-
34
-
hussars 1776 wrote:
trump2028_ wrote:
I live in a very democrat city (easily over 80% Dem in 2024). Republicans surely pay more than their proportional share of taxes.
Calling West Virginia a red state when it was fully blue until 2010, or Mississippi red when it had Democrat majorities until 2010 is also funny.
listen to the mental gymnastics of trumpers.
Mississippi has always been conservative, whether their party was "Democrat" or "Republican." And that is why it has remained poor.
the more conservative a state, the poorer it is. Automatic. And you try to say maga is about self reliance and hard work. Good lord.
The cities are the engines of wealth in this country and they have been run by Democrats for a long time. Not a coincidence.
If you don't have something smart to say, you can just choose not to say anything, you know.
Then California was "conservative" until the 80s.
Public education is failing in America, but blue states and especially blue cities have terrible public schools. But at least they can tell you all 58 genders!
15 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Then California was "conservative" until the 80s.
MAGAs did not exist back them. MAGAs are not "conservatives".
61 -
Jack Smith has said his evidence reveals Trumps motive for keeping those classified documents and so desperately trying to avoid giving them back. Even to the point of obstructing justice and committing new felonies.
This evidence is likely found in volume 2. But Judge Cannon is running interference to make sure the public does not get to see it.
This exchange indicates Jack Smith would like to share it but he is obeying the law.
And based on your indictment, is there information that led you to believe that he was aware that at least some of these documents are highly sensitive documents?
A
Yes.
Q
Can you draw any conclusions about his refusal to return those documents in spite of having been given multiple opportunities?
A
I don't think I can answer that question because it may involve nonpublic facts that are a part of the final report that is currently under an injunction.
Q
Okay. Can you draw any conclusions about his motive for refusing to return these documents?
A Unless you can point me to a filing, a public filing on that issue, I don't want to run any risk of running afoul of the injunction. And so without a public filing on that issue, I don't think I can answer that.
Just one last question. Did you come across in the course of your investigation any evidence about why President Trump took those documents in the first place?
A Again, I don't think that's in the indictment here, and unless you have a public filing, that given the current state of the injunction, I don't think that's a question I can answer.
Okay. Thank you.40 -
Oldrunningguy wrote:
Jack Smith has said his evidence reveals Trumps motive for keeping those classified documents and so desperately trying to avoid giving them back. Even to the point of obstructing justice and committing new felonies.
This evidence is likely found in volume 2. But Judge Cannon is running interference to make sure the public does not get to see it.
This exchange indicates Jack Smith would like to share it but he is obeying the law.
And based on your indictment, is there information that led you to believe that he was aware that at least some of these documents are highly sensitive documents?
A
Yes.
Q
Can you draw any conclusions about his refusal to return those documents in spite of having been given multiple opportunities?
A
I don't think I can answer that question because it may involve nonpublic facts that are a part of the final report that is currently under an injunction.
Q
Okay. Can you draw any conclusions about his motive for refusing to return these documents?
A Unless you can point me to a filing, a public filing on that issue, I don't want to run any risk of running afoul of the injunction. And so without a public filing on that issue, I don't think I can answer that.
Just one last question. Did you come across in the course of your investigation any evidence about why President Trump took those documents in the first place?
A Again, I don't think that's in the indictment here, and unless you have a public filing, that given the current state of the injunction, I don't think that's a question I can answer.
Okay. Thank you.Corrupt Jack Smith led an unconstitutional witch hunt against Trump. It was a complete sham - the very definition of lawfare!
26 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Equalss wrote:
Trumpers: Can we get an update on what Tommy Homan did with the 50 grand in the greasy paper bag from the FBI?
Only the best people.
Can we get an update on this?
"On the 30th, Trump and Nauta spoke by phone for about 30 seconds. And very shortly after that, over a period of a little less than two hours, Nauta moved another 50 boxes from the storage room."
