6 hours ago, Puccini said:

 

I read that Trump is not in court because he paid hush money to someone, but because he falsified business documents.

 

Right. He is alleged to have had his attorney pay Stormy "hush money" to enter into legal non-disclosure agreement. 

 

But when he reimbursed his attorney for the payment, he listed it as "legal fees" rather than as "hush money payment". 

 

Mischaracterizing the payment was a misdemeanor, with a statute of limitations of two years, which ran out long ago.

 

Enter Alvin Bragg who ran for office promising to get Trump. 

 

He figured out that by tying the expired misnomer to election finance violation (a felony) he could upgrade the phony "crime" to a felony and indict Trump. 

 

Meanwhile under the same New York Attorney General, a gang of criminal illegal aliens arrested for assaulting police officers are released back to the streets on their own recognizance. Our tax dollars at work. 

14 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Yet.

 

You'll have to wait a little longer for Trump to be convicted of a felony.

Perhaps he and Joe can share a cell together then.

15 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Were you one of the MAGA crowd chanting "Lock her up"?

No I wasn't... but I did agree that her actions warranted an investigation... she made a mess in Benghazi 

On 4/16/2024 at 6:58 AM, Sticky Rice Balls said:

Exactly.I mean when mexico paid for the yuge glorious luxurious big beautiful Wall

You must be talking about the wall that because it wasn't completed has been causing your hero untold grief as the illegals just walk through the gaps.

Be ironic if Biden loses because he didn't finish the wall. LOL.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You must be talking about the wall that because it wasn't completed has been causing your hero untold grief as the illegals just walk through the gaps.

Be ironic if Biden loses because he didn't finish the wall. LOL.

The Wall was only built for a few miles.

 

The Border Patrol is very good at picking up illegals trying to cross the border in remote areas.

 

Most illegals who successfully come into America come through legal ports of entry.

11 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

 

 

Mischaracterizing the payment was a misdemeanor, with a statute of limitations of two years, which ran out long ago.

 

I will explain this again.

 

In NY, the statute of limitations is tolled when the perp moves out of state. Trump lived in Washington DC and Florida after 2016.

8 minutes ago, Sticky Rice Balls said:

not about the payment--its about election interference dummy...but keep using your fox fed narratives...responding to Yellowtail whos been long blocked

I don't block anyone.

 

Not even @Yellowtail, despite his terrible memory.

1 hour ago, Sticky Rice Balls said:

not about the payment--its about election interference dummy...but keep using your fox fed narratives...responding to Yellowtail whos been long blocked

How did the payment interfere with the election? 

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How did the payment interfere with the election? 

By blocking the release of the Stormy Daniels story prior to the election.

 

Groundhog Day. You knew this yesterday, but then you woke up this morning with no memory. Later today you will post that nobody brought guns to the January 6 insurrection.

31 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

By blocking the release of the Stormy Daniels story prior to the election.

 

Groundhog Day. You knew this yesterday, but then you woke up this morning with no memory. Later today you will post that nobody brought guns to the January 6 insurrection.

No. Again, it may have influenced the election, but it would have interfered with the election. 

 

If later today, you claim that January 6 was an insurrection, I will again explain that none of the protestors brought firearms into the Capital building, and while you will make more silly comments in your response, you nor anyone else will show my claim to be false. 

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

 

If later today, you claim that January 6 was an insurrection, I will again explain that none of the protestors brought firearms into the Capital building, and while you will make more silly comments in your response, you nor anyone else will show my claim to be false. 

False:

 

Missouri Man Sentenced on Felony Weapons Charge for Actions During Jan. 6 Capitol Breach

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

No. Again, it may have influenced the election, but it would have interfered with the election. 

 

Please don't post while you are drunk.

 

If I respond to this, you won't remember any of it tomorrow, and you will ask again why Trump is being charged for felony business fraud. Groundhog Day style.

17 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

False:

 

Missouri Man Sentenced on Felony Weapons Charge for Actions During Jan. 6 Capitol Breach

Are you lying or just wrong again, he was on the grounds, not in the building.

16 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Please don't post while you are drunk.

 

If I respond to this, you won't remember any of it tomorrow, and you will ask again why Trump is being charged for felony business fraud. Groundhog Day style.

You can't respond to it, because it not election interference, so you just regurgitate the same weak claims over and over. 

 

Please explain how it interfered with the election, and how if it did, killing the Biden laptop story did not. 

13 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Are you lying or just wrong again, he was on the grounds, not in the building.

So therefore it wasn't an insurrection?

Trump *has* lost it.

 

How did he confuse Jimmy Kimmel with Al Pacino?

 

As for the rest of his rant:

 

Despite Trump’s assertions, Kimmel received overwhelmingly positive reviews for his hosting of the Oscars, which drew more TV viewers than any awards show in the past four years. Kimmel’s eponymous late-night show is also the most watched in its demographic.

15 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You can't respond to it, because it not election interference, so you just regurgitate the same weak claims over and over. 

 

Please explain how it interfered with the election, and how if it did, killing the Biden laptop story did not. 

Denying the electorate the information about Trump's romp with Stormy Daniels was was election interference.

