Miscellaneous Trump (1 Viewer)

[Huntn]

Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'​

Anxiety surges as Donald Trump may be indicted soon: Why 2024 is 'the final battle' and 'the big one'

Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the 2024 election.

www.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON – It looks like American politics is entering a new age of anxiety, triggered by an unprecedented legal development: The potential indictment of a former president and current presidential candidate.

Donald Trump's many legal problems – and calls for protests by his followers – have generated new fears of political violence and anxiety about the unknowable impact all this will have on the already-tense 2024 presidential election

I’ll reframe this is a more accurate way, Are Presidents above the law? This new age was spurred into existence when home grown dummies elected a corrupt, mentally ill, anti-democratic, would be dictator as President and don’t bother to hold him responsible for his crimes, don’t want to because in the ensuing mayhem and destruction, they think they will be better off. The man is actually advocating violence (not the first time). And btw, screw democracy too. If this feeling spreads, we are In deep shirt.

This goes beyond one treasonous Peice of work and out to all his minions. This is on you or should we be sympathetic to the idea of they can’t help being selfish suckers to the Nation’s detriment? Donald Trump is the single largest individual threat to our democracy and it‘s all going to boil down to will the majority of the GOP return to his embrace and start slinging his excrement to support him?

 

[MT15]

That's right leftist, always spew the extremes...lol, there's so much you "know"...

You said the extreme. It was your statement about all thieves needing to be shot.

Most of us here are fact-based. And then there’s you, who are woefully misinformed about nearly everything it seems.

If you could quit popping off, read the terms of service and respect the wishes of the owner of this website we could have some civil conversations. I’m not sure you can do that, but maybe you will prove me wrong?

 

[bird]

Seems like you spew a lot of trash and can't back it up. Typical...

Thanks for brightening my night. Have anything to actually discuss. Maybe you should toddle back to freeperville.

 

[billm]

Thanks for brightening my night. Have anything to actually discuss. Maybe you should toddle back to freeperville.

So, as I said, you can't offer proof for anything. Typical leftist liar.

 

[billm]

You said the extreme. It was your statement about all thieves needing to be shot.

Most of us here are fact-based. And then there’s you, who are woefully misinformed about nearly everything it seems.

If you could quit popping off, read the terms of service and respect the wishes of the owner of this website we could have some civil conversations. I’m not sure you can do that, but maybe you will prove me wrong?

Popping off? You guys are the ones spewing BS. Prove your claims.

 

[MT15]

Popping off? You guys are the ones spewing BS. Prove your claims.

What claim? That shoplifters shouldn’t be shot?

 

[bird]

So, as I said, you can't offer proof for anything. Typical leftist liar.

The adults are trying to talk. Go back to your 60 failed lawsuits, your unproven claims of voter fraud, your failed businesses and lawsuits by contractors, your failed steaks, failed vodka, fraudulent charity and Putin/Kim/Ji azz kissing.

 

[billm]

The adults are trying to talk. Go back to your 60 failed lawsuits, your unproven claims of voter fraud, your failed businesses and lawsuits by contractors, your failed steaks, failed vodka, fraudulent charity and Putin/Kim/Ji azz kissing.

So, no proof like I thought. LOL

 

[billm]

What claim? That shoplifters shouldn’t be shot?

There it is! The expected leftist deflection! Always the same. lol

 

[MT15]

There it is! The expected leftist deflection! Always the same. lol

Tell me the claim that I made that you wish to see supported. How is that a deflection from anything? Do you have a firm grasp of the English language?

 

[bird]

So, no proof like I thought. LOL

60 lawsuits are public record. Failed vodka and steaks, public record. Fraudulent charity, public record. There is a tool called the internet. Maybe your mom will give you access to it tomorrow morning.

 

[billm]

60 lawsuits are public record. Failed vodka and steaks, public record. Fraudulent charity, public record. There is a tool called the internet. Maybe your mom will give you access to it tomorrow morning.

Any found guilty? No, Lol, prove something!

 

[billm]

Tell me the claim that I made that you wish to see supported. How is that a deflection from anything? Do you have a firm grasp of the English language?

Classic leftist drizzle! I've dealt with leftist scum for two decades. Seen all your games! lol

 

[MT15]

Classic leftist drizzle! I've dealt with leftist scum for two decades. Seen all your games! lol

Well at least you answered my English language question, lol.

 

[Optimus Prime]

So, no proof like I thought. LOL

Funny, that is exactly what the 60 judges thought

 

[MT15]

Any found guilty? No, Lol, prove something!

Ok, so the lawsuits weren’t criminal cases, so there wouldn’t have been guilty or not-guilty verdicts. They were attempts (poorly done) to prove election fraud. They all failed. Which means that over 60 judges looked at the evidence presented by Trump‘s lawyers, listened to the evidence from the various states and localities, and threw out the lawsuits, because of lack of merit or lack of standing. There were lots of judges appointed by Republicans and some of the states and localities were Republican as well. There were some judges appointed by Trump. They all said - no reason to suspect any foul play in the election results.

So, you are correct in that Trump couldn’t prove any of his claims of election fraud. None.

 

[billm]

Ok, so the lawsuits weren’t criminal cases, so there wouldn’t have been guilty or not-guilty verdicts. They were attempts (poorly done) to prove election fraud. They all failed. Which means that over 60 judges looked at the evidence presented by Trump‘s lawyers, listened to the evidence from the various states and localities, and threw out the lawsuits, because of lack of merit or lack of standing. There were lots of judges appointed by Republicans and some of the states and localities were Republican as well. There were some judges appointed by Trump. They all said - no reason to suspect any foul play in the election results.

So, you are correct in that Trump couldn’t prove any of his claims of election fraud. None.

So, no proof, just bullshirt like always.

 

[MT15]

So, no proof, just bullshirt like always.

Yes, that’s what we are trying to tell you. There is no proof for election fraud. None. It is all just Trump bullshirt, like always. I’m glad you have seen the light.

 

[billm]

Funny, that is exactly what the 60 judges thought

Funny how you clowns got nothing but bullshirt. lol