and Edwards case pretty well closed the door on the Catch-22 theory that a candidate for office cannot execute an NDA without breaking law.quash said:Oldbear83 said:First, use one standard regardless of politics. Hillary Clinton paid a fine for essentially the same offense, for example.quash said:Mothra said:So most Americans are in favor of political prosecutions as well.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
What should be the procedure for holding politicians accountable for possibly criminal behavior?
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.
Trump Indicted
37,482 Views |
423 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by whiterock
It's like you were speeding but didn't get caught so they charge you for fleeing the scene of a crime.Mothra said:quash said:Oldbear83 said:First, use one standard regardless of politics. Hillary Clinton paid a fine for essentially the same offense, for example.quash said:Mothra said:So most Americans are in favor of political prosecutions as well.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
What should be the procedure for holding politicians accountable for possibly criminal behavior?
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.
Campaign finance violations, and what Trump has been charged with are two very different things. A district attorney trying to prosecute a campaign finance violation on which limitations have long since passed in state court by using a state court misdemeanor claim that turns the misdemeanor violation into a felony is indeed unprecedented, and quite different from what Edwards and Clinton went through.
Neither was charged outside the statute of limitations.quash said:Oldbear83 said:First, use one standard regardless of politics. Hillary Clinton paid a fine for essentially the same offense, for example.quash said:Mothra said:So most Americans are in favor of political prosecutions as well.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
What should be the procedure for holding politicians accountable for possibly criminal behavior?
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.
Neither was accused by someone who ran for office specifically to indict them.
Neither was forced to be arraigned in person in court.
You do not see the different standard because you are willfully blind.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
I agree with you. Trump is poison. The longer he stays in, the more of these events will happen and we will have to listen to more asinine speeches like last hour.riflebear said:
I want Trump out of politics and I knew this was a sham but had no idea how political this really was. Read this thread about Biden's #3 guy at the DOJ that went to work with the Manhattan DA to make up this case. He's as dirty and liberal as they come.2) @TruthNinja316 (who was JUST oddly suspended on Twitter) said it perfectly in regards to Matthew Colangelo:
— Gain of Fauci (@DschlopesIsBack) April 4, 2023
"The man comes in to work for Bragg after working DIRECTLY for Barrack Obama, Joe Biden, and Merrick Garland and says this....then Trump is indicted THREE MONTHS LATER.…6) "Meet Merrick Garland's inner circle of 22 officials" - Guess who was one of them? The aforementioned Matthew Colangelo... pic.twitter.com/Fgf2RUPPCZ
— Gain of Fauci (@DschlopesIsBack) April 4, 2023
Rather than talking about the Biden failures and policies, we are talking about Fact Checking Trump speeches.
Sam Lowry said:
TRUMP: I'll make America a banana republic again. No one can twist the law and get away with it like me.
BRAGG: Hold my beer.
Trump has convinced some here that everybody does it, so everybody ought to get to do it
You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
You do know the two party system has been this way for 100+ years right?
#SwainTheDramp
#SweetDonny2024
#FormerlyOrangeManGood
#Murrica
- KKM
{ sipping coffee }
{ eating organic toast }
Go Bears!
#SweetDonny2024
#FormerlyOrangeManGood
#Murrica
- KKM
{ sipping coffee }
{ eating organic toast }
Go Bears!
arbyscoin - the only crypto you can eat.
also not talking about Democrats abusing power for political purposes to distract voters from failures of Democrat policies.RMF5630 said:I agree with you. Trump is poison. The longer he stays in, the more of these events will happen and we will have to listen to more asinine speeches like last hour.riflebear said:
I want Trump out of politics and I knew this was a sham but had no idea how political this really was. Read this thread about Biden's #3 guy at the DOJ that went to work with the Manhattan DA to make up this case. He's as dirty and liberal as they come.2) @TruthNinja316 (who was JUST oddly suspended on Twitter) said it perfectly in regards to Matthew Colangelo:
— Gain of Fauci (@DschlopesIsBack) April 4, 2023
"The man comes in to work for Bragg after working DIRECTLY for Barrack Obama, Joe Biden, and Merrick Garland and says this....then Trump is indicted THREE MONTHS LATER.…6) "Meet Merrick Garland's inner circle of 22 officials" - Guess who was one of them? The aforementioned Matthew Colangelo... pic.twitter.com/Fgf2RUPPCZ
— Gain of Fauci (@DschlopesIsBack) April 4, 2023
Rather than talking about the Biden failures and policies, we are talking about Fact Checking Trump speeches.