 

Conversely, Trump released the Biden laptop story before the election.

 

Different circumstances.

11 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

So therefore it wasn't an insurrection?

We were talking about the fact that none of the protestors carried firearms into the Capital building to overthrow the government and seize control of the United States of Americal with mop-sticks, not whether or not it was an "insurrection". 

 

So, you admit now that you were wrong, and that none of the protestors carried firearms into the Capital building, correct? Once we can agree on that, perhaps we can discuss whether or not it was an insurrection.

6 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Denying the electorate the information about Trump's romp with Stormy Daniels was was election interference.

How did it interfere with the election, and if it was, why was Cohen not convicted of it? 

 

You seem to be confusing interference with influence.  

6 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

 

Conversely, Trump released the Biden laptop story before the election.

 

Different circumstances.

The store was killed, and Biden said it was not true. How that not, per your definition, election interference.

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

We were talking about the fact that none of the protestors carried firearms into the Capital building to overthrow the government and seize control of the United States of Americal with mop-sticks, not whether or not it was an "insurrection". 

 

So, you admit now that you were wrong, and that none of the protestors carried firearms into the Capital building, correct? Once we can agree on that, perhaps we can discuss whether or not it was an insurrection.

Some of the accounts are not clear if the armed insurrectionists stopped at the doors of the Capitol, or crashed in.

 

Either way, they brought guns to the insurrection.

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How did it interfere with the election, and if it was, why was Cohen not convicted of it? 

 

You seem to be confusing interference with influence.  

The store was killed, and Biden said it was not true. How that not, per your definition, election interference.

The question was whether the data in the laptop had been manipulated.

 

But the laptop story was published before the election.

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

How did it interfere with the election, and if it was, why was Cohen not convicted of it? 

 

You seem to be confusing interference with influence.  

The store was killed, and Biden said it was not true. How that not, per your definition, election interference.

This will all come out during the trial, so your attempts to spin are futile.

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

The question was whether the data in the laptop had been manipulated.

 

But the laptop story was published before the election.

In any event, the story was killed, and Biden said it was not true. Again, how is that not, per your definition, election interference? 

 

By your definition of election interference as withholding information from the electorate, anyone that chooses to not run a story that paints their favored candidate in a negative or positive light, is interfering with the election, correct? 

 

Incidentally, the FBI had the laptop and knew it was authentic prior to the election. 

9 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Some of the accounts are not clear if the armed insurrectionists stopped at the doors of the Capitol, or crashed in.

 

Either way, they brought guns to the insurrection.

And per your link, the one guy that brought a gun stayed outside with it, yes?  

 

So, you admit now that that none of the protestors were found to have carried firearms into the Capital building, correct? I will concede that there may have been protestors inside the Capital building with guns, but that none of the protestors inside the Capital building fired a gun, and none of them were caught with a gun inside the Capital building.

 

Once we can agree on that, perhaps we can discuss whether or not it was an insurrection.

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

In any event, the story was killed, and Biden said it was not true. Again, how is that not, per your definition, election interference? 

 

 

Given that the laptop story was published before the election, you are wrong.

 

This fact has been posted here many times, but you still don't get it.

 

We can try this: count the number of times the Stormy Daniels story was published before the election and then count the number of times the laptop story was published before the election.

 

If you want to get really precise, you can divide the latter number by the former number.

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

And per your link, the one guy that brought a gun stayed outside with it, yes?  

 

So, you admit now that that none of the protestors were found to have carried firearms into the Capital building, correct? I will concede that there may have been protestors inside the Capital building with guns, but that none of the protestors inside the Capital building fired a gun, and none of them were caught with a gun inside the Capital building.

 

Once we can agree on that, perhaps we can discuss whether or not it was an insurrection.

There was more than one guy with a gun at the Insurrection.

 

But, yes, nobody fired a gun inside the Capitol.

2 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

There was more than one guy with a gun at the Insurrection.

 

But, yes, nobody fired a gun inside the Capitol.

Nor was anyone caught with a gun inside the Capital building, correct? 

5 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Given that the laptop story was published before the election, you are wrong.

 

This fact has been posted here many times, but you still don't get it.

 

We can try this: count the number of times the Stormy Daniels story was published before the election and then count the number of times the laptop story was published before the election.

 

If you want to get really precise, you can divide the latter number by the former number.

What I said was: "In any event, the story was killed, and Biden said it was not true. Again, how is that not, per your definition, election interference? 

 

By your definition of election interference as withholding information from the electorate, anyone that chooses to not run a story that paints their favored candidate in a negative or positive light, is interfering with the election, correct? 

 

Incidentally, the FBI had the laptop and knew it was authentic prior to the election." 

 

That the story was published once and killed is not relevant to my post. 

On 4/12/2024 at 7:10 PM, transam said:

I reckon Melania can't wait to make an exit from this orange wide boy....😱

She must be so embarrassed by his antics.....😢

As far as I can tell, she is gone already!

5 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

As far as I can tell, she is gone already!

Yes, she has been out of McTrump's dodgy embarrassing picture for quite a while.........🤔