Weren't most of these various charges filed before Trump even decided to run again? Answer - yes.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
I think I understand the issue now, you can't understand basic English. I specifically said if it was donated to HIM he can't spend it on her for president. If she is part of the filing, it would be donated to THEM. I don't know what fund you are talking about, though. If it's third party, it might be a general fund to donate to anyone. Biden's campaign fund would be donations for HIM to be president, unless as I mentioned earlier, they put in some kind of weird loophole when setting it up.
I just don't see them nominating her. Nobody likes her and it's a guaranteed loss. They'd be better off with Biden.
they led him away before he could boast about beating medicare. Oh wait, I thought that was someone else.
quiz: which image below is Mitch McConnell and which is Joe Biden?
Last edited:
It matters because even with the most biased grand-jury participants you still need something technically criminal to charge someone with. I'm talking about reality in which one pres did something that seems treasonous, many respected RINO other than Mitch have said so and pretty much everyone other than MAGA-brainholed people have said so. Are other presidents committing serious crimes?
Biden took docs and special counsel DID investigate, but he was cooperative and there wasn't enough evidence to prove intent partly due to old man charm and memory. There wasn't enough meat for the charge to stick. In contrast, Trump wasn't cooperative (he lied about the docs, tried to conceal his theft, and paraded them to guests at maralago).
If Biden willfully took docs and was uncooperative, wouldn't you want him charged with a crime? If Biden pressured state AGs and pushed a fake/alternative elector scheme involving a disruption of the certification wouldn't you want him charged with a crime?
So what are the charges Biden could face when an illegal immigrant commits a crime? How could he even be an accessory? Shouldn't an American president ponder the criminality of his actions before doing them? If he did could be charged with accessory to murder then he should be prosecuted. If a president can face charges for lying maybe we focus out attacks on Afghanistan instead of Iraq 20 yrs ago.
That is why my question matters.
excuse me, but I think you lit that weak fire. We're just putting it out for you.
he DID willfully take docs, no less so than Trump did and arguably even worse. This is like the stupidity of a hate crime. If someone shoots one of your loved ones dead, do you really give two shits whether the killer acted out of hate or greed or pure meanness? The cooperation bullshit is the lamest of excuses for not prosecuting Biden on equal terms with Trump. Even more so than the 'oh he's so old and senile' crap.
I gave this a like because I want it to be as true as it should be, but as I've pointed out before; never underestimate the power of the dem sheep to flock up a wet dream.
Fani/GA stuff was started '21.
June 2022, the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack said it had enough evidence to recommend that the Department of Justice indict Trump.
Word salad that basically was TDS on display and excuses for PawPaw.
Better bottle up your cope. You’re gonna need a bunch soon.
and you just said it. Lying and concealment is a crime in and of itself. If that should be charged additionally, then do so. Don't use that as an excuse to not prosecute the main crime equally. How much more plain can it be that the left is the one turning our democracy into a third world type power grab.
You hit the nail on the head and seem to not even realize it, which is weird considering how much you pointed to all the convictions resulting from the Russia collusion investigation, which were largely based on.....you guessed it...lying and concealment, and not any sort of collusive activity with Russia. Of course that didn't stop you and the other demwits from continuing to assail Trump for 'collusion'.
I don't think we can trust any stuff like this any more than a coach saying "i live this team i'm staying".
I can't keep up with everybody you try to use to prop up your lame assertions. I'm sure you have a ready list of anti-Trumpers to draw from. Go ahead and start your weak little fires, and we'll continue to roast marshmallows over them. I wonder how long it'll take for you to get down to quoting @prlyles.
there isn’t the neg poll bump many including me expected regarding biden. Only a couple points. Obama lost like 6 points after his debate loss. Crazy. That will help biden decide to stay in the race I would think. I’m sure they think they can make it up.
which I think is why some have been circling the wagons around Biden. Reminds me a little of Custer's last stand though. Shouldn't have gone to the Little Big Horn to begin with, thinking pure bravado could prevail.
Too many Indians, not enough ammo, and no exit strategy..
Why you bringing Elizabeth Warren into this?
You keep going back to this like the dates were determinative. This was the worst kept secret since Trump originally announced after coming down that golden escalator - and considering all the so-called leaks and unnamed sources, that's saying something. How many times does it have to get stated by yourself and others that he's the leader of the R's, yada yada? If, Trump had gone quietly into the night and "accepted" the election loss, maybe. But that never happened. Indeed, the prosecutions may well have prompted him to run again if he was teetering.
Running or not, what came first or second: none of it matters. The fact remains that the opposition has done and would do anything they could to derail the Trump Train. Part of that is living with the consequences. No president has ever been pursued in this fashion (and it simply doesn't matter whether it is justified or not). Had it not been pursued, Trump never files for claims of immunity. Rather than attacking the Court for what they correctly did and was widely expected in light of the circumstances, just accept the result of lawfare against Trump. It's just silly to think that he wouldn't avail himself of any and all options he could utilize.
these were talking stages. You want to make a more tit for tat comparison, and discuss when Trump started considering running again as opposed to officially announcing?
we now know she's only a half-breed. And I use the term half-breed only in humor and in the most respectful way, except in her case. She typifies the hypocrisy and dishonesty inherent in liberals and I loathe her more than I do most. She gives Pocahontas a bad name.
It's not like she's the only choice, though. There's a couple of hundred million people that could beat Trump. They have plenty of options.
America just completely ****ed it up this year. More than normal. You have a guy who is brain dead and can't stand up straight as one choice. In any other election that guy gets beat by 20%, but his opponent is so bad that there is still a chance he wins. Think about that for a second. Trump is going to have to campaign against a guy who is half dead. Any other candidate could just sleep until election day and still win.
ah yes, but there's a wild card in play. To dump Biden is bad enough, even though it would be explained away as his becoming senile in a short period of time, having been so adept up to that point (yeah, right). You can't do that with Kamala. She hasn't changed. You dump her and you admit that she flat out sucked balls from the get go just like we've been saying all along (both figuratively and literally). Dems don't make those kinds of admissions, being the party which is always
isn't it amazing what a mere eight years of relentless media negativity and contrived political and legal persecution can do for a man's image? Fake investigations, bogus impeachments, a character assassination telethon, accusers suddenly appearing from out of the past, felonious bookkeeping entries, the hyperbolical specter of a demised democracy, etc,, etc. THAT is what is truly striking, that a man can be consistently pilloried like this for so long and yet actually have an even chance of winning.
Biden absolutely did willfully take documents and store them unsafely. The crux of the matter isn’t that he returned them, it’s that he wasn’t entitled to take them as he wasn’t POTUS.
Care to name a mere 100,000 then?
Always believe what people do, not what they say. This particularly applies to politicians who are expert liars.
Classic example of Dims misrepresenting the truth, taking six words out of a statement and using them completely out of context. Dims have to lie and obfuscate to further their agenda because their policies are by and large shite.
The funny part here is that you think you're being witty.
You thought you were being witty. Name 100. Or even 5. I’m sure the DNC would appreciate any help. Michelle ma belle is the only one who scares me.
Last edited:
Similar threads