Even the NY Times is commenting on the shaky legal ground of Bragg's indictment. But sure, quash, this is all routine:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/surprise-accusation-bolsters-risky-case-113626001.html
A Surprise Accusation Bolsters a Risky Case Against Trump
WASHINGTON The unsealed indictment against former President Donald Trump on Tuesday laid out an unexpected accusation that bolstered what many legal experts have described as an otherwise risky and novel case: Prosecutors claim he falsified business records in part for a plan to deceive state tax authorities.
For weeks, observers have wondered about the exact charges Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg would bring. Accusing Trump of bookkeeping fraud to conceal campaign finance violations, many believed, could raise significant legal challenges. That accusation turned out to be a major part of Bragg's theory but not all of it.
"Pundits have been speculating that Trump would be charged with lying about the hush-money payments to illegally affect an election, and that theory rests on controversial legal issues and could be hard to prove," said Rebecca Roiphe, a New York Law School professor and former state prosecutor.
"It turns out the indictment also includes a claim that Trump falsified records to commit a state tax crime," she continued. "That's a much simpler charge that avoids the potential pitfalls."
The indictment listed 34 counts of bookkeeping fraud related to Trump's reimbursement in 2017 to Michael Cohen, his former lawyer and fixer. Just before the 2016 election, Cohen had made a $130,000 hush-money payment to pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels, who has said she and Trump had an extramarital affair.
Various business records concerning those payments to Cohen, an accompanying statement of facts said, falsely characterized them as being for legal services performed in 2017. For each such record, the grand jury charged Trump with a felony bookkeeping fraud under Article 175 of the New York Penal Law. A conviction on that charge carries a sentence of up to four years.
But bookkeeping fraud is normally a misdemeanor. For it to rise to a felony, prosecutors must show that a defendant intended to commit, aid or conceal a second crime raising the question of what other crime Bragg would contend is involved.
On Tuesday, Bragg suggested that prosecutors are putting forward multiple theories for the second crime, potentially giving judges and jurors alternative routes to finding that bookkeeping fraud was a felony.
As was widely predicted, he is pointing toward alleged violations of both federal and state elections laws. By doing so, he is in part plunging forward with a premise that has given pause to even some of Trump's toughest critics.
As a matter of substance, it can be ambiguous whether paying off a mistress was a campaign expenditure or a personal one.
As a matter of legal process, to cite federal law raises the untested question of whether a state prosecutor can invoke a federal crime even though he lacks jurisdiction to charge that crime himself. Still, Article 175 does not say that the second intended crime must be a state-law offense.
To cite state law raises the question of why New York election rules would apply to a federal presidential election, which is governed by federal laws that generally supersede state laws.
At a news conference, Bragg pointed to both state and federal election law. He cited a New York state election law that makes it a misdemeanor to conspire to promote a candidacy by unlawful means, but did not explain why that law would apply to a presidential election. He also described a federal cap on campaign contributions without indicating why he had the authority to invoke a crime he could not himself charge.
Bragg also introduced yet another theory, accusing Trump of falsifying business records as a way to back up planned false claims to tax authorities.
"The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme," Bragg wrote in the statement of facts that accompanied the indictment.
The statement of facts also described how Trump paid Cohen more than Cohen had paid Daniels to cover income taxes Cohen would incur. Bragg further emphasized that point in his news conference.
His wording was ambiguous in places. At one point, he seemed to suggest that a planned false statement to New York tax authorities was just an example of the ways by which Trump and Cohen purportedly violated the state law against conspiring to promote a candidate through unlawful means.
