Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why did you leave out the lawsuits against Trump's accusers?
That's very telling. Trump swore up and down that he was going to sue them. Given how bombastically he spat that threat, if he fails to do so, it is tantamount to an admission of guilt with regard to the accusations against him if he fails to sue.
With regard to the rest, I suspect Congress will investigate again, but nothing substantive will come of it. Blood thirst will be slaked with the ability to lord their power over the weak, and that'll be the end of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Oh, and the Media!
That'll be interesting... clearly Trump will want to nominate SCOTUS justices that are willing to do away with freedom of the press. Where will he find these rare birds?
Yet, I'll still believe Comey before I'll believe you. But go ahead and continue to beat the dead horse. I'm focused on election results at this point. This thread is now becoming a pointless waste of time.
Surprise, that dead horse came back to life. Though I don't see much good coming from dwelling on the emails, the Foundation remains a worthwhile target.
What makes you think that? That dead horse is as likely as not to be buried. There's nothing of value to be gained, now that Trump won the election. (Did you really think Trump cared about your erroneous perception of injustice? LOL.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama
Though I don't see much good coming from dwelling on the emails, the Foundation remains a worthwhile target.
I doubt Trump would risk it since it'll just bring down more scrutiny either on his own Foundation or on his abuse of office to suppress the investigation of his own Foundation.
Remember Trump's bombastic threats that he would absolutely sue those who accused him of sexual assault after the election: Let's watch how much integrity Trump has with regard to those promises. If he hasn't done so by the end of the month, we can safely assume that he's actually guilty and doesn't want the scrutiny to bring that to light. And I think that'll be a clear indicator for the rest of this: All Trump wanted was the power. He isn't stupid enough to waste political capital on pursuits that have no ROI.
What makes you think that? That dead horse is as likely as not to be buried. There's nothing of value to be gained, now that Trump won the election. (Did you really think Trump cared about your erroneous perception of injustice? LOL.)
I doubt Trump would risk it since it'll just bring down more scrutiny either on his own Foundation or on his abuse of office to suppress the investigation of his own Foundation.
Remember Trump's bombastic threats that he would absolutely sue those who accused him of sexual assault after the election: Let's watch how much integrity Trump has with regard to those promises. If he hasn't done so by the end of the month, we can safely assume that he's actually guilty and doesn't want the scrutiny to bring that to light. And I think that'll be a clear indicator for the rest of this: All Trump wanted was the power. He isn't stupid enough to waste political capital on pursuits that have no ROI.
Again,and again,and again please show where INTENT is shown it the statute as claimed by Comey? You claim to support justice and the rule of law so put up or, well, you know the rest...
Does the statute say anything about INTENT or does it not?
Again,and again,and again please show where INTENT is shown it the statute as claimed by Comey? You claim to support justice and the rule of law so put up or, well, you know the rest...
Does the statute say anything about INTENT or does it not?
I'll refresh his memory:
"Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
"This is the claim of the class action fraud and racketeering lawsuits, that Donald Trump used other people’s money to succeed. Using “OPM” is one of Donald’s plan if he gets into office.
...
But when victims are created, this strategy is against the law, it’s called racketeering or fraud. Cornell Law says that the legal definition of racketeering when it comes to money changing hands is offering a product or service, the “racket,” to solve a problem or service that wouldn’t exist if the business didn’t offer the service to begin with. Acts under the RICO act include up to 35 different acts that could be considered racketeering. A conviction of racketeering could lead to a jail term of up to 20 years."
At this point, she's just keepin' the seat warm for Chris Christie.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
