Yet instead of dealing with the matters that I concur are at issue, we gave them an easy target and someone acting just like them. The problem with Trump is that while they never gave quarter to Republicans, nor will they in the future, we didn't give them anything substantive to support their claims and they looked like the idiots they are. We lost that with Trump. You don't fight corruption with corruption.Oldbear83 said:Nice speech.ATL Bear said:
You want to know why some of us don't vote for the other guys? Because we know they have no principles and they're willing to act recklessly with impunity. So when our own guy who constantly acted recklessly with impunity is now in trouble for his actions the defense is, "well the other guys have been doing it or worse and nothing happened"! We already knew this all along. Why the hell do you think we don't support them? But for some of you the answer is to double down on our guy who's acting in the similar manner as them?? How about some integrity and be opposed to both? No matter how much you love your dog, if they have fleas and you let it go, eventually you're going to get them.
Work the problem, not the person.
But at the end of the day, if you allow the Democrats to use the courts as a weapon against Trump, you know damn well they won't stop with him.
They will go after DeSantis if he wins the nomination just the same as they trashed Romney in 2012, lying that he did not pay his taxes.
They will go after Scott if he wins the nomination just the same as they attacked Judge (now Justice) Kavanaugh with false rape allegations.
Long before Trump ever ran for President, Obama weaponized the IRS to target and attack Conservative groups, and in so doing dismantled a lot of groups who could and should have played a proper role in the 2012 and 2014 elections.
The problem is that the Democrats have created a weapon that threatens the very foundation of our nation.
The choice is whether you allow that corruption to grow even stronger, just because you cannot stand to protect Trump from that corrupted power.
Donald Trump Indicted on Seven Counts......
57,282 Views |
663 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by Oldbear83
Nice rant.ATL Bear said:Yet instead of dealing with the matters that I concur are at issue, we gave them an easy target and someone acting just like them. The problem with Trump is that while they never gave quarter to Republicans, nor will they in the future, we didn't give them anything substantive to support their claims and they looked like the idiots they are. We lost that with Trump. You don't fight corruption with corruption.Oldbear83 said:Nice speech.ATL Bear said:
You want to know why some of us don't vote for the other guys? Because we know they have no principles and they're willing to act recklessly with impunity. So when our own guy who constantly acted recklessly with impunity is now in trouble for his actions the defense is, "well the other guys have been doing it or worse and nothing happened"! We already knew this all along. Why the hell do you think we don't support them? But for some of you the answer is to double down on our guy who's acting in the similar manner as them?? How about some integrity and be opposed to both? No matter how much you love your dog, if they have fleas and you let it go, eventually you're going to get them.
Work the problem, not the person.
But at the end of the day, if you allow the Democrats to use the courts as a weapon against Trump, you know damn well they won't stop with him.
They will go after DeSantis if he wins the nomination just the same as they trashed Romney in 2012, lying that he did not pay his taxes.
They will go after Scott if he wins the nomination just the same as they attacked Judge (now Justice) Kavanaugh with false rape allegations.
Long before Trump ever ran for President, Obama weaponized the IRS to target and attack Conservative groups, and in so doing dismantled a lot of groups who could and should have played a proper role in the 2012 and 2014 elections.
The problem is that the Democrats have created a weapon that threatens the very foundation of our nation.
The choice is whether you allow that corruption to grow even stronger, just because you cannot stand to protect Trump from that corrupted power.
Pays absolutely no attention to what I just said.
Doc Holliday said:Then why hasn't Biden been indicted for insanely corrupt crimes we have proof of?Porteroso said:Doc Holliday said:Trump is his own worst enemy. He didn't have the balls to go scorched earth while democrats obviously do.LateSteak69 said:didn't t**mp have every opportunity to take down HRC?Doc Holliday said:She did something MUCH worse than what Trump is being accused of.ron.reagan said:
When your only defense is that a Clinton did something similar you are probably on the wrong side of history.
Joe Biden committed bribery in a pay to play scheme. Not a peep from your bleeding heart leftoid ass.
You love that they're taking down Trump and not applying the law to themselves. It makes you giddy.
Is upholding the rule of law really going scorched earth? I thought it was the norm. Maybe not for politicians, sure, but again, normally.
Trump is banking on his political following to keep him out of trouble, and you have bought into it. I have sways said that while running for office, if a serious candidate, you should more or less be immune to immediate prosecution. Once Hilary secured the nomination, for example.
However if you are running for the position you recently lost, to an elderly man with dementia no less, you should not be immune to prosecution. If politicians running for office were always immune, they would run for office every chance.
Probably what Trump will try. And if he was the sitting President, I'd be against it. If he was trying for President the first time, I'd be against it. But he cannot evade justice forever.
Nobody should be able to. Only the true zealots of the country think their dear leader should be above the law. Stupidity knows no bounds.
If you think the application of law isn't biased or fair then you're bat**** crazy. Either be against Biden like you are with Trump or shut the f up.
You obviously have trouble reading. I'll not respond to your stupid posting again on this subject. Wail away for dear leader.
Mothra said:You don't believe Trump is a serious candidate in the sense he will most likely be the Republican nominee - just like HRC was in 2016?Porteroso said:Doc Holliday said:Trump is his own worst enemy. He didn't have the balls to go scorched earth while democrats obviously do.LateSteak69 said:didn't t**mp have every opportunity to take down HRC?Doc Holliday said:She did something MUCH worse than what Trump is being accused of.ron.reagan said:
When your only defense is that a Clinton did something similar you are probably on the wrong side of history.
Joe Biden committed bribery in a pay to play scheme. Not a peep from your bleeding heart leftoid ass.
You love that they're taking down Trump and not applying the law to themselves. It makes you giddy.
Is upholding the rule of law really going scorched earth? I thought it was the norm. Maybe not for politicians, sure, but again, normally.
Trump is banking on his political following to keep him out of trouble, and you have bought into it. I have sways said that while running for office, if a serious candidate, you should more or less be immune to immediate prosecution. Once Hilary secured the nomination, for example.
However if you are running for the position you recently lost, to an elderly man with dementia no less, you should not be immune to prosecution. If politicians running for office were always immune, they would run for office every chance.
Probably what Trump will try. And if he was the sitting President, I'd be against it. If he was trying for President the first time, I'd be against it. But he cannot evade justice forever.
Nobody should be able to. Only the true zealots of the country think their dear leader should be above the law. Stupidity knows no bounds.
You know better. There's no excuse for a double standard as between Democrat and Republican candidates. I could care less about Trump personally, but let's not pretend the double standard here isn't a real concern and a dangerous precedent.