But it is also a crime to submit false information to the state government. At another point Bragg seemed to put forward an alleged plan to lie to tax authorities an intention to say Cohen had earned income for "legal services performed in 2017" to launder what was in reality a repayment as a stand-alone offense.
In addition to covering up campaign finance crimes committed in 2016, Bragg said: "To get Michael Cohen his money back, they planned one last false statement. In order to complete the scheme, they planned to mischaracterize the repayments to Mr. Cohen as income to the New York state tax authorities."
In the courtroom, prosecutor Christopher Conroy accused Trump of causing the Trump Organization to create a series of false business records, adding that he "even mischaracterized for tax purposes the true nature of the payment."
That prosecutors cited the possibility of planned false statements on tax filings struck some legal specialists as particularly significant, given the speculation over how bookkeeping fraud charges would rise to felonies.
"The reference to false tax filings may save the case from legal challenges that may arise if the felony charges are predicated only on federal and state election laws," said Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University.
Indeed, a range of election law specialists on Tuesday expressed fresh doubt about whether Bragg could successfully use campaign finance laws alone to elevate the bookkeeping fraud charges to felonies. Among those skeptics were Richard L. Hasen, a UCLA legal scholar, and Benjamin L. Ginsberg, a longtime election lawyer for the Republican Party and a critic of Trump.
Even with the addition of the claim about intended false statements to tax authorities, Robert Kelner, the chair of the election and political law practice group at the firm Covington & Burling, remained uncertain that it would show an intent to commit another crime.
"The local prosecutors seem to be relying in part on a bank shot exploiting Michael Cohen's guilty plea in a federal campaign finance case," he said. "But there were serious questions about the legal basis for the case against Cohen, making that a dubious foundation for a case against a former president. Prosecutors also allude vaguely to 'steps' taken to violate tax laws, but they say little to establish what that might mean."
Still, Bragg emphasized that at this stage, prosecutors did not need to go into detail about what other crimes they believe Trump intended to commit.
Bragg will eventually have to show his hand. Barry Kamins, a retired New York Supreme Court judge who is now in private practice, said the next phase of the case would require prosecutors to divulge more.
"What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery," he said. "Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/surprise-accusation-bolsters-risky-case-113626001.html
A Surprise Accusation Bolsters a Risky Case Against Trump
WASHINGTON The unsealed indictment against former President Donald Trump on Tuesday laid out an unexpected accusation that bolstered what many legal experts have described as an otherwise risky and novel case: Prosecutors claim he falsified business records in part for a plan to deceive state tax authorities.
For weeks, observers have wondered about the exact charges Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg would bring. Accusing Trump of bookkeeping fraud to conceal campaign finance violations, many believed, could raise significant legal challenges. That accusation turned out to be a major part of Bragg's theory but not all of it.
"Pundits have been speculating that Trump would be charged with lying about the hush-money payments to illegally affect an election, and that theory rests on controversial legal issues and could be hard to prove," said Rebecca Roiphe, a New York Law School professor and former state prosecutor.
"It turns out the indictment also includes a claim that Trump falsified records to commit a state tax crime," she continued. "That's a much simpler charge that avoids the potential pitfalls."
The indictment listed 34 counts of bookkeeping fraud related to Trump's reimbursement in 2017 to Michael Cohen, his former lawyer and fixer. Just before the 2016 election, Cohen had made a $130,000 hush-money payment to pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels, who has said she and Trump had an extramarital affair.
Various business records concerning those payments to Cohen, an accompanying statement of facts said, falsely characterized them as being for legal services performed in 2017. For each such record, the grand jury charged Trump with a felony bookkeeping fraud under Article 175 of the New York Penal Law. A conviction on that charge carries a sentence of up to four years.
But bookkeeping fraud is normally a misdemeanor. For it to rise to a felony, prosecutors must show that a defendant intended to commit, aid or conceal a second crime raising the question of what other crime Bragg would contend is involved.
On Tuesday, Bragg suggested that prosecutors are putting forward multiple theories for the second crime, potentially giving judges and jurors alternative routes to finding that bookkeeping fraud was a felony.
As was widely predicted, he is pointing toward alleged violations of both federal and state elections laws. By doing so, he is in part plunging forward with a premise that has given pause to even some of Trump's toughest critics.
