Ya’ll saying he didn’t falsify those records? Or are you saying he should be allowed to falisify records? I don’t understand.
i think it is important to note the fact that in this thread there is a real video of one guy partying with jeffery epstein and a fake picture of another guy standing next to some weird kid. also notable that the 2nd guy isn’t a political figure.
He didn’t falsify any records, paying Stormy Daniels hush money arguably had nothing to do with campaign finance.
There’s plenty of other reasons why he wanted to keep her quiet, like to protect his reputation for the sake of his marriage, family and business.
And also, it only makes sense to go after Trump for this if you hate him, they wouldn’t go after any other politician for something so inconsequential, even mainline lefty media outlets like politico concede this.
This is a strictly partisan move in a long line of partisan moves and if Trump doesn’t submit, apologize for daring to challenge the Clintons, the woke neocon establishment and agree to never run for office or make another political speech, there will in all likelihood be many more partisan moves to come, they won’t be satisfied until they’ve ruined him, or he’s dead.
The justice system has been weaponized.
did you read the indictment?
they impeached bill clinton for lying about a consentual blowjob, and im not sure if you remember john edwards from 2008 but you should read up on him and his case. none of this is actually unprecedented.
also he defintely falsified those records. that shit isnt something that opinions can differ about. pretty much as clear as it could ever be. maybe you believe that it shouldn’t be illegal, but it is.
like do you know how grand juries work? it was the grand jury that issued the indictment. are you american? do you know how american criminal proceedings work?
i wonder why michael cohen sat in jail for 2 or 3 years since none of this was against the law. i wonder why trump didnt pardon him like he did mike flynn after flynn pled guilty to acting as an unregistered foreign agent with his deals with turkey. you know those guys wanted to build nuclear reactors in the middle east right?
the whole thing isnt as simple as “wOke PeOpLE jUsT hAtE tRuMp”.
doesn’t gaslighting mean something like lying to someone in order to make them think themselves crazy?
he definitely falsified records. and the charges aren’t based on campaign finance laws, they’re based on record keeping laws in new york, where the records were kept. so your first point is both mistaken and irrelvant. also, you use the word “arguably”. my brother in christ, anything can be argued. just because something is arguable doesn’t mean that there is no truth. lucky for the defendant he gets to go to court, where he can make those arguments in a place where they matter and are of real consequence, rather than in the court of public opinion which is where he tends to prefer to litigate, because the jurors in the court of public opinion are a bunch of rubes who have 0 understanding of how any of this shit even works. people who couldn’t even bother to read the indictment for instance.
i love it that politico isn’t credible in your eyes, until they agree with you about something. that says a lot about your capacity for discernment.
there is more than 1 reason to go after him aside from that some people “hate him”…one of which being that he plainly falsified those records…which is a violation of the law…which he should know since he’s no dummy and has been a businessman for decades. you’re going to have to give up the argument that the records weren’t falsified. they were and it’s provable and as plain as day. black and white stuff here.
the republicans literally impeached clinton for a blowjob. and now that trump is being prosecuted for an actual crime he’s committed…it’s a partisan witch hunt? get. the. fuck. out. of. here. with. that. bullshit.
It appears he did falsify those records, but that by itself is just a misdemeanor in NY, it’s only a felony federally if they can prove he falsified those records to help his political campaign, which he arguably didn’t do, and I use the word arguably here because that appears to be the contentious part of this case.
This coming from a guy who took the Russiagate conspiracy theory seriously, that says a tremendous amount about your discernment.
The left have been slinging mud at him in the court of public opinion for 7 years now praying something, anything would stick, but in actuality this is the best they could come up with, something nobody but a partisan hack cares about, he paid a porn star hush money.
‘Wow whoopty doo guys, literally Hitler!
Didn’t I tell yuh?
I knew that guy was a traitor and the biggest threat to ‘our democracy’ in the history of the republic which’s why he’s the only president we had to indict’!
