Proof Obama and Schiff tried to overthrow the government

[JoeB131]

During a lawsuit about sexually harassing a state employee.

A state employee who did not report to him directly, who suffered no negative consequences for rejecting his advances.

Whose case was thrown out as legally insufficient.

 

[Robert W]

A state employee who did not report to him directly, who suffered no negative consequences for rejecting his advances.

Whose case was thrown out as legally insufficient.

Paula Jones won her lawsuit.

 

[Rambunctious]

Most corrupt man to ever live in the white House...

 

[markef]

Why is it that even Republican leaning historians don't know that "proof?"

I see no reason to accept the ratings of raving leftist anti-American fake news propagandists.

 

[BackAgain]

He was impeached for lying about a blow job.

No. That’s false.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A state employee who did not report to him directly, who suffered no negative consequences for rejecting his advances.

Whose case was thrown out as legally insufficient.

Oh, well in that case his perjury was fine.

DURR

 

[markef]

Wrong again, higher court upheld the case.

What they disagreed with was the judgement amount against Trump Co.

Trump is still appealing to have his so-called hush money conviction moved out of leftist TDS kangaroo courts into federal courts, but leftist TDS judges on democrat payrolls continue to block the move for obvious reasons. Unjust convictions by biased democrat judges and juries are rarely overturned in democrat courts.

 

[markef]

Of what, exactly?

If anything, Obama showed restraint.

He could have exposed everything the government had on Trump's Russia ties BEFORE the election.

He didn't.

Mueller had to admit he had been sent on a wild goose chase by lying leftist democrats inspired by fake intelligence created by Obama sycophants. There was no Trump/Russian collusion.

 

[markef]

Wrong again, higher court upheld the case.

What they disagreed with was the judgement amount against Trump Co.

Democrats bragged about going after Trump before the election and that is exactly what they did. A TDS DA filed an out-of-date unjust lawsuit against Trump before a compliant TDS democrat judge. Only the slowest of legal experts cannot see the unjust bias and perversions of law in thos case.


Monday, March 30, 2026




Erik Uebelacker / October 28, 2025

File - U.S. President-elect Donald Trump appears remotely for a sentencing hearing in front of New York State Judge Juan Merchan in the criminal case in which he was convicted in 2024 on charges involving hush money paid to a porn star, at New York Criminal Court in Manhattan in New York, Jan. 10, 2025. (Brendan McDermid via AP, Pool)
MANHATTAN (CN) — President Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case “should never have seen the inside of a courtroom, let alone resulted in a conviction,” he said in a late-night filing to a mid-level New York appellate court.

In the 111-page filing, Trump outlined his long-awaited arguments to toss his historic guilty verdict, claiming that the case judge allowed the prosecutors to use insufficient evidence and should have recused himself.

“This is the most politically charged prosecution in our nation’s history,” Trump claims in the filing.

The appeal filed late Monday is rife with claims that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg only brought the case to kneecap Trump’s 2024 presidential bid — claims Trump echoed on the campaign trail and at trial when speaking to news cameras outside of the courtroom.

“The DA, a Democrat, brought those charges in the middle of a contentious presidential election in which President Trump was the leading Republican candidate,” Trump argues in the filing. “These charges against President Trump were as unprecedented as their political context."

Last May, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records, which prosecutors said stemmed from a sweeping and salacious hush money scheme aimed at quelling bad press during his 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump’s former personal attorney and “fixer” Michael Cohen testified at trial that Trump directed him to carry out a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who Trump was concerned would share details from their 2006 sexual encounter at an inopportune time during the election.

When it was time for Cohen to be repaid, he said Trump signed off on a monthly payment plan to illegally disguise reimbursement checks as standard legal fees. Trump signed those illicit checks from the Oval Office during his first presidential term, according to witness testimony.

Trump could have faced jail time for the 34 felony convictions, but got off without punishment following his 2024 election win. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan deemed that unconditional discharge was the only conceivable way to sentence an incoming president.

Still, Trump is trying to clear his name by claiming that Merchan should have recused himself from the case based on his supposed political past.

“The trial was conducted by a judge who refused to recuse himself despite having made political contributions to President Trump’s electoral opponents and despite having disqualifying family conflicts,” Trump argues.