As a matter of substance, it can be ambiguous whether paying off a mistress was a campaign expenditure or a personal one.
As a matter of legal process, to cite federal law raises the untested question of whether a state prosecutor can invoke a federal crime even though he lacks jurisdiction to charge that crime himself. Still, Article 175 does not say that the second intended crime must be a state-law offense.
To cite state law raises the question of why New York election rules would apply to a federal presidential election, which is governed by federal laws that generally supersede state laws.
At a news conference, Bragg pointed to both state and federal election law. He cited a New York state election law that makes it a misdemeanor to conspire to promote a candidacy by unlawful means, but did not explain why that law would apply to a presidential election. He also described a federal cap on campaign contributions without indicating why he had the authority to invoke a crime he could not himself charge.
Bragg also introduced yet another theory, accusing Trump of falsifying business records as a way to back up planned false claims to tax authorities.
"The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme," Bragg wrote in the statement of facts that accompanied the indictment.
The statement of facts also described how Trump paid Cohen more than Cohen had paid Daniels to cover income taxes Cohen would incur. Bragg further emphasized that point in his news conference.
His wording was ambiguous in places. At one point, he seemed to suggest that a planned false statement to New York tax authorities was just an example of the ways by which Trump and Cohen purportedly violated the state law against conspiring to promote a candidate through unlawful means.
But it is also a crime to submit false information to the state government. At another point Bragg seemed to put forward an alleged plan to lie to tax authorities an intention to say Cohen had earned income for "legal services performed in 2017" to launder what was in reality a repayment as a stand-alone offense.
In addition to covering up campaign finance crimes committed in 2016, Bragg said: "To get Michael Cohen his money back, they planned one last false statement. In order to complete the scheme, they planned to mischaracterize the repayments to Mr. Cohen as income to the New York state tax authorities."
In the courtroom, prosecutor Christopher Conroy accused Trump of causing the Trump Organization to create a series of false business records, adding that he "even mischaracterized for tax purposes the true nature of the payment."
That prosecutors cited the possibility of planned false statements on tax filings struck some legal specialists as particularly significant, given the speculation over how bookkeeping fraud charges would rise to felonies.
"The reference to false tax filings may save the case from legal challenges that may arise if the felony charges are predicated only on federal and state election laws," said Ryan Goodman, a law professor at New York University.
Indeed, a range of election law specialists on Tuesday expressed fresh doubt about whether Bragg could successfully use campaign finance laws alone to elevate the bookkeeping fraud charges to felonies. Among those skeptics were Richard L. Hasen, a UCLA legal scholar, and Benjamin L. Ginsberg, a longtime election lawyer for the Republican Party and a critic of Trump.
Even with the addition of the claim about intended false statements to tax authorities, Robert Kelner, the chair of the election and political law practice group at the firm Covington & Burling, remained uncertain that it would show an intent to commit another crime.
"The local prosecutors seem to be relying in part on a bank shot exploiting Michael Cohen's guilty plea in a federal campaign finance case," he said. "But there were serious questions about the legal basis for the case against Cohen, making that a dubious foundation for a case against a former president. Prosecutors also allude vaguely to 'steps' taken to violate tax laws, but they say little to establish what that might mean."
Still, Bragg emphasized that at this stage, prosecutors did not need to go into detail about what other crimes they believe Trump intended to commit.
Bragg will eventually have to show his hand. Barry Kamins, a retired New York Supreme Court judge who is now in private practice, said the next phase of the case would require prosecutors to divulge more.
"What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery," he said. "Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts."
Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
Sorry your Dems missed again. Every time they think they have him….
I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
maybe your Qanon cohorts will get him.riflebear said:LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
Sorry your Dems missed again. Every time they think they have him….
I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
Hillary was never charged. Edwards was charged only after retiring from politics, and Bragg had the benefit of hindsight on the folly of that prosecution.quash said:Oldbear83 said:First, use one standard regardless of politics. Hillary Clinton paid a fine for essentially the same offense, for example.quash said:Mothra said:So most Americans are in favor of political prosecutions as well.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
What should be the procedure for holding politicians accountable for possibly criminal behavior?