[That was the day after Trump met with his attorneys about the grand jury subpoena for the documents].
70 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Equalss wrote:
Yes, Trump and his cabinet have “talent” written all over them. 100% merit.
I think that picking and advertising pronouns is probably BS.
You know what’s infinitely worse? Pete Hegseth is SECDEF. Ditto many others.
Hegseth is the Secretary of War. Not defense. There might have been people better than him, but he's infinitely better than Rachel Levine or Sam Brinton.
IIRC neither Levine nor Brinton served as SECDEF.
00 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Equalss wrote:
Trumpers: Can we get an update on what Tommy Homan did with the 50 grand in the greasy paper bag from the FBI?
Only the best people.
Can we get an update on this?
nypost.com
Hunter Biden says his art sales plunged since dad left White House, bemoans LA wildfires — as he claims he’s broke in bombshell legal filingHelp me out here: Was Hunter Biden ever a member of the U.S. government?
50 -
13
-
trump2028_ wrote:
Oldrunningguy wrote:
Jack Smith has said his evidence reveals Trumps motive for keeping those classified documents and so desperately trying to avoid giving them back. Even to the point of obstructing justice and committing new felonies.
This evidence is likely found in volume 2. But Judge Cannon is running interference to make sure the public does not get to see it.
This exchange indicates Jack Smith would like to share it but he is obeying the law.
And based on your indictment, is there information that led you to believe that he was aware that at least some of these documents are highly sensitive documents?
A
Yes.
Q
Can you draw any conclusions about his refusal to return those documents in spite of having been given multiple opportunities?
A
I don't think I can answer that question because it may involve nonpublic facts that are a part of the final report that is currently under an injunction.
Q
Okay. Can you draw any conclusions about his motive for refusing to return these documents?
A Unless you can point me to a filing, a public filing on that issue, I don't want to run any risk of running afoul of the injunction. And so without a public filing on that issue, I don't think I can answer that.
Just one last question. Did you come across in the course of your investigation any evidence about why President Trump took those documents in the first place?
A Again, I don't think that's in the indictment here, and unless you have a public filing, that given the current state of the injunction, I don't think that's a question I can answer.
Okay. Thank you.Corrupt Jack Smith led an unconstitutional witch hunt against Trump. It was a complete sham - the very definition of lawfare!
I've often criticized Jack Straw's decision to only Indict Trump and not the 6 other co-conspirator criminals: Giuliani, John Eastman, Kraken Powell, Jeff Clark, The Cheeseman, and drunken illegal Russian immigrant Boris Epshteyn. Straw appears to say it was for ease of presentation of evidence:
"Two points. One, as I said, we were considering prosecutions of these people, and I think --
I don't want to say what the ultimate conclusion of that would have been, but that was something that was being considered. The second thing I think to understand contextually is this was a case where the issue was how to present it in a concise way. We had so many witnesses, again, so many witnesses who were allies of President Trump available to us to testify. This was not a case where we needed more witnesses, it was a case where we needed to be able to present the case in a streamlined way because there was so much evidence."I think what he's saying is that he didn't want to complicate an already incredibly complicated trial with evidence about other criminals (assumes they would all be tried together) and was going to indict the other scumbag liars after the Trump trial.
I'm not seeing any testimony about when Trump threw the plate of spaghetti at Giuliani and left him standing there like an object of humiliation. I think everyone avoided asking those questions of Straw because they didn't want to humiliate Giuliani further. And it's not really relevant either. Trump's constant abuse of Giuliani isn't really relevant to Trump's decision to create Fake Elector certificates or store Top Secret documents in his bathroom.
40 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Heh
right wingers now running away from states rights as fast as they can. Whoddathunk ‘conservatives’ would be calling for more power to DC and less to localities!!!!!!!
oh America .
22 -
Is there any doubt in anyone’s mind that indicted somalis will be approaching piggie’s bagmen and ask how much they need to ‘donate’ to buy pardons?
