Based on clear evidence actually.Um….let’s review the people you’ve proclaimed guilty based on accusations without due process
Hunter biden
Fauci
Numerous election officials
Hospital administrators
Vaccine developers
Capitol police
Pelosi
Various news orgs
Trans people
Jan 6 conspirators’ prison guards
You keep making this reference that an indictment is proof that orange did something illegal or there would be no indictment.
Smoke just means something happened, it doesn't mean it was a felony-worthy conflagration, or a misdemeanor-worthy spark. You want to find the potential fire to handle or clean-up after it though. The evidence seen so far at least looks like a misdemeanor, and there is potential it is election-related. Nobody is above the law, even white-collar misdemeanors.
And he doesn't even get a Bud Light or Nike sponsorship out of it. He's doing it wrong...
I mentioned before that the dedication was impressive.
Slimy low-moral businessmen should pay penalties when they break laws in hopes that they'll stop being slimy.
It means he's likely guilty of at least the misdemeanor, and there is enough evidence of that to at least put out the fire/clean-up.
I agree that all laws shouldn't be broken and that a price should be paid by those who do that for whatever reason. Being or not being slimy though seems more like a subjective personal choice that shouldn't be addressed by any law. More to the current point, ONE businessman shouldn't be singled out for having committed a misdemeanor for whatever reason that a thousand others commit routinely.
"What a way to go through life, being such a laughingstock.I'm sure you're aware, blazers, but we're wasting our time with these idiots. These crotch remoras have such firm suction on the Donald's private parts that I doubt they will ever let go.
We can try until we're blue in the face to civilize them, but @pooponduke, @bluetoe, @nctransplant, @gunslingerdick, and the like will never be enlightened enough to understand the truth. What a way to go through life, being such a laughingstock.
Still, we do get enjoyment from the light workout, delivering jabs and uppercuts to these soft punching bags. And I have to admit, it has been fun gloating over the 2020 and 2022 election results. I can hardly wait for 2024!
"You just can't bring yourself to acknowledge that your predetermined conclusions on this are driven by your skewed perspective.
www.instagram.com
dailycaller.com
#shockedfaceI know some won't approve of the source, but it's not something I'd expect WaPo to run on their front page.
‘At Least 40’ Undercover Informants Were Doing Surveillance On Jan. 6, Defense Lawyer Says
Government agencies had at least 40 undercover informants engaging in surveillance work among defendants on Jan. 6, a defense lawyer alleged.
Some selected portions:
The government admitted Tuesday that eight FBI confidential human sources were embedded among the Proud Boys on Jan. 6, Roots reported in a Wednesday court filing, saying the Homeland Security Investigations (HIS) agency appears to have had some 19 informants active at the time.
. . .
"At least 13 undercover plain-clothes DC Metro Police (MPD) agents worked among Jan. 6 defendants that day, Roots said. He reported that federal prosecutors revealed information involving twelve of the officers on Friday.
. . .
“Some of these undercover Metro officers marched with the Proud Boy march,” Roots said. “And some appear to have played roles of instigators, in that they are seen on body-worn videos chanting ‘Go! Go!,’ ‘Stop the Steal!,’ and ‘Whose house? Our house!’ on Jan. 6. Others generally followed demonstrators toward the Capitol.”
. . .
“When added to the 8 FBI CHSs now acknowledged by the prosecutors, this means that there were at least 40 undercover informants or agents doing surveillance among defendants on January 6,” he concluded.
Which all circles back to the question of, with all that information and inside knowledge, how could all this have happened?
You must not have watched the mini-series.
and might I add.....yes, @prlyles, I actually believe this.I know some won't approve of the source, but it's not something I'd expect WaPo to run on their front page.
‘At Least 40’ Undercover Informants Were Doing Surveillance On Jan. 6, Defense Lawyer Says
Government agencies had at least 40 undercover informants engaging in surveillance work among defendants on Jan. 6, a defense lawyer alleged.
Some selected portions:
The government admitted Tuesday that eight FBI confidential human sources were embedded among the Proud Boys on Jan. 6, Roots reported in a Wednesday court filing, saying the Homeland Security Investigations (HIS) agency appears to have had some 19 informants active at the time.
. . .
"At least 13 undercover plain-clothes DC Metro Police (MPD) agents worked among Jan. 6 defendants that day, Roots said. He reported that federal prosecutors revealed information involving twelve of the officers on Friday.
. . .
“Some of these undercover Metro officers marched with the Proud Boy march,” Roots said. “And some appear to have played roles of instigators, in that they are seen on body-worn videos chanting ‘Go! Go!,’ ‘Stop the Steal!,’ and ‘Whose house? Our house!’ on Jan. 6. Others generally followed demonstrators toward the Capitol.”
. . .
“When added to the 8 FBI CHSs now acknowledged by the prosecutors, this means that there were at least 40 undercover informants or agents doing surveillance among defendants on January 6,” he concluded.
Which all circles back to the question of, with all that information and inside knowledge, how could all this have happened?
sorry, this didn't happen. Because @prlyles said it didn't, or at least he scoffed at my saying that it did. He said...I know some won't approve of the source, but it's not something I'd expect WaPo to run on their front page.