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.
There are legal and illegal ways to improve rejection rates. As usual, Republicans would be well advised not to drink too deeply of their own propaganda.whiterock said:and then it will be illegal for both sides.Sam Lowry said:It's going to be quite a spectacle when Republicans get busted for doing all the things they imagine Democrats did in 2016.whiterock said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said: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.RMF5630 said:4th and Inches said:counting votes that are not in accordance with state rules are fraudulent votes.RMF5630 said: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.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.
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.
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.
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).
.
FIFY in bold.Sam Lowry said:There are legal and illegal ways to improve rejection rates. As usual, Republicans would be well advised to adopt the exact same procedures and legal interpretations as their opponents..whiterock said:and then it will be illegal for both sides.Sam Lowry said:It's going to be quite a spectacle when Republicans get busted for doing all the things they imagine Democrats did in 2016.whiterock said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said: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.RMF5630 said:4th and Inches said:counting votes that are not in accordance with state rules are fraudulent votes.RMF5630 said: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.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.
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.
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.
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).
.
Uh oh.....
Stunning Turnaround!@realDonaldTrump now beats @joebiden by 7%
— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) April 5, 2023
That's his best in 17 months, and a 10-point swing from just weeks ago.
Highest absolute % of the vote since September 2021
Please subscribe:https://t.co/teW73gtxD8https://t.co/vCwR2bYhY3 pic.twitter.com/GF9BdFEYDU
A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
whiterock said:
Uh oh.....Stunning Turnaround!@realDonaldTrump now beats @joebiden by 7%
— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) April 5, 2023
That's his best in 17 months, and a 10-point swing from just weeks ago.
Highest absolute % of the vote since September 2021
Please subscribe:https://t.co/teW73gtxD8https://t.co/vCwR2bYhY3 pic.twitter.com/GF9BdFEYDU
Supposedly that vote in Wisconsin yesterday was devastating for the GOP and voter ID. Don't think anyone can win without Wisconsin and this makes it very unlikely to win that state now.
If you mean what you said, i.e. procedures that are "illegal for both sides," I would disagree. But like I said, it promises to be quite a show.whiterock said:FIFY in bold.Sam Lowry said:There are legal and illegal ways to improve rejection rates. As usual, Republicans would be well advised to adopt the exact same procedures and legal interpretations as their opponents..whiterock said:and then it will be illegal for both sides.Sam Lowry said:It's going to be quite a spectacle when Republicans get busted for doing all the things they imagine Democrats did in 2016.whiterock said:Osodecentx said:whiterock said: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.RMF5630 said:4th and Inches said:counting votes that are not in accordance with state rules are fraudulent votes.RMF5630 said: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.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.
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.
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.
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).
.
Feel free to point out facts proving me wrong.LateSteak69 said:Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
i'd be happy to, but it won't do anything. Your position, like many that support the guy, is not changed by facts and this has been proven over the last 7 years.Mothra said:Feel free to point out facts proving me wrong.LateSteak69 said:Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
FIFYLateSteak69 said:I can't because I'm full of *****Mothra said:Feel free to point out facts proving me wrong.LateSteak69 said:Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
Our vibrations were getting nasty. But why? I was puzzled, frustrated... Had we deteriorated to the level of dumb beasts?
Seems like a convenient excuse to avoid putting forth anything factual.LateSteak69 said:i'd be happy to, but it won't do anything. Your position, like many that support the guy, is not changed by facts and this has been proven over the last 7 years.Mothra said:Feel free to point out facts proving me wrong.LateSteak69 said:Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
If you're up to the task, let me know. Otherwise, I will assume you got nothing.
LateSteak69 said:maybe your Qanon cohorts will get him.riflebear said:LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
Sorry your Dems missed again. Every time they think they have him….
