Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget that Selzer planned to look at the data when her fraud was first discovered.

She retired rather than face scrutiny. That's something a guilty person would do.

It's not Fraud. Please.
You people would stone your own mother if Trump told you to.

Listen, we live in a world where a person can be found guilty of falsifying business records because in Feb of 2017 he labeled reimbursement to his lawyer of a cash settlement for an NDA as a “legal expense”. He labeled it as such using a drop down menu in accounting software. The conviction required the jury to believe that the Feb 2017 act was done in furtherance of defrauding NY voters in the Nov 2016 election.

So, don’t be mad that the convicted felon now has expansive views of the concept of “fraud” after his interactions with the legal system.

It wasn’t a drop down menu error. It was the CFO’s hand written note on Cohen’s bank statement for how they’d “gross up” the money being paid as a retainer to cover the taxes, when it was really reimbursement for an NDA. It was to hide it.

If you’re going to try to post a gotcha, at least get your facts straight.

The “falsified” was the labeling of it as a “legal expense”. The bank note was evidence….

But you’re proving the point. You all were all too happy to stretch legal theories into novel areas. And all that really matters is if you can get 12 Americans to vote guilty (and it helps if you have a heavy handed judge and a state AG who has no shame).

So, don’t worry about how ridiculous the theory against Selzer is. This will all play out in court.

What you’re saying isn’t legally sound, or in line with reality. Gotta feed that victim complex!

Anonymous wrote:Well, I want Trump punished for telling people to inject bleach into themselves to deal with Covid. How can I start suing him?

Anonymous wrote:Seltzer (or another insider) allegedly released the poll info early to the KH campaign. This is highly atypical for non campaign polls. Indeed, the Des Moines Register holds itself out as a non partisan actor. So there is probably some fraudulent business records case to be made here, too.

Throw in election interference, fake news, misinformation, release of business secrets, voter suppression through the “shock poll” and, yeah, she should be investigated and she should probably just go ahead and plead guilty. And that’s before the fraud on prediction markets.

Protecting our democracy is the most important thing. We can never forget Nov 2 and how she clearly harmed our democracy. Has anybody checked her for ties to Russia yet?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what the next four years is going to be like: Trump seeking vengeance on those he feels have wronged him, however slightly.

You voted for this circus.

Trump doesn't want to govern. He wants a circus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what the next four years is going to be like: Trump seeking vengeance on those he feels have wronged him, however slightly.

You voted for this circus.

If the Des Moines Register misclassified partisan political expenses as legitimate business expenses why shouldn’t they be prosecuted?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what the next four years is going to be like: Trump seeking vengeance on those he feels have wronged him, however slightly.

You voted for this circus.

If the Des Moines Register misclassified partisan political expenses as legitimate business expenses why shouldn’t they be prosecuted?