I honestly don't. Just a month or 2 ago he polled terribly.. he will again. In the end the Republicans will put up another man (with les than 50% support) against an elderly with dementia. The split vote will be absolutely mind boggling. You zealots who can't wait to vote for Trump will forever rail against those who vote for someone, I don't know, who might not be a known criminal?
By the way, you zealots are losing. Winning would be defending dear leader's actions or explaining them away...... not trying to prolong the inevitable.
Fre3dombear said:FLBear5630 said:Fre3dombear said:FLBear5630 said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
Screw this. To Hell with DeSantis and Tim Scott. Both are good men but only Trump can clean up this corruption that has taken over Washington, D.C. and rescue our Republic. Still do not like Trump as a person, but I am all in. The DOJ has convinced me to change my vote in the 2024 Presidential Election. Enough.
You really think Trump is person to clean up DC? It got worse with him in the mix, Nation has never been as divided. He needs to go back to TV or this won't end.
Seems you're a socialist Obama Biden type voter
What specifics did you dislike about Trump's policies that makes you dislike him so much?
Love it, if I don't agree with you on Trump, I am a Socialist!
Trumps policies were not special, nor where they all his. I don't get why the "die on the hill" mentality for this clown. Read a little about Trump and his life in NY before he went to TV. The guy was the biggest Obama Dem there was. He is no conservative, unless he can make a buck at it.
That said, he was a better choice than Hilary or Biden in 2016 &2020. But, time for him to go away, he is not the same guy from 2016 and definitely different than his whole life as a Dem at the 1970s Studio 54 Trump. If he runs and wins, it will be 4 more years of the same BS. We can't survive that with China. He is not the answer.
By the way, I think HRC and Biden should be prosecuted too. All three broke the law and need to be held accountable. I would go Haley, Pompeo, Scott, DeSantis and even Christie over Trump. Trump is poison.
I've still never gotten an answer from anyone that hates Trump about what they dislike about his policies
I definitely won't die on a hill for Trump. He's not a do nothing corrupt loser like Obama or Biden who severely hurt and are hurting the country but yes if one votes for those racist losers, they are in fact supporting socialism and as my white friends would say "how can any white guy vote Democrat?"
I'm just curious, do you know anyone who hates Trump? Like who was it you asked.
Fre3dombear said:Sam Lowry said:This makes it all the more important to defeat Trump in the primary. I've been skeptical of claims that a Trump victory would be the "end of the GOP," but if we nominate a felon it just might be.Osodecentx said:It's too early to sign onto one candidate.Mothra said:And yet, none of them have a snowball's chance in Hell of defeating Trump.Osodecentx said:Mothra said:TexasScientist said:Biden will win again, because Rs are going to hand the nomination to Trump again. The R field is too large, and none of their egos will let them step aside before the Trump train has left the station.FLBear5630 said:Trump is going to shift the election to him from the Biden policies, which are for the most part horrible. If this election becomes about Trump, Biden will win again.TexasScientist said:Trump brought this on himself. No one else to blame.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
regarding the classified documents found at Mar-A-Lago. No specifics available yet.
The Biden Administration, Department of Justice, the FBI, and CIA are rotten to the core. If they are not careful, they may get to see what a real insurrection looks like. The Deep State is alive and well. I do not like Donald Trump, but this is a sad day for our country.
Don't disagree with this. DeSantis is the best option to defeat trump but given the fact there are so many contenders it dilutes his vote to have so many nominees. Trump's sycophants, which comprise a good percentage of republicans, are going to vote for him regardless. So I think it's pretty much a foregone conclusion trump will be the nominee.
I wish all of the small players would get out of the race and endorse DeSantis.
There are some great candidates running. Let's sift them a while longer
I think the one benefit of having so many candidates is the ability to focus their attacks on Trump - if they're willing to attack him of course. However, if it goes into primary season, Trump is going to start racking up victory after victory, and will inevitably be the nominee. And I suspect none of them bow out until we've had several primaries. Their egos won't let them.
DeSantis has the best chance to beat Trump. The other candidates are just obstacles IMO.
We?
Lol
This is desperate. Blue star.
Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
You are so wrong. These are the thoughts of a perpetual loser. Anyone with a functional brain that goes into the White House with a main quote other than "grabbed her by the *****" or whatever has a great chance at uniting America.
The culture war is so far from over. Reason is never truly lost, because children are born each day with functional brains. As I keep saying, join my education party, not these stupid green or tea parties. Although if a party to drink tea, I'm in. Very much into tea.
Logic 101 in grade 9, change my mind.
Addressed it directly. The threat the Democrats have always posed is their blatant abuse of power. The fact our guy didn't get away with it and they did/have thus far is only a symptom. If we argue our guy should get away with it because of the former we're no different than them.Oldbear83 said:Nice rant.ATL Bear said:Yet instead of dealing with the matters that I concur are at issue, we gave them an easy target and someone acting just like them. The problem with Trump is that while they never gave quarter to Republicans, nor will they in the future, we didn't give them anything substantive to support their claims and they looked like the idiots they are. We lost that with Trump. You don't fight corruption with corruption.Oldbear83 said:Nice speech.ATL Bear said:
You want to know why some of us don't vote for the other guys? Because we know they have no principles and they're willing to act recklessly with impunity. So when our own guy who constantly acted recklessly with impunity is now in trouble for his actions the defense is, "well the other guys have been doing it or worse and nothing happened"! We already knew this all along. Why the hell do you think we don't support them? But for some of you the answer is to double down on our guy who's acting in the similar manner as them?? How about some integrity and be opposed to both? No matter how much you love your dog, if they have fleas and you let it go, eventually you're going to get them.
Work the problem, not the person.
But at the end of the day, if you allow the Democrats to use the courts as a weapon against Trump, you know damn well they won't stop with him.
They will go after DeSantis if he wins the nomination just the same as they trashed Romney in 2012, lying that he did not pay his taxes.
They will go after Scott if he wins the nomination just the same as they attacked Judge (now Justice) Kavanaugh with false rape allegations.
Long before Trump ever ran for President, Obama weaponized the IRS to target and attack Conservative groups, and in so doing dismantled a lot of groups who could and should have played a proper role in the 2012 and 2014 elections.
The problem is that the Democrats have created a weapon that threatens the very foundation of our nation.
The choice is whether you allow that corruption to grow even stronger, just because you cannot stand to protect Trump from that corrupted power.
Pays absolutely no attention to what I just said.
Porteroso said:Mothra said:You don't believe Trump is a serious candidate in the sense he will most likely be the Republican nominee - just like HRC was in 2016?Porteroso said:Doc Holliday said:Trump is his own worst enemy. He didn't have the balls to go scorched earth while democrats obviously do.LateSteak69 said:didn't t**mp have every opportunity to take down HRC?Doc Holliday said:She did something MUCH worse than what Trump is being accused of.ron.reagan said:
When your only defense is that a Clinton did something similar you are probably on the wrong side of history.
