Trump sentenced to unconditional discharge

What crimes has the President committed?

I am talking about Biden not the convicted felon

You can start here:






 
IMG_7261.webp
 
Wrong, he only limited it to the description the judge had of the laws. He did not allow the expert to describe HIS OWN interpretation of the law. The judge has the right to do that. Trump's lawyers can appeal that but they are not likely to win as the law was very clear and based on the law, he was found guilty.

Judge limits scope of testimony from Trump's planned expert witness


Trump's defense team wants to call election law expert Brad Smith to testify about federal campaign finance law. But the judge ruled this morning that allowing Smith to testify expansively on that topic would supplant the judge's role to determine what the law is.


This is kangaroo court stuff.
 
President Felon
Yes and thank you. We couldn't have another president Trump. If it wasn't for the bullshit charges you loons came up with! But in the end the felonies will disappear. Like the millions of dollars that was wasted and the reputation of the democrat party. Keep up the great work you're doing destroying your party!
 
Try as you did, all your investigations showed there was no influence peddling



"Comer, Jordan, and Smith Refer Hunter and James Biden for Criminal Prosecution as Part of Impeachment Inquiry of President Biden​




WASHINGTON—House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), House Committee on the Judiciary Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), and House Committee on Ways and Means Jason Smith (R-Mo.) today sent criminal referrals to the Department of Justice recommending Hunter and James Biden be charged with making false statements to Congress about key aspects of the impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden. These false statements implicate Joe Biden’s knowledge of and role in his family’s influence peddling schemes and appear to be a calculated effort to shield Joe Biden from the impeachment inquiry.

“Our investigation has revealed President Biden knew about, participated in, and benefitted from his family cashing in on the Biden name around the world. Despite this record of evidence, President Biden continues to lie to the American people about his involvement in these influence peddling schemes. It appears making false statements runs in the Biden family. We’ve caught President Biden’s son and brother making blatant lies to Congress in what appears to be a concerted effort to hide Joe Biden’s involvement in his family’s schemes. As part of our efforts to hold the Bidens accountable for profiting off public office, we are today referring Hunter and James Biden to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution for making false statements to Congress. This is not the end of our efforts to hold the Bidens accountable; it’s only the beginning,” said Chairman Comer.

“Lying to Congress is a serious crime with serious consequences. Both Hunter and James Biden did just that. They lied to coverup President Biden’s involvement in their family’s international influence peddling schemes that have generated millions of dollars. These criminal referrals are a reflection of criminal wrongdoing by the Biden family, and the Department of Justice must take steps to hold the Bidens accountable,” said Chairman Jordan.

As part of the impeachment inquiry of President Biden, the Committees are investigating the President’s role in and knowledge of his family’s international influence peddling schemes that have generated over $18 million for Biden family members and their related companies, and over $27 million when including the payments to their business associates, who often were used to transfer funds to Biden family members. The Committees have also identified an additional $8 million in loans—most of which has not been repaid—Hunter and James Biden. The Committees have not identified legitimate services warranting such lucrative payments and have found that Joe Biden often interacted with his family’s business associates as they were funneling the Bidens millions of dollars and lied to the American people about these interactions.

“President Biden claims no one is above the law. We will soon see his Department of Justice put that principle to the test. Congress cannot allow anyone, not even the president’s son or his brother, to stand in the way of its oversight of the executive branch or deny the American people the accountability they deserve. The IRS whistleblowers have provided indisputable evidence that Hunter Biden broke the law and lied to Congress during his February deposition. Lying to Congress to impede an ongoing congressional investigation is a serious crime. If the Department of Justice fails to act on our criminal referral and hold Hunter Biden accountable, they will once again be telling the American people there are two tiers of justice in this country. One for the wealthy and politically connected, and one for everyone else,” said Chairman Smith.