Firstly not a whole lot is very credible in my eyes, I take what the MSM has to say into consideration, but unlike you I just take it with a grain of salt.
Secondly I said even Politco, operative word there.
In other words if Politico said it then even someone who thinks very highly of mainline lefty media won’t be able to casually dismiss it in good faith.
Firstly two wrongs don’ t necessarily make a right, and secondly that happened over two decades ago and I’m not sure what Trump’s thoughts on the matter were.
I agree tho Trump should’ve never threatened Hillary if he wasn’t serious about going after her, he was bluffing and that was pathetic for him to do that, nonetheless Trump and the republicans didn’t actually weaponize the justice system to go after their political opponents, that’s just what dems have been doing like trying to destroy the lives of Jan 6ers for committing petty crimes.
so should he be prosecuted for his crimes or should he get special treatment and be allowed to break the law?
what do you think about rebekah jones having her kids put into the custody of cps as a result of posting a meme?
[tab]
[/tab]
…because of this, meme?
By that reasoning, everyone who has posted that meme around should be being ‘brought in…’ and charged.
The Dems tryna make the Reps look bad, in lieu of the upcoming US generals, couldn’t be more transparent.
The World is watching… in disbelief.
Special treatment?
Opinion | Trump Seems to Be the Victim of a Witch Hunt. So What?
It’s hard to believe prosecutors would bring this case against anyone else. But that doesn’t mean they’re wrong.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/03/30/trump-political-witch-hunt-indictment-00089011
They should drop the charge.
Given the list of crimes, it seems odd to find him convicted of these more trivial things.
Whilst 100s of his acolytes are now doing real time for their acts of 6thJan, I’m puzzled why the man who instigated the riot has not yet been charged.
Because from a legal standpoint, he didn’t incite that riot.
He called for peaceful protest, and you’re allowed to question the outcome of elections, dems do it all the time.
K: excellent use of conservative “whataboutism”
feel free to name a single “dem” who has questioned the outcome of
an election?
Kropotkin
This is just the tip of the iceberg, but here you go:
From Politifact:
[b]Did Democrats suggest 2016 presidential election was stolen?
Gov. Glenn Youngkin recently gave his blessings to an “Election Integrity Unit” established by Attorney General Jason Miyares, a fellow Republican, to investigate and prosecute violations of Virginia’s election laws.
Youngkin visited Loudoun County’s Office of Elections on Sept. 20 to watch officials test vote-counting machines. Reporters asked him why the 20-person unit is needed when, as Democrats note, Virginia elections have been basically clean.
“People have concerns about the election process and oh by the way, it’s not just Republicans; it’s Democrats,” Youngkin said. “Let’s just remind ourselves that in 2016 Democrats suggested that the election was stolen.”
Did Democrats suggest the 2016 presidential election, won by Donald Trump, was hijacked? The claim is often made by Republicans advancing Trump’s disproven claims that the 2020 presidential election, won by Joe Biden, was stolen by fraudulent vote counting. Youngkin, after some initial hedging, acknowledged last year that Biden was legitimately elected.
Youngkin’s office sent us a number of recordings of prominent Democrats saying that Trump’s 2016 victory was turned by events that occurred during the campaign, especially documented Russian interference on Trump’s behalf.
It’s important to point out, however, that the Democrats did not question the actual counting of ballots in 2016, as Youngkin’s statement implies, or that Trump won the election.
Let’s look at the information Youngkin’s office sent.
Hillary Clinton
In 2016, 2.8 million more people voted for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton than Trump, but she lost the determining Electoral College vote. During a September 2019 interview on CBS, she blamed her loss on voting restrictions passed by some states before the 2016 election and Russian hacking of her campaign that was later confirmed by a U.S. Department of Justice investigation.
Trump “knows he’s an illegitimate president,” Clinton said. “I believe he understands that the many varying tactics they used, from voter suppression and voter purging to hacking to the false stories — he knows that — there were just a bunch of different reasons why the election turned out like it did … I know he knows this wasn’t on the level.”
