Indictment Monday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When he’s found not guilty, then what? Will you accept it or will it be because "the jury was filled with MAGA people"?

If he's found not guilty on this charge, I'll wait it out for the Georgia election tampering and Jan 6 indictments to come down. Things are piling up - finally. One hopes justice is served one way or another.

Don’t forget the classified documents he kept at Marlagogo..

Like the one's Biden has strewn all over his house in Delaware?

Yes I vote for him and I don’t mind he is investigated for it as well.

But you know he won’t be. And that’s the point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where's that civil war we were promised if Trump got indicted?



Stop making dumb threats that you don't intend to follow through on.
Especially not in defense of corrupt criminals like Trump.

The one leftists said would happen? If he is vindicated, make no mistake: There will be riots

[Anonymous]

Oh hey! "The first arrest will shock the world"! Lets goooooo!

(IYKYK)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

The problem is that a decent percentage of the country (I'd guess 20%) have so thoroughly identified themselves with Trump that they're totally unable to separate him being held accountable for his crimes with a direct attack on them personally. Look at how they talk about it " they are not after Trump as much as they are after all of us" "if they can come for Trump, they will come for you." You can't reason with that.

Twenty percent of Americans believe in unicorns, alien abductions, angels, crystals, and that the moon landing was faked. So?

You forgot that Elvis is still alive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

Remember the pee tapes (Lordy there are tapes)? Please produce. Remember the Steele dossier that even Steele himself was just barroom talk?

Pelosi said Trump has to prove his innocence. Agree?

Do you understand that Michael Cohen and Allen Weisselberg are, or have been, in jail because of this crime? The same one that there is an "Individual 1" who, as described in the previous indictments and sentencing documents are obviously Trump? I mean, if Trump's DOJ put Cohen behind bars for this, then why should Trump face court and possible jail as well?

Should Trump have to prove his innocence? Yes or no

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at the people supporting this crook. yet "lock her up" and he had 4 years and Hillary never was charged with a d@mn thing. If she was the crook, why didn't the Trump administration/FBI/DOJ prosecute her?

look in the mirror, Trump supporters. take the name "trump" out and put Hillary, Joe, Nancy and how would you feel?

Well, Hillary kept classified emails on a private server. She also paid for the Steele dossier. The Obama administration spied on Trump. HB purchased a handgun as a felon illegally. Where are the prosecutions?

The classified documents were classified AFTER they were on her server. Even Trump's DOJ didn't see a crime there and didn't prosecute.
The Steele Dossier started out as opposition research from a different GOP candidate.
Obama Administration didn't "spy" on Trump. Obama Law Enforcement was monitoring our enemies and spies, and oh hey, look who they were in touch with - a bunch of people from the Trump campaign. Go figure.
If HB did somethig illegal, he should be indicted and tried for it. If found guilty, then so be it. No one is defending him.

Comey disagreed. He stated it was a problem but there wasn’t ‘intent’. She didn’t mean to do it donchaknow. You honestly think that’s what happened with the spying? Really? Ask Page. HB did so something illegal.Many things in fact. On tape. Documented. The gun issue is on paper. Federal records. Nothing’s happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

Remember the pee tapes (Lordy there are tapes)? Please produce. Remember the Steele dossier that even Steele himself was just barroom talk?

Pelosi said Trump has to prove his innocence. Agree?

Do you understand that Michael Cohen and Allen Weisselberg are, or have been, in jail because of this crime? The same one that there is an "Individual 1" who, as described in the previous indictments and sentencing documents are obviously Trump? I mean, if Trump's DOJ put Cohen behind bars for this, then why should Trump face court and possible jail as well?

Should Trump have to prove his innocence? Yes or no

Given ALL the corruption and lying we've seen from him - yes, he should have to prove his innocence to the public

In a court of law, the prosecution must prove his guilt

Do you not get that distinction?

[Anonymous]

someone ins freaking out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at the people supporting this crook. yet "lock her up" and he had 4 years and Hillary never was charged with a d@mn thing. If she was the crook, why didn't the Trump administration/FBI/DOJ prosecute her?

look in the mirror, Trump supporters. take the name "trump" out and put Hillary, Joe, Nancy and how would you feel?

Well, Hillary kept classified emails on a private server. She also paid for the Steele dossier. The Obama administration spied on Trump. HB purchased a handgun as a felon illegally. Where are the prosecutions?

The classified documents were classified AFTER they were on her server. Even Trump's DOJ didn't see a crime there and didn't prosecute.
The Steele Dossier started out as opposition research from a different GOP candidate.
Obama Administration didn't "spy" on Trump. Obama Law Enforcement was monitoring our enemies and spies, and oh hey, look who they were in touch with - a bunch of people from the Trump campaign. Go figure.
If HB did somethig illegal, he should be indicted and tried for it. If found guilty, then so be it. No one is defending him.

Comey disagreed. He stated it was a problem but there wasn’t ‘intent’. She didn’t mean to do it donchaknow. You honestly think that’s what happened with the spying? Really? Ask Page. HB did so something illegal.Many things in fact. On tape. Documented. The gun issue is on paper. Federal records. Nothing’s happened.

Comey was head of the FBI. The FBI is not in charge of taking a case to a Grand Jury seeking an indictment. That would be the DOJ, so whatever Comey though is irrelevant. If Bill Barr didn't see enough for a crime, that should tell you something.

