Federal Indictment of Donald Trump

#2,202
#2,202
If you are a Biden, you can collect more than $30 million from the Chinese government, work with the "spy chief of China", tell the world that you've given "half your salary" to pops for the last 30 years, and the FBI still won't raid you.

The FBI will even shield you from investigation by labeling your laptop containing substantial evidence of your family's crimes, financial corruption, and foreign kickbacks as "disinformation".

If you are a Trump, the FBI will fabricate a Russian-Collusion hoax without a scintilla of evidence, alter evidence in federal court to continue to spy on you, and when all of that doesn't work to frame you for a crime — the FBI will raid your home.

Hunter Biden's 'Sexually Inappropriate' Relationship With His 14-Year-Old Niece

EXCLUSIVE: Hunter Biden's Most Treasonous Text Message
 
#2,203
#2,203
volgr said:
This is from one your links


For one, we know the first sentence is incorrect, as I have already shown.

Secondly, the assumed provisions that make mail in balloting "secure", weren't followed in every State. Hell, I would say most States. Again, those that aren't familiar with mass mail-in balloting did a poor job of administering them. Why do we know this? Because there is proof ballots were mailed out without being requested, they were mailed out multiple times in a lot of cases, they were mailed out to people who no longer lived at said residence, we know ballots were not signature verified and those that were had a very low standard to meet, we know voter rolls were dirty, we know drop boxes were used so there was no check on making sure ballots came from the proper address.

Just admit you were wrong. Which you are.
Click to expand...
No. I don't think those sources are wrong. You definitely haven't proven that they are.
 
#2,204
#2,204
lawgator1 said:
As more and more slowly comes out, this is looking far worse for Trump:

1) Agents had to seize archive documents as far back as June, and order that others be sequestered and held there;

2) Informants tell them that there are still classified documents there, causing enough alarm that the DOJ has to seek a search warrant to get them;

3) Search warrant was only option because of fear that Trump or his agents would destroy the documents;

4) Trump has, and could easily release, but for some reason will not release, the warrant itself;

5) A judge had to sign off on the warrant application.


We are rapidly getting to a point where it is clear that Trump took those documents from the WH for the very purposes of hiding them from someone, the feds gave him every opportunity to give them back and he did not, and enough information came out that it became clear that the documents are at risk if left in Trump's hands.

Sorry Trumpsers, but this reeks of disaster for Trump.
Click to expand...

Are the documents that you speak of made out of some kind of super paper, because it isn't really that difficult to beat regular paper?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolStrom
#2,206
#2,206
BowlBrother85 said:
No. I don't think those sources are wrong. You definitely haven't proven that they are.
Click to expand...

It's not that they are wrong, but their conditions for mail-in voting to be "secure", weren't followed. What don't you understand about that? The very reasons why the 2005 bi-partisan committee was worried about mail-in voting being open to fraud, were proven correct in 2020. Mail-in voting, to be secure, has to be strictly administered (which most States did not do in 2020).
 
#2,208
#2,208
VolStrom said:
Yeah, but if Trump wins another 4 years and DeSantis gets elected for 8 more years after him, that will put me close to my death bed.
Click to expand...
That would be ideal. Trump, if elected, will lay waste to most of the corrupted crust of these agencies. This should open the pathway for the next R to run the country without make believe scandals.
 
#2,209
#2,209
VolinWayne said:
There is absolutely no way will they "allow" Trump to win again. I'm just hoping they underestimate DeSantis
Click to expand...
Trump is the only chance we have at this point at a real good president. I just hope enough has been done to him to make him what he should've been. I want the Trump that actually makes the idiots on the board, want to kill themselves. If we get that, we'll finally have a decent president.
 
#2,210
#2,210
Attorney General Merrick Garland said Thursday that he “personally approved” the search for documents that triggered Monday’s unprecedented FBI raid on the Florida home of former President Donald Trump.

Garland, in brief comments during which he declined to take any questions, also said the Justice Department has asked a federal magistrate judge to unseal copies of the search warrant and would do so as long as Trump and his legal team do not object.

AG Merrick Garland asks federal court to unseal search warrant of Trump's Mar-a-Lago home
 
#2,211
#2,211
tim said:
That would be ideal. Trump, if elected, will lay waste to most of the corrupted crust of these agencies. This should open the pathway for the next R to run the country without make believe scandals.
Click to expand...
Yeah you’re right. He really “drained the swamp” his first try.
 
#2,212
#2,212
tim said:
That would be ideal. Trump, if elected, will lay waste to most of the corrupted crust of these agencies. This should open the pathway for the next R to run the country without make believe scandals.
Click to expand...
This begs the question :

Why didn't he do this during the four years that he was President ?

Hollow 2016 campaign rhetoric aside, Trump didn't show much interest in making federal agencies less corrupt.
 
#2,213
#2,213
tnmarktx said:
If only this DOJ or the corrupt FBI could ever demonstrate that they tell the truth, maybe you would get an answer.
Click to expand...


You don't think they took the boxes with them or wouldn't turn them over to the archive? Then why didn't they deny it a year ago when this first came up?

See, you and Rand Paul need to learn a little something about advancing conspiracy theories: THEY HAVE TO MAKE SENSE.
 