In an October 2020 interview with The Atlantic, Clinton said, “There was a widespread understanding that [the 2016] election was not on the level. We still don’t know what happened … but you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, ‘Whoa, something’s not right here.’”
Jimmy Carter
In June 2019, Jimmy Carter, the former Democratic president, said, “There’s no doubt that the Russians did interfere in the election, and I think the interference, although not yet quantified, if fully investigated would show that Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.”
Bernie Sanders
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is an independent who has twice sought the Democratic presidential nomination. During an ABC interview in January 2017, he twice declined to say whether he thought Trump would be “a legitimate president.”
“I think he’s going to be inaugurated this week,” Sanders said. “I have great concerns, apparently Republicans do as well, and there’s going to be an investigation about the role that Russian hacking played in getting (Trump) elected.”
John Lewis
The late Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., said in January 2017 he would not attend Trump’s inauguration. “I do not see this president-elect as a legitimate president,” he told NBC. “I think there was a conspiracy on the part of the Russians and others that helped him get elected. That’s not right. That’s not fair. That’s not the open democratic process.”
Jerry Nadler
Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said in January 2017 that Trump was legally elected but an “illegitimate” president.
“He was legally elected,” Nadler said. “But the Russians weighing in on the election, the Russian attempt to hack the election and, frankly, the FBI’s weighing in on the election make his election illegitimate. But he is the president.”
Nadler’s reference to the FBI concerned then-FBI Director James Comey’s disclosure to Congress, 11 days before the 2016 election, that he was reopening an investigation into whether emails stored on Clinton’s personal computer contained classified information.
Maxine Waters
Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., was among seven House Democrats who raised futile objections to the Electoral College count by Congress in January 2017 that certified Trump’s victory. They tried to argue that the election was tainted by Russian interference and voter suppression. They were overruled because none of their objections had required support from a senator.
Polling
Youngkin’s office also sent us an April 2022 Rasmussen poll. It showed that 72% of Democrats believe it’s likely the 2016 election outcome was changed by Russian interference, but that opinion is shared by only 30% of Republicans and 39% of voters not affiliated with either major party.
Our ruling
Youngkin said, “In 2016, Democrats suggested that the election was stolen.” He was referring to Trump’s victory in the presidential election.
Youngkin, a Republican, made the claim while endorsing the formation of an “Election Integrity Unit” by Virginia’s attorney general to investigate violations of the state’s election laws. He was at the Loudoun County Office of Elections, where he had just witnessed the testing of vote-counting equipment.
Democrats say the integrity unit is an effort to placate disproven Republican claims that Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election was caused by vote-counting fraud. Youngkin, in responding to that accusation, said concern over election fraud is a bipartisan issue.
Indeed, some well-known Democrats — including Clinton — said Trump’s 2016 victory was fishy. They mostly cited events that happened during the campaign, such as Russian hacking of campaign information and Comey’s announcement that the FBI was reopening an investigation into Clinton’s emails. They also complained that many states had passed laws that suppressed voter turnout.
But Youngkin’s contention that the Democratic response in 2016 equates with the Republican response to 2020 runs into trouble. The Democrats, while questioning events that occurred during the campaign, didn’t contend there was widespread vote-counting fraud that flipped the election.
The Democratic leaders cited by Youngkin’s office also made a distinction about 2016 that Trump and his followers did not about 2020. While the Democrats rejected the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency based on the oddities of the campaign, they acknowledged that he won the election.
All told, we rate Youngkin’s statement Half True.[/b]
I disagree with Politifact’s conclusion here, it’s a full truth, dems did suggest Trump together with the reps and the Russians stole the election.
Nonetheless, you wanted at least one example of a dem questioning the outcome of an election, now you have multiple examples.
Again we’re just scratching the surface here, I could on and on.