Joe Biden committed bribery in a pay to play scheme. Not a peep from your bleeding heart leftoid ass.
You love that they're taking down Trump and not applying the law to themselves. It makes you giddy.
Is upholding the rule of law really going scorched earth? I thought it was the norm. Maybe not for politicians, sure, but again, normally.
Trump is banking on his political following to keep him out of trouble, and you have bought into it. I have sways said that while running for office, if a serious candidate, you should more or less be immune to immediate prosecution. Once Hilary secured the nomination, for example.
However if you are running for the position you recently lost, to an elderly man with dementia no less, you should not be immune to prosecution. If politicians running for office were always immune, they would run for office every chance.
Probably what Trump will try. And if he was the sitting President, I'd be against it. If he was trying for President the first time, I'd be against it. But he cannot evade justice forever.
Nobody should be able to. Only the true zealots of the country think their dear leader should be above the law. Stupidity knows no bounds.
You know better. There's no excuse for a double standard as between Democrat and Republican candidates. I could care less about Trump personally, but let's not pretend the double standard here isn't a real concern and a dangerous precedent.
I honestly don't. Just a month or 2 ago he polled terribly.. he will again. In the end the Republicans will put up another man (with les than 50% support) against an elderly with dementia. The split vote will be absolutely mind boggling. You zealots who can't wait to vote for Trump will forever rail against those who vote for someone, I don't know, who might not be a known criminal?
By the way, you zealots are losing. Winning would be defending dear leader's actions or explaining them away...... not trying to prolong the inevitable.
Trump is the leading contender for the Republican nomination, and unfortunately, it's not even that close. He's the likely nominee. Were you unaware of this?
Why is it ok in your mind to hold the leading contenders for Republican and Democrat candidates to different legal standards? Why is it ok to prosecute only the Republican for the same or similar conduct?
I know you love to label anyone who feels stronger about something than you a zealot (I'm sure most people are zealots to you given your lukewarm approach to life), but I've been on record as saying anyone for the Republican nominee but Trump. Hell, I've been labeled a Never Trumpers by the likes of Oldbear, and a zealot by the likes of you. Perhaps it's you and Oldbear who are zealots while the rest of us are stuck in the middle of you two groups of bozos.
Porteroso said:Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
You are so wrong. These are the thoughts of a perpetual loser. Anyone with a functional brain that goes into the White House with a main quote other than "grabbed her by the *****" or whatever has a great chance at uniting America.
The culture war is so far from over. Reason is never truly lost, because children are born each day with functional brains. As I keep saying, join my education party, not these stupid green or tea parties. Although if a party to drink tea, I'm in. Very much into tea.
Logic 101 in grade 9, change my mind.
You say something completely correct and on point in the first paragraph and then go off the rails in your second. I commend you for being half right. I suppose that's progress.
I recall Mao and Stalin valuing "reason" over religion. What's ironic is their "reason" somehow led them to become the two biggest mass murderers in the history of the world.
Perhaps having a Judeo-Christian moral compass isn't such a bad thing.
i will acknowledge that one was POTUS and one wasnt(two for that matter) when the records were moved.fubar said:If you refuse to acknowledge the difference between Trump and Biden (and Pence, for that matter) on this one, I've got nothing to say.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:No indictments for Joe Biden who had mega classified documents at his home in Delaware and Chinatown, Washington, D.C. ? Why not? You are okay with a two-tiered justice system? One set of rules for your Democrats and another set of rules for Republicans? You people never cease to amaze me.fubar said:
Somebody is rotten to the core.
Though there is no amount of evidence that will convince you as to who that somebody is.
This may be the tipping point. Most sane Americans find this unacceptable.
Except this: Trump had you pegged years ago.
Of course Biden gave all his back, Hunter already sold all the info out of them when he lived in the house..
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”
Jon Stewart
Jon Stewart
"Why is it ok to prosecute only the Republican for the same or similar conduct?"
Weird that they left Pence alone then, isn't it? I guess if they can go after one guy for hoarding literal rooms full of state secrets, and knowingly defying multiple subpoenas to recover them, and directing his agents to deliberately conceal the documents from searches by law enforcement figures, all while being caught on tape demonstrating knowledge that he knew it was illegal...then they can come after anyone else for doing the same. And that should scare us all for...reasons. /s
That's the difference here: willful acts done for a demonstrably corrupt purpose. It may not be an official statutory element, but after the buttery males saga it's clearly where the unofficial bar has been set. It's an intentionally high bar to clear, because the FBI generally hates going after public figures and will make up any excuses not to, but Trump pretty much tied their hands with the evidence he generated in this one. DoJ tried so hard to treat him with kid gloves and keep it quiet as long as they could, if Trump had simply refrained from his usual lying ways (lol) and just returned what was requested, we would have never even heard of this investigation.
Just as a reminder, Trump's DoJ handed Reality Winner a 5yr prison sentence for far less than what Trump is accused of, and I don't remember anyone here defending her.
Weird that they left Pence alone then, isn't it? I guess if they can go after one guy for hoarding literal rooms full of state secrets, and knowingly defying multiple subpoenas to recover them, and directing his agents to deliberately conceal the documents from searches by law enforcement figures, all while being caught on tape demonstrating knowledge that he knew it was illegal...then they can come after anyone else for doing the same. And that should scare us all for...reasons. /s
That's the difference here: willful acts done for a demonstrably corrupt purpose. It may not be an official statutory element, but after the buttery males saga it's clearly where the unofficial bar has been set. It's an intentionally high bar to clear, because the FBI generally hates going after public figures and will make up any excuses not to, but Trump pretty much tied their hands with the evidence he generated in this one. DoJ tried so hard to treat him with kid gloves and keep it quiet as long as they could, if Trump had simply refrained from his usual lying ways (lol) and just returned what was requested, we would have never even heard of this investigation.
Just as a reminder, Trump's DoJ handed Reality Winner a 5yr prison sentence for far less than what Trump is accused of, and I don't remember anyone here defending her.
Don't disagree. I remember the HRC not pursuing "for the good of the Nation". That was 2016 Trump. 2024 Trump is not the same guy. 2024 Trump is nasty, vengeful and willing to burn the whole thing down if he doesn't get his way.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:Trump would have had to sign off on the indictment action. And he figured that nothing good would come out of prosecuting a past political rival! Trump actually took the high road!FLBear5630 said:boognish_bear said:
It was his DOJ that didn't indict!
For the record (spelled out), your post pretty much tells the story of where we are.
Unfortunately, Trump is screwed. The charges are going to hold up in Court, whoever was in charge of those documents screwed up and there is really no way to defend documents being kept like they were. Sort of like Al Capone, it may be something small but it will stick. There is a real possibility that Trump is done as a candidate.