#2,214
#2,214
tim said:
That would be ideal. Trump, if elected, will lay waste to most of the corrupted crust of these agencies. This should open the pathway for the next R to run the country without make believe scandals.
Click to expand...
Trump has a handle on what to expect from the swamp and I guarantee that he has a football stadium of people on reserve to take the place of the sleeze balls he is going to replace in the first few months of his presidency. The upper echelon of each agency will have its clock cleaned of partisan democrats and replaced with Trump loyalists. He trusted too many people his first go around, and they stabbed him in the back, he won't make that mistake again.
 
#2,215
#2,215
tnmarktx said:
Trump is the only chance we have at this point at a real good president. I just hope enough has been done to him to make him what he should've been. I want the Trump that actually makes the idiots on the board, want to kill themselves. If we get that, we'll finally have a decent president.
Click to expand...
Don't go playing with the shore points on @luthervol 's stupid post continuum.
 
#2,216
#2,216
utvols88 said:
No one on this board knows the contents. It's not reasonable to demand any side to speculate why he took them.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point; but I am struggling to come up with even an remotely sensible reason for Trump and his team to have done it from the beginning. You have to admit, its hard to come up with a benign reason.
 
#2,218
#2,218
lawgator1 said:
The warrant should reveal the potential criminal charge. Trump doesn't want to talk about that, though does he?


days-of-our-lives-dool.gif
Click to expand...

I've never seen a search warrant, do they spell out the potential charge and or reason for the search?
 
#2,220
#2,220
VolinWayne said:
If you are a Biden, you can collect more than $30 million from the Chinese government, work with the "spy chief of China", tell the world that you've given "half your salary" to pops for the last 30 years, and the FBI still won't raid you.

The FBI will even shield you from investigation by labeling your laptop containing substantial evidence of your family's crimes, financial corruption, and foreign kickbacks as "disinformation".

If you are a Trump, the FBI will fabricate a Russian-Collusion hoax without a scintilla of evidence, alter evidence in federal court to continue to spy on you, and when all of that doesn't work to frame you for a crime — the FBI will raid your home.

Hunter Biden's 'Sexually Inappropriate' Relationship With His 14-Year-Old Niece

EXCLUSIVE: Hunter Biden's Most Treasonous Text Message
Click to expand...
You really dug to the bottom of the barrel for that source. "Kanekoa's Newsletter" ??? WTF?
 
#2,221
#2,221
VolStrom said:
Trump has a handle on what to expect from the swamp and I guarantee that he has a football stadium of people on reserve to take the place of the sleeze balls he is going to replace in the first few months of his presidency. The upper echelon of each agency will have its clock cleaned of partisan democrats and replaced with Trump loyalists. He trusted too many people his first go around, and they stabbed him in the back, he won't make that mistake again.
Click to expand...

You think people should be loyal to Trump and not to a country or their constituents? This is why MAGAs are just full on mouth-breathers. They rail against “corrupt democrats” but want to do the exact same thing with their guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel
#2,222
#2,222
lawgator1 said:
And no one from the right side of the board has ever answered the question of why he would take and/or keep the boxes of documents in the first place?

The law could not be clearer, the documents belong to the country and are to be archived. 15 boxes?


Why?
Click to expand...

IDK, why did Obama take boxes of documents and squabble with the National Archives over them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#2,224
#2,224
utvols88 said:
If your beef is with the "because of Trump" part, the reason why he is impartial isn't directly stated. He could technically be right. Unless there is a statement from the magistrate(wouldn't there be to justify recusing himself?), only he knows. You said "I want to know whether @Caculator was lying or being lied to". You act as though the contrary is proven when it's not.

Instead of being a twat, you could always say "we don't technically know what made him impartial" but you've taken the twat route more often, recently.
Click to expand...
No. Read the statute. Then read the order.

The judge did not cite an “inability to be impartial,” at all. He made a citation to a statute that sets forth around a dozen different circumstances that prompt a judge to recuse.

Yes, that sratute includes impartiality among the circumstances, arguably twice, but it is not solely about impartiality. Many of the enumerated situations are conflicts that would be resolved by a change in one party, by a change in matter that is the subject of the dispute, or by new lawyers for the parties.

Therefore, it is false to say he recused “citing his inability to be [im]partial.” The statement isn’t an equivocation that may or may not be true, it’s a false statement of certainty about contents of the order.

Alone, that would be understandably erroneous. Obviously, you have made the same mistake, based on the articles. That should be a little embarrassing, given that you claim to have read the statute, but it’s not dishonest. However, the “because of Trump” part didn’t come from the articles, or the order, or the statute. That was completely made up. Which is why I simply asked him for a link to his source.

You, likely still butt hurt from me laughing about Eric Trump making you look like a gullible dipshit, were the one who couldn’t resist being a twat, and jumped in with “Google works.”

I can’t imagine that proving that this simple word matching exercise was too intellectually challenging for you is going to improve your disposition, so maybe try to work through the logic of whether the fact that this judge has already shown a willingness to (seemingly sua sponte) recuse in the civil case makes it more or less likely that he would then unethically sign a warrant that is going to be handed off to Trump or his attorneys?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top