Fat, Obese Trump is Indicted!!!

[Deluge]

6 minutes ago, Rebound said:

FACTS:

We have had 46 US Presidents.

Collectively, these 46 men have been indicted on a total of 71 felony counts, as follows:

Presidents 1-44: Zero Felony Counts

President 45: Seventy-One Felony Counts

President 46: Zero Felony Counts

ACTUAL FACTS:

The United States of America took a radical shift starting around 2015, making the government and the country itself almost unrecognizable today. 

The 46th president is not only a fraud, but a global communist; he wants the 45th president's head on a platter, and will stop at nothing to make it happen. 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

ACTUAL FACTS:

The United States of America took a radical shift starting around 2015, making the government and the country itself almost unrecognizable today. 

The 46th president is not only a fraud, but a global communist; he wants the 45th president's head on a platter, and will stop at nothing to make it happen. 

And it's bound to start a 'nuclear war' between the parties

There has always been an agreement that such crimes would be overlooked by both parties.  Trump got a 'talking to' right after he was elected and the next day suddenly he wasn't going to put hillary in jail any more,

This breaks that. You think the next president isn't going to order investigations like mad into biden and his son and look at charging them as fast as possible? You can bet on it.

[Legato]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

His head will explode in the first 10 seconds and then it's over.

 

Empty vessels usually implode.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

 You think the next president isn't going to order investigations like mad into biden and his son and look at charging them as fast as possible? You can bet on it.

I can't see Biden investigating himself or his son, but I do hope the next Republican President, if there is one, does exactly that.  No-one is above the law.

[Rebound]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

I can't see Biden investigating himself or his son, but I do hope the next Republican President, if there is one, does exactly that.  No-one is above the law.

If Biden committed a crime he should be prosecuted.  His finances are very simple and he’s published all his tax returns, so if he accepted illegal money, it can be found. 
 

But it’s a joke to pretend the Republicans believe in Justice when they argue against Trump’s Seventy-One Felonies charged, not to mention George Santos, who should have been kicked out of congress the day they swore him in. 

[CdnFox]

55 minutes ago, Rebound said:

If Biden committed a crime he should be prosecuted.  His finances are very simple and he’s published all his tax returns, so if he accepted illegal money, it can be found.

Yes -there's NO way to hid money from  your income tax.  (extreme sarcasm mode engaged)

Quote

But it’s a joke to pretend the Republicans believe in Justice when they argue against Trump’s Seventy-One Felonies charged, not to mention George Santos, who should have been kicked out of congress the day they swore him in. 

It's a joke to pretend the Dems do when they pressured the justice dept to drop the charges on Hillary.

 

[Rebound]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Yes -there's NO way to hid money from  your income tax.  (extreme sarcasm mode engaged)

It's a joke to pretend the Dems do when they pressured the justice dept to drop the charges on Hillary.

 

You can hide money from your income tax but once it’s more than a few thousand dollars, it’s very difficult to hide if the government is looking for it.  
 

Merrick Garland assigned a special counsel to investigate Biden’s classified documents and if there’s anything to this allegation, he will assign someone to look into it.  Biden cannot prevent it. 

[robosmith]

7 hours ago, Deluge said:

Only in your wettest dreams.

Trump will be your president, again, and you will have to suffer through success and borders - poor little communist...

Trump has NEVER had a majority of the vote nor majority approval except in a FEW outlier polls.

The ONLY way Trump can win 2024 is by CHEATING and THAT depends on Republican state legislatures AND the courts' enablement of their voter suppression AND taking over the count.

Apparently you don't understand that he ONLY "WON" by significantly less than 1% of the vote in 3 states. About 50K total votes, while LOSING the popular vote by the largest margin in history for an EC "winner."

The margin was so small, he would not have "won" without Putin's help. LMAO

[Legato]

19 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The margin was so small, he would not have "won" without Putin's help. LMAO

So, how did Putin help him win?

Oh yes I forgot. Putin gave Hillary the hammer to smash her phones and the bleach to douse the private server. and you no what, Hillary kept the hammer, so least they should charge her with that.

Edited June 14, 2023 by Legato

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, Legato said:

So, how did Putin help him win?

Ever hear of the Internet Research Agency? You know, the division of the Russian Army which was indicted by Mueller for directing the Army bots and trolls (mostly Albanians) who targeted US social media.

Of course you didn't because FOS LIES viewers are kept in the dark. LMAO

14 minutes ago, Legato said:

Oh yes I forgot. Putin gave Hillary the hammer to smash her phones and the bleach to douse the private server. and you no what, Hillary kept the hammer, so least they should charge her with that.

Smashing phones is an approved way of discarding old phones when you GET A NEW ONE. Duh.

Do you EVER stop trolling? Or know that Hillary does NOT KNOW HOW to use BleachBit? LMAO.

God, you're mockery is SO LAME.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

You can hide money from your income tax but once it’s more than a few thousand dollars, it’s very difficult to hide if the government is looking for it.  
 

 

Until it gets into the millions it's not even a challenge.

