Are Republican's claims valid that Trump's indictment is 'political'?

[Dadoalex]

They aren't fraudulent, jackass.

sure they were and that's what got your other hero.

If not, why the faux corporation
Why call it legal expenses
not to worry
Trump's ass will have a great time in supermax.

 

[bripat9643]

what you're looking for my tiny minded poopeater.
Maybe if you took your cheeto colored nose out of Trump's ass long enough for a single sniff of fresh air that pile of crappettes between your ears might generate a thought or two.

In other words, you can't answer the question.

 

[Dadoalex]

In other words, you can't answer the question.

You refuse to comprehend so why talk to a rock.

 

[Rumpole]

The goddamn Democrats claimed that Crooked Hillary was innocent, even after Comey laid out her crimes but then made the unbelievable and ridiculous determination that she had "no intent".

All you stupid Moon Bats are in denial about The Worthless Negro's lies and incompetency and Poatohead's corruption and disastrous record.

So just go **** yourself Moon Bat.

it appears we have stumbled upon a garden of invective, blooming with vitriol and impertinence, which, of course, says more about you, than anything else, a fact which eludes you.

First, as to the matter of Secretary Clinton and the email investigation, it is crucial to remember that the decision to forego charges was not solely the purview of Mr. Comey, but rather the result of a thorough investigation by the relevant legal authorities. Accusations of a partisan conspiracy are baseless and fail to acknowledge the due process that was followed.

Your pitiful epithets hurled at the current president are not rooted in reality. There is no evidence of any malfeasance on the part of Joe Biden. None, not to mention that given the sorry state of affairs he inherited from Trump, that he got passed an infrastructure bill that Trump tried for four years and failed, an accomplishment on par with Eisenhower's highway project, thus he's not doing that bad at all, with unemployment at very low rates.

Allow me to predict what your reply will be, it will be a
1. Lazy retort, snarky and sophomoric quip, ad hom, etc
2. Cop out
3. a vacuous claim or claims without substantiation of any kind
4. Any combination or all of the above.

But feel free to prove me wrong, which I sincerely doubt.

Cheers
Rumpole

 

[bripat9643]

it appears we have stumbled upon a garden of invective, blooming with vitriol and impertinence, which, of course, says more about you, than anything else, a fact which eludes you.

First, as to the matter of Secretary Clinton and the email investigation, it is crucial to remember that the decision to forego charges was not solely the purview of Mr. Comey, but rather the result of a thorough investigation by the relevant legal authorities. Accusations of a partisan conspiracy are baseless and fail to acknowledge the due process that was followed.

Wrong, it was solely Comey's decision. Lynch gave him that authority.

Your pitiful epithets hurled at the current president are not rooted in reality. There is no evidence of any malfeasance on the part of Joe Biden. None, not to mention that given the sorry state of affairs he inherited from Trump, that he got passed an infrastructure bill that Trump tried for four years and failed, an accomplishment on par with Eisenhower's highway project, thus he's not going that bad at all, with unemployment at very low rates.

You are delusional.

 

[Rigby5]

You saw the indictment? It was for an NDA? Can you link please? I thought it wasn't publically available.

You didn't know the statute of limitations is on hold when Trump is gone from the state for long periods?

How can you not know this by now?

It does not matter if the indictment is over campaign funds or private funds being used to pay hush money.
Both are perfectly legal.
And any relevant law is federal, not state.

There is no legal means by which the "statue of limitation" can ever be "put on hold" just because someone is frequently "gone from the state for long periods".
The only purpose of the actual law is to allow those who escaped prosecution by fleeing, to be later prosecuted if they are later captured.
The amount of time a person is out of state, is legally irrelevant.

 

[Rigby5]

Some law professors stood up for slavery, continuing to use child workers, denying the vote to women, and against marriage between the races. Some law professors are just wrong.

But not in this case.
From the impeachments to the illegal Mar-a-lago raid, Trump has been badly abused.
I am further left wing than anyone here, but these manipulations of law against Trump are completely illegal.

 

[Rigby5]

it appears we have stumbled upon a garden of invective, blooming with vitriol and impertinence, which, of course, says more about you, than anything else, a fact which eludes you.

First, as to the matter of Secretary Clinton and the email investigation, it is crucial to remember that the decision to forego charges was not solely the purview of Mr. Comey, but rather the result of a thorough investigation by the relevant legal authorities. Accusations of a partisan conspiracy are baseless and fail to acknowledge the due process that was followed.

Your pitiful epithets hurled at the current president are not rooted in reality. There is no evidence of any malfeasance on the part of Joe Biden. None, not to mention that given the sorry state of affairs he inherited from Trump, that he got passed an infrastructure bill that Trump tried for four years and failed, an accomplishment on par with Eisenhower's highway project, thus he's not doing that bad at all, with unemployment at very low rates.

Allow me to predict what your reply will be, it will be a
1. Lazy retort, snarky and sophomoric quip, ad hom, etc
2. Cop out
3. a vacuous claim or claims without substantiation of any kind
4. Any combination or all of the above.

But feel free to prove me wrong, which I sincerely doubt.