HuMcK said:
"Why is it ok to prosecute only the Republican for the same or similar conduct?"
Weird that they left Pence alone then, isn't it? I guess if they can go after one guy for hoarding literal rooms full of state secrets, and knowingly defying multiple subpoenas to recover them, and directing his agents to deliberately conceal the documents from searches by law enforcement figures, all while being caught on tape demonstrating knowledge that he knew it was illegal...then they can come after anyone else for doing the same. And that should scare us all for...reasons. /s
That's the difference here: willful acts done for a demonstrably corrupt purpose. It may not be an official statutory element, but after the buttery males saga it's clearly where the unofficial bar has been set. It's an intentionally high bar to clear, because the FBI generally hates going after public figures and will make up any excuses not to, but Trump pretty much tied their hands with the evidence he generated in this one. DoJ tried so hard to treat him with kid gloves and keep it quiet as long as they could, if Trump had simply refrained from his usual lying ways (lol) and just returned what was requested, we would have never even heard of this investigation.
Just as a reminder, Trump's DoJ handed Reality Winner a 5yr prison sentence for far less than what Trump is accused of, and I don't remember anyone here defending her.
It's odd you ignored the comparison I was making. HRC is the more apropos analogy. She deliberately set up an email server to email classified information outside of the purview of govt. oversight, a set of acts that the head of the FBI said was clearly a crime that he would not prosecute. That's the disparate application of the law you've conveniently ignored, though I give you an E for effort.
There's no evidence that Trump's acts was done for a demonstrably corrupt purpose as of yet, but I'm not surprised by your partisan take. You are the biggest partisan hack in this board.
You overlook one aspect of this case, he is guilty. The documents were not kept or returned properly. Sort of hard to say you are weaponizing the Courts when the idiot is proven guilty of the charges. This is typical Trump, half-assing it and it biting him in the ass. Whoever was in charge of his documents did him no favors. They have 37 charges, even if he gets the big ones acquitted his is guilty. Similar to Capone, not big but it will stick and has real penalties...Oldbear83 said:Nice speech.ATL Bear said:
You want to know why some of us don't vote for the other guys? Because we know they have no principles and they're willing to act recklessly with impunity. So when our own guy who constantly acted recklessly with impunity is now in trouble for his actions the defense is, "well the other guys have been doing it or worse and nothing happened"! We already knew this all along. Why the hell do you think we don't support them? But for some of you the answer is to double down on our guy who's acting in the similar manner as them?? How about some integrity and be opposed to both? No matter how much you love your dog, if they have fleas and you let it go, eventually you're going to get them.
Work the problem, not the person.
But at the end of the day, if you allow the Democrats to use the courts as a weapon against Trump, you know damn well they won't stop with him.
They will go after DeSantis if he wins the nomination just the same as they trashed Romney in 2012, lying that he did not pay his taxes.
They will go after Scott if he wins the nomination just the same as they attacked Judge (now Justice) Kavanaugh with false rape allegations.
Long before Trump ever ran for President, Obama weaponized the IRS to target and attack Conservative groups, and in so doing dismantled a lot of groups who could and should have played a proper role in the 2012 and 2014 elections.
The problem is that the Democrats have created a weapon that threatens the very foundation of our nation.
The choice is whether you allow that corruption to grow even stronger, just because you cannot stand to protect Trump from that corrupted power.
Amateur hour in Palm Beach, there is a reason other Presidents have professionals set up thier Presidential Libraries. But, those people are just bureaucrats whose positions should be done away with...
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
I agree. He is done. Bottomline is that he did it and it will be proven. Hard to claim victim when you did what they are accusing you of doing. Big defense so far is that they (him) didn't prosecute HRC? Weak. Garland appointed a Special Counsel to investigate the Biden similar case, but as we saw with Durnham that could take years.HuMcK said:
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump like a good little partisan as i recall), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
I didn't agree with the HRC, I thought they should have followed through. The difference, I can see, is that a server using the wrong security is a much easier case to defend than what they found at Mar-Lago with papers all over. At the worst, HRC was in fine territory. Trump is in jail territory.
And at the end of the day, the Trump DOJ with Sessions as AG didn't indict her??? Check-mate, Trump was outplayed here and his not paying attention to detail will cost him.
I've never understood this argument. Of course Dems will go after Repubs, just as Repubs went after Clinton, Obama, and now Biden. That's how the game is played. The answer is not whining about it or doubling down on a buffoon, but rather, nominate normal, decent candidates who are not easy to attack. Reagan, the Bushes, and numerous successful GOP Governors and Senators withstood attacks just fine.Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
I've defended Trump on his legal troubles from Russia to Ukraine to J6 and everything in between. This is different. If even half of what is alleged in the indictment is true, he should be convicted and do real time. These are egregious crimes to say the least. And, unlike the other matters, he cannot blame anyone but himself.
If true, he intentionally (1) suggested his own attorneys destroy subpoenad evidence, (2) concealed subpoenad evidence, (3) allowed his attorneys to falsely certify compliance with subpoenas, and (4) lied to the FBI.
If these crimes don't bother you, how about exposing some of our most top secret defense and nuclear information by keeping it in public areas and then worse, actually showing it to and discussing with third parties and bragging that it is top secret? He put our country at risk.
And this is the guy you defend and use as an example why others will be treated the same way? Would Desantis, Scott, and Haley do this crap? Have others? No and No.
HuMcK said:
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
You're significantly down-playing HRC's conduct. The criminal intent element was not the mere fact she stored classified information off site. If that were the standard then Biden would likewise be prosecuted.
Instead, it was the fact she set up a private server outside of govt. oversight to send classified information, and then deliberately destroyed most of the evidence of her misconduct. The intent element could be inferred from that conduct, as Comey himself later said in his memoir. Interestingly, he also admitted that his decision not to prosecute was in part based on the fact she was the democrat presidential candidate.
I'm not defending Trump. I think he's despicable and that his conduct was in line with his behavior. But let's not pretend HRC's conduct was all that different legally. There's a clear double standard here that you're conveniently ignoring.
sombear said:I've never understood this argument. Of course Dems will go after Repubs, just as Repubs went after Clinton, Obama, and now Biden. That's how the game is played. The answer is not whining about it or doubling down on a buffoon, but rather, nominate normal, decent candidates who are not easy to attack. Reagan, the Bushes, and numerous successful GOP Governors and Senators withstood attacks just fine.Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
I've defended Trump on his legal troubles from Russia to Ukraine to J6 and everything in between. This is different. If even half of what is alleged in the indictment is true, he should be convicted and do real time. These are egregious crimes to say the least. And, unlike the other matters, he cannot blame anyone but himself.
