6 hours ago, Roo Island said:

Makes sense for the grifter family of Trumps. Worst political criminals ever.

Not even close. Been at least 3 worse ones in my lifetime.

On 4/22/2024 at 6:11 PM, Danderman123 said:

It's not like they think much when they post, they just pass along whatever talking point shows up in their Inbox. That's why sometimes multiple Trump fans will post the same talking point the same day.

 

 

That's funny. It's what you do though.

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh dear, you are making things up again. Apparently you don't know that the POTUS isn't in charge of the money. That is the lower house.

I think he's talking about the RNC....in which he would be correct.

1 minute ago, Berkshire said:

I think he's talking about the RNC....in which he would be correct.

He should have made that plain then, and given that he just had a go at me for being off topic it's a bit rich that he makes a completely off topic comment about Trump himself. I think he just likes talking about Trump as he does it so much.

31 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

So why did you mention him then?

 

 

On 4/22/2024 at 9:24 AM, impulse said:

 

You mean like what the Dems did to Bernie?

 

And tried to do to Bush?

 

 

I was responding to this post.

 

Perhaps you can ask @impulse why he mentioned Bernie Sanders in this topic.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh dear, you are making things up again. Apparently you don't know that the POTUS isn't in charge of the money. That is the lower house.

Trump is in charge of the money flow at the RNC.

 

34 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

 

You can't even get your riposte correct. The thread isn't about Trump recruiting anyone. It's about how democrats are so desperate to stop Trump that they clutch at any straw prosecuting people accused of being fake electors.

Do you think the fake electors recruited themselves?

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not even close. Been at least 3 worse ones in my lifetime.

 

Name them. Especially the other ones who've been charged with criminal crimes....crickets

A post with a trolling reference and several ensuing replies have been removed.

 

On 4/23/2024 at 7:54 PM, Danderman123 said:

Trump is in charge of the money flow at the RNC.

 

Prove that or you are making it up, again.

On 4/23/2024 at 7:55 PM, Danderman123 said:

Do you think the fake electors recruited themselves?

I don't know who did, so why don't you tell us with a link to a believeable source?

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Prove that or you are making it up, again.

You really don't know that Trump controls money flow at the RNC?

 

Before you puff up and call me a liar, let me ask you:

 

Would it be wrong for Trump to control finances at the RNC?

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't know who did, so why don't you tell us with a link to a believeable source?

In some states, the electors have confessed. Or their recruiters.

 

But to be honest, there hasn't been a definitive accounting of the chain of command within the Trump campaign to facilitate the fake elector criming. That's the function of these upcoming trials.

 

However, there are partial accounts:

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/wisconsin-fake-elector-settlement-offers-new-details-strategy-trump-la-rcna141820

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

You really don't know that Trump controls money flow at the RNC?

 

Before you puff up and call me a liar, let me ask you:

 

Would it be wrong for Trump to control finances at the RNC?

That would be off topic, just as who recruited fake electors is off topic.

 

I didn't call you a liar, if you comprehend what I said, which was "prove it OR you are making it up" If you could prove it, you would not be a liar, would you?

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

In some states, the electors have confessed. Or their recruiters.

 

But to be honest, there hasn't been a definitive accounting of the chain of command within the Trump campaign to facilitate the fake elector criming. That's the function of these upcoming trials.

 

However, there are partial accounts:

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/wisconsin-fake-elector-settlement-offers-new-details-strategy-trump-la-rcna141820

Thanks for admitting that there is no proof that Trump recruited them.

7 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

But to be honest, there hasn't been a definitive accounting of the chain of command within the Trump campaign to facilitate the fake elector criming. That's the function of these upcoming trials.

I have not heard or read anywhere that who recruited the fake electors is part of the trial, but IMO the only way to prove Trump did so would be some irrefutable proof that Trump himself spoke to them and invited them to do so. Otherwise it's just accusations.

On 4/23/2024 at 9:50 AM, bendejo said:

The Republican National Committee (RNC) is in the process of being ransacked by the T criminal organization.  The orange guy put his daughter into the leadership.

https://www.newsweek.com/lara-trump-republican-rnc-chair-money-donald-1869737

 

Daughter-In-Law, wife of Eric Trump. From your link:

 

On Tuesday, the former president outlined his support for Lara Trump, who is married to his son Eric and was a senior adviser to the Trump campaign in 2020.