[Anonymous]

A line has been crossed, and a precedent set.

You will regret this, dems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

Remember the pee tapes (Lordy there are tapes)? Please produce. Remember the Steele dossier that even Steele himself was just barroom talk?

Pelosi said Trump has to prove his innocence. Agree?

Do you understand that Michael Cohen and Allen Weisselberg are, or have been, in jail because of this crime? The same one that there is an "Individual 1" who, as described in the previous indictments and sentencing documents are obviously Trump? I mean, if Trump's DOJ put Cohen behind bars for this, then why should Trump face court and possible jail as well?

Should Trump have to prove his innocence? Yes or no

Given ALL the corruption and lying we've seen from him - yes, he should have to prove his innocence to the public

In a court of law, the prosecution must prove his guilt

Do you not get that distinction?

The typical slide away from fact into DCUM fantasy.

Pelosi’s exact words: “ No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

Remember the pee tapes (Lordy there are tapes)? Please produce. Remember the Steele dossier that even Steele himself was just barroom talk?

Pelosi said Trump has to prove his innocence. Agree?

Do you understand that Michael Cohen and Allen Weisselberg are, or have been, in jail because of this crime? The same one that there is an "Individual 1" who, as described in the previous indictments and sentencing documents are obviously Trump? I mean, if Trump's DOJ put Cohen behind bars for this, then why should Trump face court and possible jail as well?

Should Trump have to prove his innocence? Yes or no

Given ALL the corruption and lying we've seen from him - yes, he should have to prove his innocence to the public

In a court of law, the prosecution must prove his guilt

Do you not get that distinction?

Pelosi evidently believes he has to prove his innocence in a court of law. Not surprising, really. We all knew she has difficulty grasping legal issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at the people supporting this crook. yet "lock her up" and he had 4 years and Hillary never was charged with a d@mn thing. If she was the crook, why didn't the Trump administration/FBI/DOJ prosecute her?

look in the mirror, Trump supporters. take the name "trump" out and put Hillary, Joe, Nancy and how would you feel?

Well, Hillary kept classified emails on a private server. She also paid for the Steele dossier. The Obama administration spied on Trump. HB purchased a handgun as a felon illegally. Where are the prosecutions?

The classified documents were classified AFTER they were on her server. Even Trump's DOJ didn't see a crime there and didn't prosecute.
The Steele Dossier started out as opposition research from a different GOP candidate.
Obama Administration didn't "spy" on Trump. Obama Law Enforcement was monitoring our enemies and spies, and oh hey, look who they were in touch with - a bunch of people from the Trump campaign. Go figure.
If HB did somethig illegal, he should be indicted and tried for it. If found guilty, then so be it. No one is defending him.

Comey disagreed. He stated it was a problem but there wasn’t ‘intent’. She didn’t mean to do it donchaknow. You honestly think that’s what happened with the spying? Really? Ask Page. HB did so something illegal.Many things in fact. On tape. Documented. The gun issue is on paper. Federal records. Nothing’s happened.

Comey was head of the FBI. The FBI is not in charge of taking a case to a Grand Jury seeking an indictment. That would be the DOJ, so whatever Comey thought is irrelevant. If Bill Barr didn't see enough for a crime, that should tell you something.

It’s not irrelevant. The FBI decided no crime was committed due to lack of intent so no need to seek indictment. “I’m sorry officer. I didn’t intend to drive drunk and cause an accident” would go over real well for a person of color right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A line has been crossed, and a precedent set.

You will regret this, dems.

Blah blah blah. Did you miss the insurrection that happened a little while back? Was that not a line that was crossed?

- former R who is pretty embarrassed by all of this cringy defense of a known tax fraud artist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it was very calculated that the “boring” state tax fraud case was the one that Trump was indicted for. He’s been indicted for actions he took as a private citizen - not a president and not a former president. Biden’s DOJ is not involved at all. A grand jury in the state of New York decided to indict based on the evidence before them.

This is an action state grand juries across the country take on a regular routine basis.

If anything, this signals the strength of our democracy and the rule of law.

I don’t believe this to be true. I think, unfortunately, this was the reverse of democracy, i.e. give me the man, and I’ll find you the crime. It’s not surprising to me at all, given this DA has let a lot of violent criminals essentially free to hurt others again.

Love the MAGA talking points here re: the DA. But what are you going to do when the evidence shows he committed the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt? No one made up these crimes to play a game of gotcha with Trump. TWO people have been convicted of crimes related to this. Neither had as much to benefit as Trump himself.

Remember the pee tapes (Lordy there are tapes)? Please produce. Remember the Steele dossier that even Steele himself was just barroom talk?

Pelosi said Trump has to prove his innocence. Agree?

Do you understand that Michael Cohen and Allen Weisselberg are, or have been, in jail because of this crime? The same one that there is an "Individual 1" who, as described in the previous indictments and sentencing documents are obviously Trump? I mean, if Trump's DOJ put Cohen behind bars for this, then why should Trump face court and possible jail as well?

Should Trump have to prove his innocence? Yes or no

Given ALL the corruption and lying we've seen from him - yes, he should have to prove his innocence to the public

In a court of law, the prosecution must prove his guilt

Do you not get that distinction?

Pelosi evidently believes he has to prove his innocence in a court of law. Not surprising, really. We all knew she has difficulty grasping legal issues.

This is DCUM, where people invent their own realities