If true, he intentionally (1) suggested his own attorneys destroy subpoenad evidence, (2) concealed subpoenad evidence, (3) allowed his attorneys to falsely certify compliance with subpoenas, and (4) lied to the FBI.
If these crimes don't bother you, how about exposing some of our most top secret defense and nuclear information by keeping it in public areas and then worse, actually showing it to and discussing with third parties and bragging that it is top secret? He put our country at risk.
And this is the guy you defend and use as an example why others will be treated the same way? Would Desantis, Scott, and Haley do this crap? Have others? No and No.
Well said.
Problem was at that time there was little requirements in place and there were many others over several administrations. Obama didn't make it a law until a year after she left.Mothra said:HuMcK said:
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
You're significantly down-playing HRC's conduct. The criminal intent element was not the mere fact she stored classified information off site. If that were the standard then Biden would likewise be prosecuted.
Instead, it was the fact she set up a private server outside of govt. oversight to send classified information, and then deliberately destroyed most of the evidence of her misconduct. The intent element could be inferred from that conduct, as Comey himself later said in his memoir. Interestingly, he also admitted that his decision not to prosecute was in part based on the fact she was the democrat presidential candidate.
I'm not defending Trump. I think he's despicable and that his conduct was in line with his behavior. But let's not pretend HRC's conduct was all that different legally. There's a clear double standard here that you're conveniently ignoring.
My guess as to why the DOJ didn't indict is that there was not a "law" in place at the time, consistent application of standards was not in place and too many others were doing the same at the time. All of which led to DOJ saying this is either going to mean we indict half of DC or it is going to be impossible to get a conviction.
I would not be surprised if this played into the Sessions/Trump falling out, especially since Trump had crowds shouting "lock her up". In my opinion, this makes more sense than Trump taking the "high road for the sake of the Nation", I have seen no situation where Trump would put the welfare of others in front of his wants.
Once again, the Dems are pros at playing these games. It seems it is the GOP that gets caught and is able to be indicted...
Amazing world we live in. Trump is the victim. Send him more money. Buy another trading card.FLBear5630 said:You overlook one aspect of this case, he is guilty. The documents were not kept or returned properly. Sort of hard to say you are weaponizing the Courts when the idiot is proven guilty of the charges. This is typical Trump, half-assing it and it biting him in the ass. Whoever was in charge of his documents did him no favors. They have 37 charges, even if he gets the big ones acquitted his is guilty. Similar to Capone, not big but it will stick and has real penalties...Oldbear83 said:Nice speech.ATL Bear said:
You want to know why some of us don't vote for the other guys? Because we know they have no principles and they're willing to act recklessly with impunity. So when our own guy who constantly acted recklessly with impunity is now in trouble for his actions the defense is, "well the other guys have been doing it or worse and nothing happened"! We already knew this all along. Why the hell do you think we don't support them? But for some of you the answer is to double down on our guy who's acting in the similar manner as them?? How about some integrity and be opposed to both? No matter how much you love your dog, if they have fleas and you let it go, eventually you're going to get them.
Work the problem, not the person.
But at the end of the day, if you allow the Democrats to use the courts as a weapon against Trump, you know damn well they won't stop with him.
They will go after DeSantis if he wins the nomination just the same as they trashed Romney in 2012, lying that he did not pay his taxes.
They will go after Scott if he wins the nomination just the same as they attacked Judge (now Justice) Kavanaugh with false rape allegations.
Long before Trump ever ran for President, Obama weaponized the IRS to target and attack Conservative groups, and in so doing dismantled a lot of groups who could and should have played a proper role in the 2012 and 2014 elections.
The problem is that the Democrats have created a weapon that threatens the very foundation of our nation.
The choice is whether you allow that corruption to grow even stronger, just because you cannot stand to protect Trump from that corrupted power.
Amateur hour in Palm Beach, there is a reason other Presidents have professionals set up thier Presidential Libraries. But, those people are just bureaucrats whose positions should be done away with...
Sununu nails it.
Gov. Sununu clashes with Jen Psaki over claims of collusion between Trump and Russia: 'It is nonsense' https://t.co/9Ux8epxfGN
— Fox News (@FoxNews) June 6, 2023
Good postsombear said:I've never understood this argument. Of course Dems will go after Repubs, just as Repubs went after Clinton, Obama, and now Biden. That's how the game is played. The answer is not whining about it or doubling down on a buffoon, but rather, nominate normal, decent candidates who are not easy to attack. Reagan, the Bushes, and numerous successful GOP Governors and Senators withstood attacks just fine.Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
I've defended Trump on his legal troubles from Russia to Ukraine to J6 and everything in between. This is different. If even half of what is alleged in the indictment is true, he should be convicted and do real time. These are egregious crimes to say the least. And, unlike the other matters, he cannot blame anyone but himself.
If true, he intentionally (1) suggested his own attorneys destroy subpoenad evidence, (2) concealed subpoenad evidence, (3) allowed his attorneys to falsely certify compliance with subpoenas, and (4) lied to the FBI.
If these crimes don't bother you, how about exposing some of our most top secret defense and nuclear information by keeping it in public areas and then worse, actually showing it to and discussing with third parties and bragging that it is top secret? He put our country at risk.
And this is the guy you defend and use as an example why others will be treated the same way? Would Desantis, Scott, and Haley do this crap? Have others? No and No.
A strong majority of experts agreed with Comey that Hillary's case was a close call, and most former prosecutors agreed they would not have charged her based on the available facts. Some disagreed. My pro-Trump law contacts agreed with Comey and said if you charge Hillary, you'd have to charge hundreds or even thousands from both parties.Mothra said:HuMcK said:
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
You're significantly down-playing HRC's conduct. The criminal intent element was not the mere fact she stored classified information off site. If that were the standard then Biden would likewise be prosecuted.
Instead, it was the fact she set up a private server outside of govt. oversight to send classified information, and then deliberately destroyed most of the evidence of her misconduct. The intent element could be inferred from that conduct, as Comey himself later said in his memoir. Interestingly, he also admitted that his decision not to prosecute was in part based on the fact she was the democrat presidential candidate.
I'm not defending Trump. I think he's despicable and that his conduct was in line with his behavior. But let's not pretend HRC's conduct was all that different legally. There's a clear double standard here that you're conveniently ignoring.
I'm just surprised more folks don't recall that the Repubs - led by Grassley - continued to investigate the Hillary mess for 3 years into the Trump administration and found no wrongdoing.
But, regardless, there is no way to get around the fact that what Trump allegedly did is at an entirely differently level in multiple respects. I'm sure we can dig something up on twitter but I've not read, heard, or talked to one attorney who has argued with a straight face that others would not be charged for these same crimes. Even legal experts who have defended Trump from day one say this is much different.
