Can anyone explain the crime Trump did?

originally posted by: ByeByeAmericanPie
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

That’s what I’m saying. Biden is not a NY state prosecutor.

These 2 can’t seem to make the distinction.

They sure do give Biden a lot of credit for being able to juggle a lot of responsibilities.

Oh wait, now they’re saying he’s senile.

Special Counsel Robert Hur said he’s senile.

Release the tape.

originally posted by: ByeByeAmericanPie
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

That’s what I’m saying. Biden is not a NY state prosecutor.

These 2 can’t seem to make the distinction.

They sure do give Biden a lot of credit for being able to juggle a lot of responsibilities.

Oh wait, now they’re saying he’s senile.

Question - Who does the Present DOJ answer to ? You have 60 Seconds to Answer.............1 , 2 , 3.........

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
Yeah , and While your at it , Ask him about his Real Past.............

That mugshot of Obama doesn't look right. Does that look like a 7 year old boy to anybody? Because the photo itself purports to be from "1968," and Obama was born in 1961.

a reply to: Station27

No , thats him Arrested in the 1970's . That Plate was Photoshopped .

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Station27
The wire transfer to Stormy was Oct 27, 2016.

And that was which one of the 34 indictments?

I've got your back, so I'll provide your answer for you. It was not one of the indictments, so apparently it had no bearing on the case.

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
That Plate was Photoshopped.

That's what I thought. Thanks.

a reply to: JinMI

Im not interested in getting into the weeds with you. I already summed up the basic violations earlier

What I am saying is Biden wants an election, not to win by default. Winning by default means there was no election. Then his presidency might really be considered illegitimate. He doesn’t want that.

I have no clue if there are greater forces behind this case to prosecute Trump, or just zealous prosecutors who saw a case they could win. But I’m quite certain, if there is a greater force pulling strings, it ain’t Biden.

a reply to: ByeByeAmericanPie

None of what you said makes sense.

I don't know what win by default means and I have a pretty good idea that you do not either. His presidency is already considered illegitimate by a large portion of the country as did Trumps.

a reply to: JinMI

It means Trump goes to jail, and there becomes no contender.

What then? Does Biden remain president by default, or does Nikki Haley step up?

a reply to: ByeByeAmericanPie

You do know that Trump can run and win from jail....right?

I hate to ask but I'm not sure you know..,..

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: network dude

and yet you haven't a clue what any of that means.

I'd say it is you who doesn't have a clue what that means , to everyone else it's clear that paying a dodgy lawyer to hide your dirty secret so it won't effect your election campaign is dishonest and unlawful .... unless your name is Donald Trump of course then it seems it's everybody else's fault.

You call yourselves Patriots yet your patriotism is to a man not your country , shameful.

You know what's funny you don't understand what Bragg did. He didn't say Trump couldn't pay dodgy lawyer. And he considered it OK that it was listed as legal expenses. The problem Bragg said was that his campaign should have paid dodgy lawyer instead of his personal funds. He argued Trump used personal funds to hide the fact he paid dodgy lawyer and hid it from his campaign. This Bragg argued was an attempt to manipulate the election because voters wouldn't know Trump payed dodgy lawyer and this was hiden from the public.

The problem is an NDA is an attempt to hide something from the public and is legal. How it was paid shouldn't be an issue for 2 reasons. Ist the test for campaign is if this was something he would have paid even if not running for office. In this case I have to say maybe I don't think because he was running he wanted to keep this quiet. I think likely wanted to hide it from malania as she was pregnant at the time with his child. Pretty scummy thing to do but not illegal.

The second reason the argument that it should have been paid by campaign so there would be a public record of the payment defeats the purpose of an NDA. If he had to report paying dodgy lawyer as part of campaign finance laws he would have to explain what those legal services were for to not violate campaign finance laws. And if he had done that no reason for him to pay it in the first place since the payment to porn star would be public record.

Now I don't know if people are aware of this but porn star owes Donald Trump money for a lawsuit she lost claiming defamation. Her defamation case argued that Trump called her a liar by denying the affair happened. She lost partly because of another dodgy lawyer aka Avanatti who went to jail for defrauding his clients. Well when she lost the case she was on the hook to pay all trumps legal fees about 600 thousand. She is currently stacking up intrest on this as well .

But not to get to far off topic I will stop here.

originally posted by: dragonridr

He argued Trump used personal funds to hide the fact he paid dodgy lawyer and hid it from his campaign.

Trump could use his organization and his personal money to run a campaign?

Figures show Trump spent $66 million of his own cash on election campaign


www.reuters.com...

Trump is allowed to have a personal life. For something that happened long before the campaign trail.

And again. Long history of congressional members using tax payers money to obtain NDA’s to have accusers of sexual harassment which is a crime to secretly come to settlements outside the court system.

Your $25 is how we harness the news cycle and retake the narrative -- and do all the other things necessary to win this race.

Welp, there it is folks, proof right there in black and white, straight from the horse's mouth (i.e. Biden and Biden's campaign).

They openly admit they are consciously and intentionally controlling the media narrative, and that they are willing to do whatever it takes, including jailing their opponents, to 'win this race'!

Many thanks to ByeByeAmericanPie for posting this message directly from Biden's campaign HQ.

a reply to: Lazy88

the slush fund congress has is totally different. Sure it's for crafting NDA's and paying sluts to not talk about their sexual escapades with important elected folks in order to keep the scum from effecting their elections, but what Trump did was wrong. Because he's orange. Orange.

Wait till we start seeing how Chuck Schumer's Brother's law firm supplied ammo and lawyers for The Trial and Prosecution !! 😀

a reply to: JinMI

Sounds like this is just a big nothing burger, according to you then.

originally posted by: ByeByeAmericanPie
a reply to: JinMI

Sounds like this is just a big nothing burger, according to you then.

It was an expensive way to allow Joetatoe to call his opponent a "convicted felon", much like the impeachments weren't meant to remove him from office, but to use that title when speaking about him. They weren't smart enough to factor in the blowback effect, but other than that, it was a great plan. Now Trump will campaign on being railroaded into 34 felonies by Joe Biden. And regardless of the facts or feelz, most R's believe it, and quite a few D's are coming around and calling out the blatant bullsh!t.

a reply to: network dude

Blowback effect?

Less voter participation? Shame or embarrassment for being a part of the charade?

Sadly, last election voter participation was tabulated to be at an all time high.

Not since Kennedy was elected was there greater enthusiasm for the election!

originally posted by: ByeByeAmericanPie
a reply to: JinMI

Sounds like this is just a big nothing burger, according to you then.

Did I say that?

Can you elaborate?

a reply to: network dude

I think the true victim here is the color orange.