Do you believe in Bigfoot too?
it's a fruitless exercise, and i am simply not interested in that anymore. at this point, you can do your own research if you feel the need.Mothra said:Seems like a convenient excuse to avoid putting forth anything factual.LateSteak69 said:i'd be happy to, but it won't do anything. Your position, like many that support the guy, is not changed by facts and this has been proven over the last 7 years.Mothra said:Feel free to point out facts proving me wrong.LateSteak69 said:Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
If you're up to the task, let me know.
Banana Republic? Have you been paying attention at all to what your President has done these last couple of years? You people never cease to amaze me. Apparently 40 percent of our country are every bit as brain dead as Biden.Sam Lowry said:
TRUMP: I'll make America a banana republic again. No one can twist the law and get away with it like me.
BRAGG: Hold my beer.
"Stand with anyone when he is right; Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong." - Abraham Lincoln
So, a case built around a misdemeanor past the statute of limitations involving an attorney that was disbarred, in part for lying, who paid a porn star that was represented by a guy who is in prison right now for extortion?
And then the porn star loses an appeal s ordered to pay even more money to the defendant - while the defendant it at his arraignment at another court?
Holy crap, I can't make this stuff up.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
And then the porn star loses an appeal s ordered to pay even more money to the defendant - while the defendant it at his arraignment at another court?
Holy crap, I can't make this stuff up.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Rawhide said:
So, a case built around a misdemeanor past the statute of limitations involving an attorney that was disbarred, in party for lying, who paid a porn star that was represented by a guy who is in prison right now for extortion?
And then the porn star loses an appeal s ordered to pay even more money to the defendant - while the defendant it at his arraignment at another court?
Holy crap, I can't make this stuff up.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
He actually said this....without laughing.
These are felony crimes in New York. No matter who you are. We cannot normalize serious criminal conduct." D.A. Bragg
I am not sure what you think I need to research, but sure, ok.LateSteak69 said:it's a fruitless exercise, and i am simply not interested in that anymore. at this point, you can do your own research if you feel the need.Mothra said:Seems like a convenient excuse to avoid putting forth anything factual.LateSteak69 said:i'd be happy to, but it won't do anything. Your position, like many that support the guy, is not changed by facts and this has been proven over the last 7 years.Mothra said:Feel free to point out facts proving me wrong.LateSteak69 said:Simply not true, and it shows your depth of knowledge on the guy is relatively shallow.Mothra said:A bit of revisionist history there. I do think Trump has been unfairly attacked and maligned. Some of it he has brought on himself, and some of it he hasn't. But I've always said I held my nose and voted for him because he's the lesser of the evils. Two years of disaster have proven me right on that.LateSteak69 said:you constantly took up for the guy, only recently seeming to kind of turn and i think it's just a ruse. i could same the same thing about your position being skewed as well.Mothra said:I am. I also know that Trump hasn't ever been convicted of a crime, despite the alleged shenanigans you've complained of. The idea that his behavior is all that different from Biden's is interesting, but it's not borne of fact.LateSteak69 said:I assume you are familiar with Trump's business history, so i don't need to answer how this is different. I do agree that career politicians CAN be nefarious, but trump is on another level.Mothra said:Don't disagree. But is that any different from Biden - career politician and now a millionaire many times over? How did that happen on a politician's salary?LateSteak69 said:You do know that Trump has been this way for 40+ years right?Redbrickbear said:J.R. said:That SoB does not love "our country". He loves him and nothing else. Tell your wife that grifters gonna grift!RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
My wife told me years ago, "Donald Trump may be a pompous, arrogant ass, but the man truly loves our country." She is right.
I am still all in for DeSantis, but Donald Trump is a solid #2. (Pun intended)
You think he is more of a grifter than the people who run the Democratic Party or the GOP?
I think in your disdain for Trump, you're ignoring some very obvious facts.
I am not ignoring anything, i just don't drink the kool aid like you and the others do.
We will not disagree that Trump is a morally reprehensible dude. But I would submit you are drinking a different kind of kool-aid, and have no sense of objectivity when it comes to Trump. Your hatred of the man has skewed your thinking.
You seem to have a habit of accusing Trump of things which you ignore when it comes to other candidates. I would suggest your hatred of the man has indeed skewed any sense of objectivity you once possessed.
If you're up to the task, let me know.