Cheers
Rumpole

I agree that Hillary's email server was not in itself a big issue.
But you are ignoring the main point.
Which is that by using her own email server, she could then violate every other law she wanted to, and leave no evidence, in violation of FOIA.
The question really is not the private illegal email server itself, but the motivation for having it.

People also totally misunderstand Benghazi as well.
The fact Hillary did not send in troops to defend Stevens, is NOT at all the point.
The real point is that it was totally and completely illegal to setup the money and weapons annex in Benghazi, that was regularly used to illegally fund and arm groups like al Qaeda and ISIS in the attempt to destroy governments unfriendly to the US, like in Libya and Syria.
It is for Hillary's criminal "Arab Spring" that she should have been executed, not over a useless drone like Stevens. She murdered millions of innocents.

We try to put all the blame on Bush for the illegal Iraq war, but it was not all just Bush.
It was also Hillary and Kerry who pushed for those illegal wars.
And Hillary greatly expanded the wars to Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

sure they were and that's what got your other hero.

If not, why the faux corporation
Why call it legal expenses
not to worry
Trump's ass will have a great time in supermax.

Corporations are always used because they limit your personal liabilities.
The corporation gets sued or convicted, and not the individual owners.
Everyone does that.
And since Trump was trying to gain the income that comes with being elected president, it was a legal expense.
It also aided the campaign, so was a legal campaign expense.
There is no legal basis for any charges.

 

[Dadoalex]

Corporations are always used because they limit your personal liabilities.
The corporation gets sued or convicted, and not the individual owners.
Everyone does that.
And since Trump was trying to gain the income that comes with being elected president, it was a legal expense.
It also aided the campaign, so was a legal campaign expense.
There is no legal basis for any charges.

Money laundering/.

 

[tahuyaman]

Money laundering/.

Money laundering ? Who’s using LLC’s to cover up corruption? Let me think about that for a minute.

 

[BULLDOG]

It does not matter if the indictment is over campaign funds or private funds being used to pay hush money.
Both are perfectly legal.
And any relevant law is federal, not state.

There is no legal means by which the "statue of limitation" can ever be "put on hold" just because someone is frequently "gone from the state for long periods".
The only purpose of the actual law is to allow those who escaped prosecution by fleeing, to be later prosecuted if they are later captured.
The amount of time a person is out of state, is legally irrelevant.

You should rush out and tell the courts. They seem to have a different opinion.

 

[Rumpole]

I agree that Hillary's email server was not in itself a big issue.
But you are ignoring the main point.
Which is that by using her own email server, she could then violate every other law she wanted to, and leave no evidence, in violation of FOIA.
The question really is not the private illegal email server itself, but the motivation for having it.

Numerous Trump Staff used private email servers.
What people might do if they could is not a cause of action prosecutable. It could be predication for investigation.

People also totally misunderstand Benghazi as well.
The fact Hillary did not send in troops to defend Stevens, is NOT at all the point.
The real point is that it was totally and completely illegal to setup the money and weapons annex in Benghazi, that was regularly used to illegally fund and arm groups like al Qaeda and ISIS in the attempt to destroy governments unfriendly to the US, like in Libya and Syria.
It is for Hillary's criminal "Arab Spring" that she should have been executed, not over a useless drone like Stevens. She murdered millions of innocents.

We try to put all the blame on Bush for the illegal Iraq war, but it was not all just Bush.
It was also Hillary and Kerry who pushed for those illegal wars.
And Hillary greatly expanded the wars to Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syria, Somalia, Yemen, etc.

Iraq was a bipartisan affair, but it was Bush & Co who did the bamboozling of congress and the US people.
You're beating a dead horse. After four years, no indictment. How many 'illegal' ops have been ordered by Presidents since time began? Hell, in Trump's first week in office, Trump got a soldier killed. During Bush, there were 13 attacks on US embassies and some 60 persons killed.

Shit happens. but nothing compares to the crimes of Trump.

Cheers
Rumpole

 

[Dadoalex]

Money laundering ? Who’s using LLC’s to cover up corruption? Let me think about that for a minute.

Trump
It was part of his conviction.

 

[2aguy]

You should rush out and tell the courts. They seem to have a different opinion.

Let me fix your post....

You should rush out and tell the democrat party controlled courts.....they seem to have a different opinion....in that they think the legal system is simply another tool to attack and punish their political enemies....

There....fixed that for you...

 

[Billiejeens]

Trump
It was part of his conviction.

What conviction?

 

[Dadoalex]

Let me fix your post....

You should rush out and tell the democrat party controlled courts.....they seem to have a different opinion....in that they think the legal system is simply another tool to attack and punish their political enemies....

There....fixed that for you...

We're not talking about Trump appointees.

 

[Dadoalex]

What conviction?

Future conviction

 

[Billiejeens]

Future conviction

So none.
Okay.

 

[BULLDOG]

Let me fix your post....

You should rush out and tell the democrat party controlled courts.....they seem to have a different opinion....in that they think the legal system is simply another tool to attack and punish their political enemies....

There....fixed that for you...

Is that the way it looks from inside the crazy MAGA bubble?