‘At Least 40’ Undercover Informants Were Doing Surveillance On Jan. 6, Defense Lawyer Says
Government agencies had at least 40 undercover informants engaging in surveillance work among defendants on Jan. 6, a defense lawyer alleged.
Some selected portions:
The government admitted Tuesday that eight FBI confidential human sources were embedded among the Proud Boys on Jan. 6, Roots reported in a Wednesday court filing, saying the Homeland Security Investigations (HIS) agency appears to have had some 19 informants active at the time.
. . .
"At least 13 undercover plain-clothes DC Metro Police (MPD) agents worked among Jan. 6 defendants that day, Roots said. He reported that federal prosecutors revealed information involving twelve of the officers on Friday.
. . .
“Some of these undercover Metro officers marched with the Proud Boy march,” Roots said. “And some appear to have played roles of instigators, in that they are seen on body-worn videos chanting ‘Go! Go!,’ ‘Stop the Steal!,’ and ‘Whose house? Our house!’ on Jan. 6. Others generally followed demonstrators toward the Capitol.”
. . .
“When added to the 8 FBI CHSs now acknowledged by the prosecutors, this means that there were at least 40 undercover informants or agents doing surveillance among defendants on January 6,” he concluded.
Which all circles back to the question of, with all that information and inside knowledge, how could all this have happened?
No, **** all politicians. Our political system is full of corruption. Limit campaign finance, do term limits, ranked choice voting, and hold people accountable for crimes ESPECIALLY if they are the ones leading branches of our gov.
100%. It is fascinating that various branches could have people in the crowd but were so poorly prepared for a bull-rush at the barriers and doors.
40 is nothing though.
Tbh if they didn’t have surveillance in all audiences of all presidents public appearances they wouldn’t be doing their job.I know some won't approve of the source, but it's not something I'd expect WaPo to run on their front page.
‘At Least 40’ Undercover Informants Were Doing Surveillance On Jan. 6, Defense Lawyer Says
Government agencies had at least 40 undercover informants engaging in surveillance work among defendants on Jan. 6, a defense lawyer alleged.
Some selected portions:
The government admitted Tuesday that eight FBI confidential human sources were embedded among the Proud Boys on Jan. 6, Roots reported in a Wednesday court filing, saying the Homeland Security Investigations (HIS) agency appears to have had some 19 informants active at the time.
. . .
"At least 13 undercover plain-clothes DC Metro Police (MPD) agents worked among Jan. 6 defendants that day, Roots said. He reported that federal prosecutors revealed information involving twelve of the officers on Friday.
. . .
“Some of these undercover Metro officers marched with the Proud Boy march,” Roots said. “And some appear to have played roles of instigators, in that they are seen on body-worn videos chanting ‘Go! Go!,’ ‘Stop the Steal!,’ and ‘Whose house? Our house!’ on Jan. 6. Others generally followed demonstrators toward the Capitol.”
. . .
“When added to the 8 FBI CHSs now acknowledged by the prosecutors, this means that there were at least 40 undercover informants or agents doing surveillance among defendants on January 6,” he concluded.
Which all circles back to the question of, with all that information and inside knowledge, how could all this have happened?
this wasn't an audience of the president or former president, but your point is taken. I guess if you substitute 'Congress' for president, it is a valid point.
Good to see you are still relying on those solid reports from a comedy show for your news.
GEORGE SOROS!!!
Yeah, I know. Fox news is propaganda and you know this as the self avowed person who doesn't watch the news (which would include Fox btw) but gets his info from YouTube with a particular emphasis on comedy central clips and they've told you it's propaganda.
I don't care where you, or anyone else, get your "news." And, the notion that you believe that you're somehow "informed" by consuming any of this propaganda is hilarious, to me. I'm perfectly content to enjoy the satire. No one "told me" any of it was propaganda. When you're detached from all of it, and have no vested interest, or trust, in any of it, and you see it objectively, then the "slant" is so fvcking blatant that the satire is almost too easy. It's begging to be mocked.
lol, your 'detached objectivity' is what's hilarious. You're about as above it all as a led (no misspelling) balloon. The only difference between you and any of the rest of us is that the slant that compels you comes from inside your own skull. And Alice in Wonderland.
I have no idea what I just watched. For beginners, people who don't basically understand that to use a camera effectively, you can't shake it all around, should be terminated to keep them from breeding or causing me to watch what I just watched.
I have to disagree a little. There are cases of truly mixed biology, and there are cases of truly crossed up gender (gender being the sex that one associates with). The (fill in the blank) that waited on me last night was not what biology intended, but then there was no hope of it ever accomplishing that. It was perfectly nice though, and as we have agreed, it can be whatever it wants to be as long as I'm not asked to participate in any of the lunacy that has come to accompany those who aren't the norm.
You can't be serious. Trump has yet to disappoint us with his predictable pratfalls and comedic buffoonery. And as with any display of such absurd behavior, its captivated audience members are just as hysterical, if not more so. And that means you, poopondook.