 

[JoeB131]

Paula Jones won her lawsuit.

No, her lawsuit was dismissed. Her lawsuit was based on Federal Law, saying she had to prove some kind of negative outcome from the harassment, which she could not. She wasn't fired, she wasn't demoted, she wasn't denied opportunities for advancement.

Now, Clinton's insurance carrier eventually paid her "Go Away" money, about a third of what she was asking for, because after he had beaten impeachment, the cost of appealing would have run into millions of dollars. The only reason why such an appeal might have had legs is that SCOTUS had recently ruled in Ellerth v. Burlington that negative effects weren't necessarily needed to prove harassment.

Jones, for her part, found herself with hundreds of thousands of debt, because her right-wing backers lied to her about paying her legal bills. A few years later, she was boxing with Tonya Harding and posing for Penthouse to make money. (Don't google her Penthouse Spread. I wish I hadn't. Airbrushing can only do so much.)

The big thing that happened with that settlement is that Jones dropped her insistence on an apology for not seeing Clinton's weenie.

 

[markef]

No, her lawsuit was dismissed. Her lawsuit was based on Federal Law, saying she had to prove some kind of negative outcome from the harassment, which she could not. She wasn't fired, she wasn't demoted, she wasn't denied opportunities for advancement.

Now, Clinton's insurance carrier eventually paid her "Go Away" money, about a third of what she was asking for, because after he had beaten impeachment, the cost of appealing would have run into millions of dollars. The only reason why such an appeal might have had legs is that SCOTUS had recently ruled in Ellerth v. Burlington that negative effects weren't necessarily needed to prove harassment.

Jones, for her part, found herself with hundreds of thousands of debt, because her right-wing backers lied to her about paying her legal bills. A few years later, she was boxing with Tonya Harding and posing for Penthouse to make money. (Don't google her Penthouse Spread. I wish I hadn't. Airbrushing can only do so much.)

The big thing that happened with that settlement is that Jones dropped her insistence on an apology for not seeing Clinton's weenie.

The Clintons were heavily laden with rumors of serious crimes and many of the so-called investigations cannot dismiss the appearance of corrupted investigations.

 

[JoeB131]

The Clintons were heavily laden with rumors of serious crimes and many of the so-called investigations cannot dismiss the appearance of corrupted investigations.

Except you guys spent 25 years investigating the Clinton, and the only thing you could come up with was he lied about getting a hummer.

 

[markef]

Except you guys spent 25 years investigating the Clinton, and the only thing you could come up with was he lied about getting a hummer.

Are you aware that impeded investigations and corrupted prosecutors usually produce no evidence and no charges, regardless of the guilt of the person being investigated?

 

[JoeB131]

Are you aware that impeded investigations and corrupted prosecutors usually produce no evidence and no charges, regardless of the guilt of the person being investigated?

Who was impeded?

Pervert Ken Starr had 70 million dollars and unlimited power to investigate the Clintons. He had 70 agents combing Fort Marcy Park looking for evidence of Vince Foster's death.

He threw people in jail for refusing to testify the way he wanted them to testify.

And at the end of the day, he had to admit.

No Wrongdoing on Whitewater
No wrongdoing on Castle Grande
Vince Foster took his own life
No Wrongdoing in the Travel Office Firings
No wrongdoing in the FBI Files

 

[markef]

Who was impeded?

Pervert Ken Starr had 70 million dollars and unlimited power to investigate the Clintons. He had 70 agents combing Fort Marcy Park looking for evidence of Vince Foster's death.

He threw people in jail for refusing to testify the way he wanted them to testify.

And at the end of the day, he had to admit.

No Wrongdoing on Whitewater
No wrongdoing on Castle Grande
Vince Foster took his own life
No Wrongdoing in the Travel Office Firings
No wrongdoing in the FBI Files

We may not always know why even apparently good officials sometimes go bad or do bad for whatever reason. I believe money is usually the thing that persuades officials to lie, deceive, steal, or obstruct justice.

 

[JoeB131]

We may not always know why even apparently good officials sometimes go bad or do bad for whatever reason. I believe money is usually the thing that persuades officials to lie, deceive, steal, or obstruct justice.