They're letting Biden get away with pay for play bribery. Hillary destroyed classified data she stored on her server.sombear said:I've never understood this argument. Of course Dems will go after Repubs, just as Repubs went after Clinton, Obama, and now Biden. That's how the game is played. The answer is not whining about it or doubling down on a buffoon, but rather, nominate normal, decent candidates who are not easy to attack. Reagan, the Bushes, and numerous successful GOP Governors and Senators withstood attacks just fine.Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
I've defended Trump on his legal troubles from Russia to Ukraine to J6 and everything in between. This is different. If even half of what is alleged in the indictment is true, he should be convicted and do real time. These are egregious crimes to say the least. And, unlike the other matters, he cannot blame anyone but himself.
If true, he intentionally (1) suggested his own attorneys destroy subpoenad evidence, (2) concealed subpoenad evidence, (3) allowed his attorneys to falsely certify compliance with subpoenas, and (4) lied to the FBI.
If these crimes don't bother you, how about exposing some of our most top secret defense and nuclear information by keeping it in public areas and then worse, actually showing it to and discussing with third parties and bragging that it is top secret? He put our country at risk.
And this is the guy you defend and use as an example why others will be treated the same way? Would Desantis, Scott, and Haley do this crap? Have others? No and No.
The difference is Trump is actually going to be locked up while everyone else gets a free pass.
It's the unequal application of law that YOU CANT DENY.
Do you really not think they'll use extreme lawfare on Desantis?
Porteroso said:Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
You are so wrong. These are the thoughts of a perpetual loser. Anyone with a functional brain that goes into the White House with a main quote other than "grabbed her by the *****" or whatever has a great chance at uniting America.
The culture war is so far from over. Reason is never truly lost, because children are born each day with functional brains. As I keep saying, join my education party, not these stupid green or tea parties. Although if a party to drink tea, I'm in. Very much into tea.
Logic 101 in grade 9, change my mind.
Worse and more damaging than that was supporting a man who's Main quote was "you didn't build that!" So america could celebrate the leople that made the road so Elon musk could drive to work to create life changing greatness.
Or even his quote of "that's my son" which lit the racial wars in America on fire leading to literal deaths and 10a of billions in destruction.
But yes clutch your purse and weep that a man said to another man "I'd **** the **** out of her" said by no man about a woman in the history of ever
If he'd have said "I just grab em in the bunghole" about a dude you'd make a statue for em
That's your democrat vote and mindset
FLBear5630 said:Problem was at that time there was little requirements in place and there were many others over several administrations. Obama didn't make it a law until a year after she left.Mothra said:HuMcK said:
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
You're significantly down-playing HRC's conduct. The criminal intent element was not the mere fact she stored classified information off site. If that were the standard then Biden would likewise be prosecuted.
Instead, it was the fact she set up a private server outside of govt. oversight to send classified information, and then deliberately destroyed most of the evidence of her misconduct. The intent element could be inferred from that conduct, as Comey himself later said in his memoir. Interestingly, he also admitted that his decision not to prosecute was in part based on the fact she was the democrat presidential candidate.
I'm not defending Trump. I think he's despicable and that his conduct was in line with his behavior. But let's not pretend HRC's conduct was all that different legally. There's a clear double standard here that you're conveniently ignoring.
My guess as to why the DOJ didn't indict is that there was not a "law" in place at the time, consistent application of standards was not in place and too many others were doing the same at the time. All of which led to DOJ saying this is either going to mean we indict half of DC or it is going to be impossible to get a conviction.
I would not be surprised if this played into the Sessions/Trump falling out, especially since Trump had crowds shouting "lock her up". In my opinion, this makes more sense than Trump taking the "high road for the sake of the Nation", I have seen no situation where Trump would put the welfare of others in front of his wants.
Once again, the Dems are pros at playing these games. It seems it is the GOP that gets caught and is able to be indicted...
There was a law in place that was clearly violated - one of the same laws trump has been charged with. She violated 18 U.S. Code 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials, as well as State Department protocols and procedures, and regulations governing recordkeeping.
We can agree that Trump committed a crime. That's doesn't mean we have to pretend that HRC could have just as easily been charged but skated because she was a presidential candidate - as Comey admitted.
What you fail to acknowledge is Trump is the exception. Both parties have gone after each other and will continue to. Trump is the only Republican making it easy for the Dems.Doc Holliday said:They're letting Biden get away with pay for play bribery. Hillary destroyed classified data she stored on her server.sombear said:I've never understood this argument. Of course Dems will go after Repubs, just as Repubs went after Clinton, Obama, and now Biden. That's how the game is played. The answer is not whining about it or doubling down on a buffoon, but rather, nominate normal, decent candidates who are not easy to attack. Reagan, the Bushes, and numerous successful GOP Governors and Senators withstood attacks just fine.Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
I've defended Trump on his legal troubles from Russia to Ukraine to J6 and everything in between. This is different. If even half of what is alleged in the indictment is true, he should be convicted and do real time. These are egregious crimes to say the least. And, unlike the other matters, he cannot blame anyone but himself.
If true, he intentionally (1) suggested his own attorneys destroy subpoenad evidence, (2) concealed subpoenad evidence, (3) allowed his attorneys to falsely certify compliance with subpoenas, and (4) lied to the FBI.
If these crimes don't bother you, how about exposing some of our most top secret defense and nuclear information by keeping it in public areas and then worse, actually showing it to and discussing with third parties and bragging that it is top secret? He put our country at risk.
And this is the guy you defend and use as an example why others will be treated the same way? Would Desantis, Scott, and Haley do this crap? Have others? No and No.
The difference is Trump is actually going to be locked up while everyone else gets a free pass.
It's the unequal application of law that YOU CANT DENY.
Do you really not think they'll use extreme lawfare on Desantis?
I can and do deny it IN THIS CASE. Unequal application requires similar facts. No other case comes close to what the indictment alleges about Trump. Trump has only himself to blame. And he knowingly put our country at risk.
HRC's case was completely different, and again, Repubs themselves found no wrongdoing after a 3-year investigation.
We will see what happens with Biden. The evidence seems to be piling up that he was directly involved.
Of course the Dems will come after Desantis, but what are the allegations . . . military service, a good family, keeping his state open during COVID, and taking on Disney/woke teachers?