Summary of False Statements Made by Hunter and James Biden:


  • During his deposition, Hunter Biden made false statements about holding a position at Rosemont Seneca Bohai (RSB), a corporate entity that received millions of dollars from foreign individuals and entities who met with then-Vice President Biden before and after transmitting money to the RSB account that then transferred funds to Hunter Biden. After deposing Hunter Biden, the Committees obtained documents showing Hunter Biden represented that he was the corporate secretary of RSB.
  • Additionally, Hunter Biden during his testimony relayed an entirely fictitious account about threatening text messages he sent to his Chinese business partner while invoking his father’s presence with him as he wrote the messages. Hunter Biden testified he had transmitted this threat to an unrelated individual with the same surname. However, documents released by the Committee on Ways and Means demonstrate conclusively that Hunter Biden made this threat to the intended individual, and bank records prove Hunter Biden’s Chinese business partners wired millions of dollars to his company after his threat. A portion of the proceeds has been traced to Joe Biden’s bank account.
  • During James Biden’s transcribed interview, he stated that Joe Biden did not meet with Tony Bobulinski, a business associate of James and Hunter Biden, in 2017 while pursuing a deal with a Chinese entity, CEFC China Energy. His statements were contradicted not only by Mr. Bobulinski, but Hunter Biden. Mr. Bobulinski also produced text messages that establish the events leading up to and immediately following his meeting with Joe Biden on May 2, 2017.
The letter sent to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and Special Counsel and U.S. Attorney David Weiss and criminal referrals can be found here."





 
The Following was always going to vote for him, whether he committed the crimes he committed or not. The marginal voters responsible for electing him voted against inflation, not having a convicted felon as prez.
When the grand juries who voted to indict Cheeto looked at the evidence I'm sure they never considered The Following would be so depraved as to be inspired by Don's criminal behavior to vote for him.

What upset me the most were the square footage and property assessments.
I almost didn’t vote for Trump.

🙄
 
The Following was always going to vote for him, whether he committed the crimes he committed or not. The marginal voters responsible for electing him voted against inflation, not having a convicted felon as prez.
When the grand juries who voted to indict Cheeto looked at the evidence I'm sure they never considered The Following would be so depraved as to be inspired by Don's criminal behavior to vote for him.
Explain why Trump went up in the polls after every Dimwinger political, lawfare indictment, Simp.

America saw your schemes for what they were, and he ended up winning in a LANDSLIDE!

:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:
 
You are entitled to your opinion. Then again, what are your qualifications to comment on what the laws are? Are you a lawyer?
So you think one has to be a lawyer to know this case was a joke? :auiqs.jpg:
 
You are entitled to your opinion. Then again, what are your qualifications to comment on what the laws are? Are you a lawyer?

I'm basing my opinion on YOUR article. He hamstring Trump's defense.


"Merchan did not block Trump from calling Smith, a former member of the Federal Election Commission. But the judge said he’d be restricted to the basics of the FEC and to “general definitions and terms” in campaign finance law, like what counts as a contribution or expenditure.

Trump’s defense wants Smith to testify about the FEC’s policy that expenses that exist “irrespective” of a candidacy are not deemed to be campaign expenditures — evidently as part of an argument that the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels wasn’t campaign-related under federal law."



I am not a lawyer.
 
I'm basing my opinion on YOUR article. He hamstring Trump's defense.


"Merchan did not block Trump from calling Smith, a former member of the Federal Election Commission. But the judge said he’d be restricted to the basics of the FEC and to “general definitions and terms” in campaign finance law, like what counts as a contribution or expenditure.

Trump’s defense wants Smith to testify about the FEC’s policy that expenses that exist “irrespective” of a candidacy are not deemed to be campaign expenditures — evidently as part of an argument that the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels wasn’t campaign-related under federal law."



I am not a lawyer.
Did you understand this comment?

restricted to the basics of the FEC and to “general definitions and terms
 
Did you understand this comment?

restricted to the basics of the FEC and to “general definitions and terms

Yes, he blocked Trump's witness from describing "the FEC’s policy that expenses that exist “irrespective” of a candidacy are not deemed to be campaign expenditures."

Do you understand this comment?
 
Yes, he blocked Trump's witness from describing "the FEC’s policy that expenses that exist “irrespective” of a candidacy are not deemed to be campaign expenditures."

Do you understand this comment?
yes and it is up to the judge to decide what laws were broken and the interpretation of them.
 
Back
Top Bottom