwards was found not guilty for very much the same thing back in 2009.

Just to name two obvious examples.

---

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.

---

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.

---

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.

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Cobretti said:

---

CNN poll finds 60% approve of Trump indictment, but just 37% say Trump's actions were illegal. Then: 76% say politics played a role in indictment, 52% say a 'major role.' https://t.co/XUfuLLpGKk

— Byron York (@ByronYork) April 3, 2023

---

So most Americans are in favor of political prosecutions as well.

---

What should be the procedure for holding politicians accountable for possibly criminal behavior?

---

First, use one standard regardless of politics. Hillary Clinton paid a fine for essentially the same offense, for example.

Jon Edwards was found not guilty for very much the same thing back in 2009.

Just to name two obvious examples.

---

Neither of those are exactly on point legally but each shows that what is happening to Trump is not unprecedented. And I do not see a different standard at work: they were charged, same as Trump.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

chriscbear said:

---

Dems cheated via massive mail in votes in Atlanta etc. The participation rate of registered voters in Atlanta etc , all heavy Dem districts, was like 88%. Normally its like 55% to 57%. This can't be. So however they CHEATED. Cleavlend had a voter participation rate of like 56% in 2020. So however they cheated, they cheated. They tried to mailout 2.2 million ballots in Harris County, TX. Ken Paxton put a stop to it via the courts.

---

Yet, there does not seem to be proof 3 years later. Everything you say MAY be true, nothing has turned up to support that it really happened. Even Trump with all his money has noting credible. On the voting machines FOX is being sued and the case has been approved to go forward.

I agree that States did not follow their rules and vote harvesting, extended periods and drop boxes influenced the outcome. But there has been nothing credible to indicate those votes were fraudulent.

Or, the WHOLE Nation is in on a conspiracy against Trump and hiding the truth. The Dems, GOP, Green Party, Courts, Congress, State Legislatures, Federal Law Enforcement, State Law Enforcement, All Supervisors of Elections, every media (domestic and international) except FOX.

All those people are in co-hoots to make sure that Biden wins and poor Donald loses?????

As some point, all of us have to look at the peer reviewed data and say we lost. If it was true at least one State something would have stuck by now!

We ran the wrong candidate and A LARGE percentage over 80 million did not like Trump. We are not talking "W" or Bill Clinton who even if you disagreed with their politics are likeable. Trump is one of the most unlikable people on the Planet, disliked universally. And that is going to be our Candidate the GOP will fight for till the end. Just DO NOT get it. Move on.

---

counting votes that are not in accordance with state rules are fraudulent votes.

Few want to challenge the way is was done but the ones that have challenged so far have been successful in proving that votes were incorrectly counted. Rules have been changed in places because of it.

Call it election fraud, call it election law violations, call it whatever.. it happened, there is proof it happened and it some places, it will happen again.

It changes nothing.

---

No, they are not fraudulent. They may not be allowed but they are someone's vote. That is not fraud. They are not fake, duplicate or created, they are a person's vote. There is a level of fraud in every election. There is no evidence that fraud occurred in 2020 any more than normal.

Get over it, Trump lost. After all the speculation can you link us to just one State where there is credible evidence fraud threw the election to Biden. You can't, it doesn't exist. All we have is tinfoil hat conspiracy theories.

Trump lost and will lose again if we are stupid enough to run him.

---

yes, the election was decided by fraud. Rejected ballot rate in NY primary? 5%. Reject rate in general? 0.000% In blue counties in swing states, every single ballot that arrived was counted, whether it matched legal requirements or not. In AZ, GA, WI, etc....the key swing states, that was the difference.

We will be doing that this go-around, no matter who is our candidate.

---

Do you believe Trump would n the 2020 election?

---

If we apply the same primary reject rate to general election ballots in blue counties, it's a mathematical certainty.

Remember, the actual margin of victory was a 5-digit number spread across three states. These elections are being decided in a very small number of very large blue counties.

"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do."
-Joseph Stalin

Fill the blue ecosystem with ballots. Work hard to get them cast. Count them all. 100%.
Very simple business model
Almost foolproof.
Until the other side starts doing the same.

The red counties will have to step up. Fill the ecosystem with ballots. Work hard to get them cast. COUNT EVERY ONE (just like the other side does).
.

---

It's going to be quite a spectacle when Republicans get busted for doing all the things they imagine Democrats did in 2016.

---