I didn't say she didn't commit a crime. I said it looks like, to me, that the situation at the time made it difficult, unreasonable or too many others would have been brought in to the mess for DOJ to indict. HRC definitely played the rules and got away with it, as the Clintons often do.Mothra said:FLBear5630 said:Problem was at that time there was little requirements in place and there were many others over several administrations. Obama didn't make it a law until a year after she left.Mothra said:HuMcK said:
The Hillary case was exactly what I was alluding to. "Buttery males"="but-her-e-mails". Comey was quite clear in his justification presser that they could not establish intentionality or willful acts in defiance of the law, so even if not an actual statutory element, that's where the bar was set. He probably set it there thinking there was no way someone would be stupid enough to ever reach it, but that was the pre-Trump era.
Again, if just storing the info off site was prosecutable, that would be some bad news for Ivanka and Jared, but that's not even close to what happened here (meaning the Trump admin did in fact benefit from the "Hillary precedent"). They have Trump's dumb ass on tape bragging the he kept things he knew he wasn't supposed to (i.e. a corrupt purpose) and was deliberately concealing them from DoJ after a subpoena...what choice does law enforcement have at that point?
I didn't love that Hillary got a pass, so much so that I did not vote for her (you still voted for Trump and would again as I recall, like a good little partisan), but Trump's conduct is so far beyond and more egregious than what she (or anyone else really) did. There has to be a line somewhere, DoJ has decided it lies at the point of deliberate and willful misconduct (for public figures anyway, Reality Winner shows that the bar is a little lower for the rest of us) and I am at peace with that.
You're significantly down-playing HRC's conduct. The criminal intent element was not the mere fact she stored classified information off site. If that were the standard then Biden would likewise be prosecuted.
Instead, it was the fact she set up a private server outside of govt. oversight to send classified information, and then deliberately destroyed most of the evidence of her misconduct. The intent element could be inferred from that conduct, as Comey himself later said in his memoir. Interestingly, he also admitted that his decision not to prosecute was in part based on the fact she was the democrat presidential candidate.
I'm not defending Trump. I think he's despicable and that his conduct was in line with his behavior. But let's not pretend HRC's conduct was all that different legally. There's a clear double standard here that you're conveniently ignoring.
My guess as to why the DOJ didn't indict is that there was not a "law" in place at the time, consistent application of standards was not in place and too many others were doing the same at the time. All of which led to DOJ saying this is either going to mean we indict half of DC or it is going to be impossible to get a conviction.
I would not be surprised if this played into the Sessions/Trump falling out, especially since Trump had crowds shouting "lock her up". In my opinion, this makes more sense than Trump taking the "high road for the sake of the Nation", I have seen no situation where Trump would put the welfare of others in front of his wants.
Once again, the Dems are pros at playing these games. It seems it is the GOP that gets caught and is able to be indicted...
There was a law in place that was clearly violated - one of the same laws trump has been charged with. She violated 18 U.S. Code 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials, as well as State Department protocols and procedures, and regulations governing recordkeeping.
We can agree that Trump committed a crime. That's doesn't mean we have to pretend that HRC could have just as easily been charged but skated because she was a presidential candidate - as Comey admitted.
Bottomline is that Trump is not playing this game very well. For all his time in DC and his "followers" he has not cultivated any internal support that is providing ANY cover. Biden and HRC do have political cover.
It is only a matter of time until something sticks, I think he will be forced to take a deal and drop out of the election because this indictment will stand up in court and Biden or HRC did it is not a defense. It might play well at a rally or in a Tweet, but he will be convicted of this.
I think he knows it. The Tweet asking for help? That is not Trump style. He knows that he is toast in court, witch hunt or not.
Porteroso said:Fre3dombear said:FLBear5630 said:Fre3dombear said:FLBear5630 said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
Screw this. To Hell with DeSantis and Tim Scott. Both are good men but only Trump can clean up this corruption that has taken over Washington, D.C. and rescue our Republic. Still do not like Trump as a person, but I am all in. The DOJ has convinced me to change my vote in the 2024 Presidential Election. Enough.
You really think Trump is person to clean up DC? It got worse with him in the mix, Nation has never been as divided. He needs to go back to TV or this won't end.
Seems you're a socialist Obama Biden type voter
What specifics did you dislike about Trump's policies that makes you dislike him so much?
Love it, if I don't agree with you on Trump, I am a Socialist!
Trumps policies were not special, nor where they all his. I don't get why the "die on the hill" mentality for this clown. Read a little about Trump and his life in NY before he went to TV. The guy was the biggest Obama Dem there was. He is no conservative, unless he can make a buck at it.
That said, he was a better choice than Hilary or Biden in 2016 &2020. But, time for him to go away, he is not the same guy from 2016 and definitely different than his whole life as a Dem at the 1970s Studio 54 Trump. If he runs and wins, it will be 4 more years of the same BS. We can't survive that with China. He is not the answer.
By the way, I think HRC and Biden should be prosecuted too. All three broke the law and need to be held accountable. I would go Haley, Pompeo, Scott, DeSantis and even Christie over Trump. Trump is poison.
I've still never gotten an answer from anyone that hates Trump about what they dislike about his policies
I definitely won't die on a hill for Trump. He's not a do nothing corrupt loser like Obama or Biden who severely hurt and are hurting the country but yes if one votes for those racist losers, they are in fact supporting socialism and as my white friends would say "how can any white guy vote Democrat?"
I'm just curious, do you know anyone who hates Trump? Like who was it you asked.
There several Examples in this very thread with betas emoting
If Obama or Biden did exactly what Trump has done here, nobody would touch it.sombear said:What you fail to acknowledge is Trump is the exception. Both parties have gone after each other and will continue to. Trump is the only Republican making it easy for the Dems.Doc Holliday said:They're letting Biden get away with pay for play bribery. Hillary destroyed classified data she stored on her server.sombear said:I've never understood this argument. Of course Dems will go after Repubs, just as Repubs went after Clinton, Obama, and now Biden. That's how the game is played. The answer is not whining about it or doubling down on a buffoon, but rather, nominate normal, decent candidates who are not easy to attack. Reagan, the Bushes, and numerous successful GOP Governors and Senators withstood attacks just fine.Doc Holliday said:
Those that like Desantis, do you not realize they will treat him exactly the same as Trump or worse?
If you think this helps, you're not seeing the big picture.
I've defended Trump on his legal troubles from Russia to Ukraine to J6 and everything in between. This is different. If even half of what is alleged in the indictment is true, he should be convicted and do real time. These are egregious crimes to say the least. And, unlike the other matters, he cannot blame anyone but himself.
If true, he intentionally (1) suggested his own attorneys destroy subpoenad evidence, (2) concealed subpoenad evidence, (3) allowed his attorneys to falsely certify compliance with subpoenas, and (4) lied to the FBI.
If these crimes don't bother you, how about exposing some of our most top secret defense and nuclear information by keeping it in public areas and then worse, actually showing it to and discussing with third parties and bragging that it is top secret? He put our country at risk.
