I've gotten a tiny bit of satisfaction out of the idea that Trump laughs at the mouth breathers who support him.
But I don't think that it ever fully dawned on me until just now JUST HOW pathetic it is that a very rich old man needs visit poor red America and bathe in the adulation of people he has nothing in common with, and has zero respect for? How bizzare and massively insecure is that?
But 9 years later, still at it.
I agree.
But I think he has no choice, because he may very well be being manipulated by someone who has dirt on him or he owes money to, etc., and that may be a Putin or someone else in power somewhere.
It is also likely that he does this to stay out of jail (self-pardon if he gets elected, and immunity from prosecution). And it is also likely that he does it to further his brand, for the profit of Trump enerprises and his family.
Yes, but he likely has advisors telling him that saying crazy red meat things at the rallies is NOT the best way to get back to the WH. And yet he persists. Suggests to me that it is NOT all about self-preservation, and IS about massive levels of insecurity and narcissism.
You are acting suspiciously like Carmine/Newman with that "question."
On this previous page, I posted two links reciting in detail some of the felonies that Trump has committed. See Post #12001 on Page 601. That was even in response to one of your posts.
You are acting suspiciously like Carmine/Newman with that "question."
On this previous page, I posted two links reciting in detail some of the felonies that Trump has committed. See Post #12001 on Page 601. That was even in response to one of your posts.
Convicted of 34 counts of felony falsifying business records for starters.
Labeling payments to a lawyer as legal expenses.
That's a fake crime and even if Trump's accountant did this it is a very minor misdemeanor.
Are you talking about Trump's Hookers case? Isn't that the case you lied to everyone about? Holy sh!t, it is that case! You lied about that one and here you are raising it again. WTF? Who goes on a message board and blatantly lies about something that never happened in a case when the entire case file is online? A very stupid and unsophisticated liar, I suppose.
Here's you lying at Post #3835 on page 192: "The jury was incorrectly instructed that Cohen being guilty of a crime meant Trump was guilty of the same crime."
That never happened. That sh!t you made up never happened.
You are acting suspiciously like Carmine/Newman with that "question."
On this previous page, I posted two links reciting in detail some of the felonies that Trump has committed. See Post #12001 on Page 601. That was even in response to one of your posts.
That's a fake crime and even if Trump's accountant did this it is a very minor misdemeanor.
Are you talking about Trump's Hookers case? Isn't that the case you lied to everyone about? Holy sh!t, it is that case! You lied about that one and here you are raising it again. WTF? Who goes on a message board and blatantly lies about something that never happened in a case when the entire case file is online? A very stupid and unsophisticated liar, I suppose.
Here's you lying at Post #3835 on page 192: "The jury was incorrectly instructed that Cohen being guilty of a crime meant Trump was guilty of the same crime."
That never happened. That sh!t you made up never happened.
From the instructions: "Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following unlawful means: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws."
There were no FECA violations and no crime relating to FECA. Putting this in the instructions was deliberate. Refusing to allow the FECA expert to testify was deliberate. Allowing the prosecution to lie and claim there was a FECA violation was deliberate.
That's a fake crime and even if Trump's accountant did this it is a very minor misdemeanor.
Are you talking about Trump's Hookers case? Isn't that the case you lied to everyone about? Holy sh!t, it is that case! You lied about that one and here you are raising it again. WTF? Who goes on a message board and blatantly lies about something that never happened in a case when the entire case file is online? A very stupid and unsophisticated liar, I suppose.
Here's you lying at Post #3835 on page 192: "The jury was incorrectly instructed that Cohen being guilty of a crime meant Trump was guilty of the same crime."
That never happened. That sh!t you made up never happened.
You are arguing with a site sponsored troll.
Let that sink in.
He is acting to generate responses and clicks, etc.
You are acting suspiciously like Carmine/Newman with that "question."
On this previous page, I posted two links reciting in detail some of the felonies that Trump has committed. See Post #12001 on Page 601. That was even in response to one of your posts.
Are you talking about Trump's Hookers case? Isn't that the case you lied to everyone about? Holy sh!t, it is that case! You lied about that one and here you are raising it again. WTF? Who goes on a message board and blatantly lies about something that never happened in a case when the entire case file is online? A very stupid and unsophisticated liar, I suppose.
Here's you lying at Post #3835 on page 192: "The jury was incorrectly instructed that Cohen being guilty of a crime meant Trump was guilty of the same crime."
That never happened. That sh!t you made up never happened.
From the instructions: "Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following unlawful means: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws."
There were no FECA violations and no crime relating to FECA. Putting this in the instructions was deliberate. Refusing to allow the FECA expert to testify was deliberate. Allowing the prosecution to lie and claim there was a FECA violation was deliberate.
If you say so, legal eagle. But anyway, THIS right here -- "The jury was incorrectly instructed that Cohen being guilty of a crime meant Trump was guilty of the same crime" -- is a lie. That's you lying at Post #3835 on page 192.
That never happened. That jury instruction never happened. You lied about it. You even appear to know where the actual jury instructions are located and you STILL lied about it. Do you know how fvcked up and weird that is?
From the instructions: "Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following unlawful means: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws."
There were no FECA violations and no crime relating to FECA. Putting this in the instructions was deliberate. Refusing to allow the FECA expert to testify was deliberate. Allowing the prosecution to lie and claim there was a FECA violation was deliberate.
If you say so, legal eagle. But anyway, THIS right here -- "The jury was incorrectly instructed that Cohen being guilty of a crime meant Trump was guilty of the same crime" -- is a lie. That's you lying at Post #3835 on page 192.
That never happened. That jury instruction never happened. You lied about it. You even appear to know where the actual jury instructions are located and you STILL lied about it. Do you know how fvcked up and weird that is?
If you weren't an imbecile and you had actually followed the trial you would understand why I'm correct.
Alas, you remain dumber than a box of sh*t.
"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following unlawful means: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws."
There was no violation of FECA.
The judge lied and you have been lying about this for weeks now because you're an idiot.