Start a few corporations, move a little money around, buy a house or two from yourself that you'd lived in, have your businesses own things you use and 'expense' meals and trips etc. its' remarkably easy.  Not hard to find an expert to do it for you if you have millions in dough,

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

Ever hear of the Internet Research Agency? You know, the division of the Russian Army which was indicted by Mueller for directing the Army bots and trolls (mostly Albanians) who targeted US social media.

 

Yes, As i recall it was found they had no actual impact on the election at all. 

I notice you forgot to mention that part.

[Deluge]

16 hours ago, robosmith said:

Trump has NEVER had a majority of the vote nor majority approval except in a FEW outlier polls.

The ONLY way Trump can win 2024 is by CHEATING and THAT depends on Republican state legislatures AND the courts' enablement of their voter suppression AND taking over the count.

Apparently you don't understand that he ONLY "WON" by significantly less than 1% of the vote in 3 states. About 50K total votes, while LOSING the popular vote by the largest margin in history for an EC "winner."

The margin was so small, he would not have "won" without Putin's help. LMAO

Sorry, election rigging is the only way you degenerates can win elections. Biden is a senile crook and has no business being in the WH - election rigging is the ONLY explanation for that sack of shit getting in the Oval Office. 

The key in this next election is to take away all the scams you perverts ran during the last election. No more bullshit pandemics opening the doors to mail fraud, no more sleazy weighted votes from Dominion systems, none of that shit.

Take the cheating out, and Trump beats the shit out of the hair sniffer. 

[Rebound]

2 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Sorry, election rigging is the only way you degenerates can win elections. Biden is a senile crook and has no business being in the WH - election rigging is the ONLY explanation for that sack of shit getting in the Oval Office. 

The key in this next election is to take away all the scams you perverts ran during the last election. No more bullshit pandemics opening the doors to mail fraud, no more sleazy weighted votes from Dominion systems, none of that shit.

Take the cheating out, and Trump beats the shit out of the hair sniffer. 

Sadly, falsely claiming election rigging is the only way you clowns can explain your loss.  
 

You guys lost because your candidate was a clown. He badly bungled the Covid response. He was impeached for soliciting a foreign nation to help him defeat his political rival. He was extremely divisive.  If you want to win, accept the truth that these are some of the reasons why Trump lost, instead of made-up, still unproven claims of fraud.  

[robosmith]

17 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Yes, As i recall it was found they had no actual impact on the election at all. 

I notice you forgot to mention that part.

You "recall" incorrectly and once again, fail to substantiate YOUR CLAIM, because you cannot.

What you mean is that no votes were physically flipped, not that millions of voters were not influenced by social media bots and trolls LYING on FB. LMAO

 

Quote

Kimberly Guilfoyle is confident that Trump is going to beat the case because Jack Smith doesn’t understand the law as well as she does.

^This reminds me of the Canadians here who pretend to KNOW US law. LMAO

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

Sadly, falsely claiming election rigging is the only way you clowns can explain your loss.  
 

You guys lost because your candidate was a clown. He badly bungled the Covid response. He was impeached for soliciting a foreign nation to help him defeat his political rival. He was extremely divisive.  If you want to win, accept the truth that these are some of the reasons why Trump lost, instead of made-up, still unproven claims of fraud.  

And it's amazing that the MAGA CULT believes Trump's BIG LIE, despite him not having poll results showing his election was EVEN CLOSE. 42% is never enough to win.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

You "recall" incorrectly and once again, fail to substantiate YOUR CLAIM, because you cannot.

It was in that report you posted a ways back.  I remember because it's so rare for you to even post a source.  But here's one for you

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_alan_i_abramowitz/did_russian_interference_affect_the_2016_election_results

oh - turns out i was right. Imagine that.

Are you EVER not wrong?

[robosmith]

Trump Left the Justice Dept. No Choice

Quote

It is hard to overstate the gravity of the criminal indictment issued against Donald Trump late Thursday by a federal grand jury. For the first time, a former president has been charged with violating federal laws, laws that he swore to uphold just over six years ago. It is the first time a former leader of the executive branch has been charged with obstructing the very agencies he led, and the first time a former commander in chief has been charged with endangering national security by violating the Espionage Act.

The indictment, unsealed on Friday, accuses Mr. Trump of 37 crimes. The majority of them — 31 of the counts — are for willful retention of national defense information, each a violation of the Espionage Act. There is one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice, in which Mr. Trump is accused of conspiring with his personal aide, Walt Nauta, to hide classified documents from the F.B.I. and the grand jury investigating the case. The other charges involve withholding documents, corruptly concealing documents and making false statements to law enforcement authorities.

The potential prison sentences for Mr. Trump add up to as much as 420 years, even though conviction almost never results in the maximum sentence. But this indictment confronts the country with the harrowing prospect of a former president facing years behind bars, even as he runs to regain the White House.

Mr. Trump and his Republican allies are already trying to politicize the indictment, insisting that the charges issued by 23 randomly chosen residents of South Florida were an attempt by President Biden to demolish his rival. But the evidence compiled by the government is so substantial that it is clear the Justice Department had no choice but to indict. 