And this is the guy you defend and use as an example why others will be treated the same way? Would Desantis, Scott, and Haley do this crap? Have others? No and No.
The difference is Trump is actually going to be locked up while everyone else gets a free pass.
It's the unequal application of law that YOU CANT DENY.
Do you really not think they'll use extreme lawfare on Desantis?
I can and do deny it IN THIS CASE. Unequal application requires similar facts. No other case comes close to what the indictment alleges about Trump. Trump has only himself to blame. And he knowingly put our country at risk.
HRC's case was completely different, and again, Repubs themselves found no wrongdoing after a 3-year investigation.
We will see what happens with Biden. The evidence seems to be piling up that he was directly involved.
Of course the Dems will come after Desantis, but what are the allegations . . . military service, a good family, keeping his state open during COVID, and taking on Disney/woke teachers?
That's what you're not understanding.
Nothing is going to happen to Biden.
What facts GOP presented about HRC are far worse than what Trump is being accused of here. Nobody was willing to actually hold her accountable. THATS A HUGE F 'ING PROBLEM.
Hypothetical question there is no answer for.KaiBear said:Strange how Biden isn't facing similar similiar charges .TexasScientist said:Trump brought this on himself. No one else to blame.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
regarding the classified documents found at Mar-A-Lago. No specifics available yet.
The Biden Administration, Department of Justice, the FBI, and CIA are rotten to the core. If they are not careful, they may get to see what a real insurrection looks like. The Deep State is alive and well. I do not like Donald Trump, but this is a sad day for our country.
Really believe if Obama had held the exact same documents at his house, this current Democratic administration would have filed similar charges ?
The difference in Biden/Pence and Trump is blatant obstruction, and refusal to turn over classified documents that he knew were in his possession.
The better question is would Trump have been indicted at all if he had cooperated the way Biden/Pence did? I think the answer is no.
My experience is that Alpha's don't last. They push as bullies until they force those they are bullying to use overwhelming force or any means possible. Good example here, read a news story an ex-NAVY seal that got killed here a couple of years ago. Got into an altercation after a few drinks, guy who shot him in the restaurant said "what else was I supposed to do just let him beat me to death?"...Fre3dombear said:Porteroso said:Fre3dombear said:FLBear5630 said:Fre3dombear said:FLBear5630 said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
Screw this. To Hell with DeSantis and Tim Scott. Both are good men but only Trump can clean up this corruption that has taken over Washington, D.C. and rescue our Republic. Still do not like Trump as a person, but I am all in. The DOJ has convinced me to change my vote in the 2024 Presidential Election. Enough.
You really think Trump is person to clean up DC? It got worse with him in the mix, Nation has never been as divided. He needs to go back to TV or this won't end.
Seems you're a socialist Obama Biden type voter
What specifics did you dislike about Trump's policies that makes you dislike him so much?
Love it, if I don't agree with you on Trump, I am a Socialist!
Trumps policies were not special, nor where they all his. I don't get why the "die on the hill" mentality for this clown. Read a little about Trump and his life in NY before he went to TV. The guy was the biggest Obama Dem there was. He is no conservative, unless he can make a buck at it.
That said, he was a better choice than Hilary or Biden in 2016 &2020. But, time for him to go away, he is not the same guy from 2016 and definitely different than his whole life as a Dem at the 1970s Studio 54 Trump. If he runs and wins, it will be 4 more years of the same BS. We can't survive that with China. He is not the answer.
By the way, I think HRC and Biden should be prosecuted too. All three broke the law and need to be held accountable. I would go Haley, Pompeo, Scott, DeSantis and even Christie over Trump. Trump is poison.
I've still never gotten an answer from anyone that hates Trump about what they dislike about his policies
I definitely won't die on a hill for Trump. He's not a do nothing corrupt loser like Obama or Biden who severely hurt and are hurting the country but yes if one votes for those racist losers, they are in fact supporting socialism and as my white friends would say "how can any white guy vote Democrat?"
I'm just curious, do you know anyone who hates Trump? Like who was it you asked.
There several Examples in this very thread with betas emoting
Learned the Alpha's don't last lesson at the JFK at Ft Bragg in 87, from a hand-to-hand instructor. The lesson I saw was outside the Flaming Mug bar, as a mild-mannered SF beta type, caved in a guys knee and walked away after being pushed and pushed. There is value in trying to reach compromise. The there can be only one doesn't end up well for the other 99.9%
Isnt the Director of the FBI a lifelong Republican and Trump appointee?Oldbear83 said:This indictment serves two purposes for the Democrats (and for all intents and purposes, the DOJ/FBI are de facto Democrats):Mothra said:fubar said:
Somebody is rotten to the core.
Though there is no amount of evidence that will convince you as to who that somebody is.
Indeed. But thats completely irrelevant to the separate question of whether this is tantamount to a political prosecution. That should concern all Americans, regardless of what type of individual the person is.
In line with his ******y behavior, Trump didn't turn over the docs immediately like Biden and Pence. But does that really make his behavior criminal while Biden's is not? Seems like they're reaching here.
Is this really that much worse than HRC's secret email server, and the destruction of documents included on that server? I don't think so. Yet HRC skated and Trump was indicted.
I suspect all this does is strengthen Trump and backfire on the Biden admin. I can't stand Trump, but political prosecutions are for banana republics not America.
1, The timing allows Democrats to downplay the release of the document which appears to confirm Joe Biden took a $5 million dollar bribe while a Senator;
and
2. It drives Republican voters to commit to supporting Trump as the GOP nominee. The Democrats believe they have an easier time against Trump than DeSantis (true) , but if the GOP allows the jackboot tactics employed here to go unopposed their voters would reject whatever nominee they select.
In the end, good people will get hurt and our nation with them.
I'm the English Guy
On the contrary, I'm all for equal application. There is a distinction between Trump and Biden/Pence. I don't see much of one for HRC. Failure to prosecute one is no excuse for failure to prosecute another over obstruction. We don't live in a perfect world unfortunately. If there isn't a limitations issue, I'm all for going after HRC today. We continue down a slippery slope, if we ignore Trump.Mothra said:While it might be true Trump brought this on himself, even a Trump hater such as yourself should have a problem with the unequal application of the law, and the precedent this kind of political prosecution sets.TexasScientist said:Trump brought this on himself. No one else to blame.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:
regarding the classified documents found at Mar-A-Lago. No specifics available yet.
The Biden Administration, Department of Justice, the FBI, and CIA are rotten to the core. If they are not careful, they may get to see what a real insurrection looks like. The Deep State is alive and well. I do not like Donald Trump, but this is a sad day for our country.
I think in some of you Never Trumper's zeal to destroy the guy, you miss the forest through the trees, and fail to consider the larger implications. You can't see past your hatred.