61 -
Oldrunningguy wrote:
We are at a strange place as a country. When you read about Trumps criminal and corrupt conduct it is damning and he should be in prison.
How did we get to the point that Presidential conduct could be a hundred times worse than Nixon and yet the people just shrug their shoulders and say “ That’s just Trump being Trump”?
But more importantly, will the nation ever return to have a lawful administration , DOJ, FBI?
People need to know if their president is a crook.
Trump isn't a crook.
He earned everything he has.
05 -
Hussars 1776.1 wrote:
trump2028_ wrote:
Heh
right wingers now running away from states rights as fast as they can. Whoddathunk ‘conservatives’ would be calling for more power to DC and less to localities!!!!!!!
oh America .
It is Democrats who have always been for states rights.
1861-1865, Little Rock, etc...
03 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Oldrunningguy wrote:
Jack Smith has said his evidence reveals Trumps motive for keeping those classified documents and so desperately trying to avoid giving them back. Even to the point of obstructing justice and committing new felonies.
This evidence is likely found in volume 2. But Judge Cannon is running interference to make sure the public does not get to see it.
This exchange indicates Jack Smith would like to share it but he is obeying the law.
And based on your indictment, is there information that led you to believe that he was aware that at least some of these documents are highly sensitive documents?
A
Yes.
Q
Can you draw any conclusions about his refusal to return those documents in spite of having been given multiple opportunities?
A
I don't think I can answer that question because it may involve nonpublic facts that are a part of the final report that is currently under an injunction.
Q
Okay. Can you draw any conclusions about his motive for refusing to return these documents?
A Unless you can point me to a filing, a public filing on that issue, I don't want to run any risk of running afoul of the injunction. And so without a public filing on that issue, I don't think I can answer that.
Just one last question. Did you come across in the course of your investigation any evidence about why President Trump took those documents in the first place?
A Again, I don't think that's in the indictment here, and unless you have a public filing, that given the current state of the injunction, I don't think that's a question I can answer.
Okay. Thank you.Corrupt Jack Smith led an unconstitutional witch hunt against Trump. It was a complete sham - the very definition of lawfare!
Dozens of legit reasons to pursue Trump legally.
But not one of those avenues were traversed.
All BS charges
13 -
Newname wrote:
trump2028_ wrote:
Corrupt Jack Smith led an unconstitutional witch hunt against Trump. It was a complete sham - the very definition of lawfare!
Dozens of legit reasons to pursue Trump legally.
But not one of those avenues were traversed.
All BS charges
Doesn't look like BS charges to me, Newmans.
50 -
man who never existed wrote:
Hussars 1776.1 wrote:
Heh
right wingers now running away from states rights as fast as they can. Whoddathunk ‘conservatives’ would be calling for more power to DC and less to localities!!!!!!!
oh America .
It is Democrats who have always been for states rights.
1861-1865, Little Rock, etc...
Do posters like this one truly think Jim Crow whites in 1950s Mississippi were liberals? Biden voters? Obama voters? Mamdani types maybe?
I mean what exactly does a person like this know and not know?40 -
trump2028_ wrote:
I live in a very democrat city (easily over 80% Dem in 2024).
Is that why you have no friends? Or some other excuse?
21 -
trump2028_ wrote:
Equalss wrote:
Trumpers: Can we get an update on what Tommy Homan did with the 50 grand in the greasy paper bag from the FBI?
Only the best people.
Can we get an update on this?
Homan is but the very tip of the Trump corruption iceberg, and your Hunter equivalency still falls far, far short of it.
40 -
Equalss wrote:
trump2028_ wrote:
Can we get an update on this?
Homan is but the very tip of the Trump corruption iceberg, and your Hunter equivalency still falls far, far short of it.
…and tell us, is the DOJ investigating Homan, or any other member of the administration, or Trump, or his family?
30