10 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Daughter-In-Law, wife of Eric Trump. From your link:

 

On Tuesday, the former president outlined his support for Lara Trump, who is married to his son Eric and was a senior adviser to the Trump campaign in 2020.

Yeah, I realized my error when it was too late to edit.

And I've always sensed something fishy regarding Djr's divorce, like somehow sheltering $$$ in case something like a bumper-crop of criminal charges came along.  I've had no reason to think otherwise.

 

51 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Yeah, I realized my error when it was too late to edit.

And I've always sensed something fishy regarding Djr's divorce, like somehow sheltering $$$ in case something like a bumper-crop of criminal charges came along.  I've had no reason to think otherwise.

 

OK

Just in the Arizona grand jury just returned an indictment against the fake electors + a bonus trump named as a co conspirator.Im sure Cari flake…..lake will be frothing at the mouth soon!popcorn at the ready heck I might just have a barley pop!!

16 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Thanks for admitting that there is no proof that Trump recruited them.

A very childish response.

 

First off, it's unlikely that Trump himself called the fake electors to recruit them, instead he relied on his mooks to do that. And the mooks are in legal trouble:

 

Arizona grand jury indicts Meadows, Giuliani, other Trump allies for 2020 election interference

 

While the names of the remaining seven defendants remain redacted, reporting suggests that among the indicted are Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Christina Bob, Boris Epshteyn, and Mike Roman.

 

Finally, someone is going to nail Boris Epshteyn.

 

Ooh, Mike Roman is indicted, which means we are going to learn all about the prosecutor's love life.

 

16 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I have not heard or read anywhere that who recruited the fake electors is part of the trial, but IMO the only way to prove Trump did so would be some irrefutable proof that Trump himself spoke to them and invited them to do so. Otherwise it's just accusations.

There is going to be a trial for the Arizona fake electors that will lay all of this out.

 

Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator, so he allegedly participated in the recruitment.

16 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I have not heard or read anywhere that who recruited the fake electors is part of the trial, but IMO the only way to prove Trump did so would be some irrefutable proof that Trump himself spoke to them and invited them to do so. Otherwise it's just accusations.

This post did not age well, and the day is still young.

3 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

A very childish response.

55555555555555555555555

If that's an insult, it's like being savaged by a very small poodle that yaps a lot and is easily ignored.

 

You should remember the saying that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

This post did not age well, and the day is still young.

Given the attention you are paying to that post I suspect it hit close to home for you.

2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

There is going to be a trial for the Arizona fake electors that will lay all of this out.

 

Trump is an unindicted co-conspirator, so he allegedly participated in the recruitment.

Allegedly is as significant as Elon claiming he is going to live on Mars.

33 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Allegedly is as significant as Elon claiming he is going to live on Mars.

Unindicted but a co-conspirator, again. Per the findings of the grand jury. I'm guessing they know more details than any of us here.

58 minutes ago, Roo Island said:

Unindicted but a co-conspirator, again. Per the findings of the grand jury. I'm guessing they know more details than any of us here.

I understand that there is no defense present in a Grand Jury, so they don't have any counter to the prosecutor. In that case they only have half the story.

For sure, if there was any evidence at all, even a smidgen, he'd be indicted as well, IMO. Ergo there is zero, nothing, not an iota, zip, nada, not a sausage of evidence.

4 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

A very childish response.

 

First off, it's unlikely that Trump himself called the fake electors to recruit them, instead he relied on his mooks to do that. And the mooks are in legal trouble:

 

Arizona grand jury indicts Meadows, Giuliani, other Trump allies for 2020 election interference

 

While the names of the remaining seven defendants remain redacted, reporting suggests that among the indicted are Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Christina Bob, Boris Epshteyn, and Mike Roman.

 

Finally, someone is going to nail Boris Epshteyn.

 

Ooh, Mike Roman is indicted, which means we are going to learn all about the prosecutor's love life.

 

If I cared enough I'd keep a record of all your claims, so when they don't come true I could remind you of what you said, but I can't be bothered.

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I understand that there is no defense present in a Grand Jury, so they don't have any counter to the prosecutor. In that case they only have half the story.

For sure, if there was any evidence at all, even a smidgen, he'd be indicted as well, IMO. Ergo there is zero, nothing, not an iota, zip, nada, not a sausage of evidence.

The fat lady hasn't sung yet.