 

[robosmith]

8 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

It was in that report you posted a ways back.  I remember because it's so rare for you to even post a source.  But here's one for you

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_alan_i_abramowitz/did_russian_interference_affect_the_2016_election_results

oh - turns out i was right. Imagine that.

Are you EVER not wrong?

Are you ever not wrong? Even your cite ONLY says "seems to be." And your cite bases "predicted" vote almost entirely on results of the Romney election of 2012 which is NOT NEARLY comparable to 2016. That's some damning evidence you dug up there. LMAO 

Quote

So from that standpoint, the answer seems to be no.

Meanwhile there is a plethora of evidence that details all the ways Russians influenced the elections.

Trump obviously thought they advantaged his campaign cause HE REPEATEDLY EXPLOITED Russian STOLEN DNC emails at HIS RALLIES. That's just the tip of the ICEBERG.

Here's What We Know So Far About Russia's 2016 Meddling

Quote

Hacking the Democratic National Committee

This access to the DCCC then allowed the hackers to penetrate the Democratic National Committee network. In early June of 2016, the Russian officers launched DCLeaks.com and posted thousands of stolen documents and emails there. Days later, the DNC announced it had been hacked, prompting the Russians to create the Guccifer 2.0 persona to shift attention away from them and cover who had done the hacking.

The Russian agents, posing as Guccifer 2.0, soon shared stolen documents with WikiLeaks, which promised it would ensure the material “will have a much higher impact than what you are doing,” according to Mueller’s indictment. On July 22, just days before the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks released more than 20,000 stolen emails.

This dump piqued the interest of the Trump campaign. According to an indictment against longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone, a “senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information” WikiLeaks had about Clinton’s campaign. Stone had been bragging about connections to WikiLeaks, and as the election approached, prosecutors say he continued to update the Trump campaign about the group’s plans. In early October, Steve Bannon, then Trump’s campaign chairman, reached out to Stone to express concern after WikiLeaks delayed releasing emails. But Stone reassured him and when WikiLeaks released Podesta’s emails on Oct. 7, 2016, just after the Washington Post published audio from “Access Hollywood” of Trump bragging about assaulting women, Bannon sent Stone a message: “well done.”

The FACT is, Trump ONLY "won" by a razor thin margin of less than 1% of the vote in 3 states. That means that EVERY advantage he had was CRUCIAL to his victory. Your cite does NOT show that Russian aid DID NOT give that kind of razor thin advantage, so you're wrong, again.

[Legato]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Are you ever not wrong? Even your cite ONLY says "seems to be." And your cite bases "predicted" vote almost entirely on results of the Romney election of 2012 which is NOT NEARLY comparable to 2016. That's some damning evidence you dug up there. LMAO 

Meanwhile there is a plethora of evidence that details all the ways Russians influenced the elections.

Trump obviously thought they advantaged his campaign cause HE REPEATEDLY EXPLOITED Russian STOLEN DNC emails at HIS RALLIES. That's just the tip of the ICEBERG.

Here's What We Know So Far About Russia's 2016 Meddling

The FACT is, Trump ONLY "won" by a razor thin margin of less than 1% of the vote in 3 states. That means that EVERY advantage he had was CRUCIAL to his victory. Your cite does NOT show that Russian aid DID NOT give that kind of razor thin advantage, so you're wrong, again.

Has Hillary returned the hammer yet, or are you hiding it for her. The bleached bit is about 6" below the head.

[robosmith]

As Trump faces criminal charges, here are 27 people he's previously said should be indicted or jailed

Quote

Not too long ago, Donald Trump said both Joe Biden and Barack Obama should be in jail for 50 years. He also wondered why Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine and Republican Sen. Marco Rubio hadn't faced criminal charges yet.

They are among at least 27 of Trump's apparent political foes that, since launching his 2016 campaign for president, Trump has explicitly stated or otherwise suggested should be indicted or jailed.

Not one of them has been charged with any crimes.

 

[robosmith]

Trump once said a president under felony indictment would grind the government to a halt and create a constitutional crisis

Quote

Former President Donald Trump said in 2016 that a president under indictment would “cripple the operations of our government” and create an “unprecedented constitutional crisis” – years before he himself was indicted on federal charges while running for a second term as president.
Trump made the comments nearly seven years ago about Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential campaign.

“We could very well have a sitting president under felony indictment and ultimately a criminal trial,” Trump said during a November 5, 2016, campaign rally in Reno, Nevada. "It would grind government to a halt.”

Now, Trump finds himself under the exact situation he repeatedly described after he was charged in early June with 37 federal counts related to retention of classified documents and conspiracy to obstruct justice. 

 

Of course, Trump has said any indictment (AKA, "Constitutional crisis") will NOT keep him out of the race.

 

So, he is a HUGE HYPOCRIT like his supporters HERE.

[robosmith]

Special counsel blasts Trump’s bid to delay documents trial until 2024 election

Quote

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team sharply rebuked Donald Trump’s bid to postpone until after the 2024 election his criminal trial for allegedly hoarding classified documents, characterizing the former president’s call for delay as unfounded and one of his key legal arguments as ‘borderline frivolous. 

LMAO