Or maybe, and I'm just spitballing here. Pervert Kenny couldn't prove wrongdoing because there was no wrongdoing to find.

Let's just take one thing he was investigating, Vince Foster's suicide.

The initial investigation by the Park Police concluded it was a suicide. The guy was depressed because he was getting beaten up in the press every day.

Robert Fiske - the special prosecutor who preceded Starr, investigated and found. Yup. Guy was depressed and killed himself.

Now along comes Pervert Kenny, and he's gonna prove that Hillary offed Foster, who was also her former lover despite her being a power-mad Lesbian!!!

And after all those investigations, including scouring Ft. Marcy Park with metal detectors (finding bullets that dated back to the Civil War) he finally concluded... Vince Foster took his own life, because that's what happened.

 

[AntonToo]

Libtard professors loved him.

But wait a second, what about the supposed "proof"?

Only you partisan wingnuts are privy to it, but professional presidential historians have no idea about it?

 

[AntonToo]

I have looked it up.

View attachment 1236870

Good job!

And since you need more hand holding: next up is the part where you take a fact you've looked up and use it to make a point. For now you have none.

 

[AntonToo]

Democrats bragged about going after Trump before the election and that is exactly what they did. A TDS DA filed an out-of-date unjust lawsuit against Trump before a compliant TDS democrat judge. Only the slowest of legal experts cannot see the unjust bias and perversions of law in thos case.


Monday, March 30, 2026




Erik Uebelacker / October 28, 2025

File - U.S. President-elect Donald Trump appears remotely for a sentencing hearing in front of New York State Judge Juan Merchan in the criminal case in which he was convicted in 2024 on charges involving hush money paid to a porn star, at New York Criminal Court in Manhattan in New York, Jan. 10, 2025. (Brendan McDermid via AP, Pool)
MANHATTAN (CN) — President Donald Trump’s criminal hush money case “should never have seen the inside of a courtroom, let alone resulted in a conviction,” he said in a late-night filing to a mid-level New York appellate court.

In the 111-page filing, Trump outlined his long-awaited arguments to toss his historic guilty verdict, claiming that the case judge allowed the prosecutors to use insufficient evidence and should have recused himself.

“This is the most politically charged prosecution in our nation’s history,” Trump claims in the filing.

The appeal filed late Monday is rife with claims that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg only brought the case to kneecap Trump’s 2024 presidential bid — claims Trump echoed on the campaign trail and at trial when speaking to news cameras outside of the courtroom.

“The DA, a Democrat, brought those charges in the middle of a contentious presidential election in which President Trump was the leading Republican candidate,” Trump argues in the filing. “These charges against President Trump were as unprecedented as their political context."

Last May, a Manhattan jury found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records, which prosecutors said stemmed from a sweeping and salacious hush money scheme aimed at quelling bad press during his 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump’s former personal attorney and “fixer” Michael Cohen testified at trial that Trump directed him to carry out a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels, who Trump was concerned would share details from their 2006 sexual encounter at an inopportune time during the election.

When it was time for Cohen to be repaid, he said Trump signed off on a monthly payment plan to illegally disguise reimbursement checks as standard legal fees. Trump signed those illicit checks from the Oval Office during his first presidential term, according to witness testimony.

Trump could have faced jail time for the 34 felony convictions, but got off without punishment following his 2024 election win. New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan deemed that unconditional discharge was the only conceivable way to sentence an incoming president.

Still, Trump is trying to clear his name by claiming that Merchan should have recused himself from the case based on his supposed political past.

“The trial was conducted by a judge who refused to recuse himself despite having made political contributions to President Trump’s electoral opponents and despite having disqualifying family conflicts,” Trump argues.

Dummy, if you are going to quote me then at least ADDRESS SOMETHING in it. I'm not interested in your rants, deflections and copy-paste dumps.

You haven't refuted even a word of what I told you: Appeals court upheld the case, overturning only the amount in the judgement against Trump Co., not the actual finding that Trump Co. violated laws as a pattern of business practice.

 

[AntonToo]

I see no reason to accept the ratings of raving leftist anti-American fake news propagandists.

That's no way to talk about conservative historians.

You Trumptards just can't reconcile how your narrowly contemporary politics are viewed from the broad historical perspective.