Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes. And the case is under appeal. And part of the appeal is that the Judge excluded evidence such that the jury might not have found some witnesses as credible.

Please dont interject reality into the fun

  • Confused 2
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Exactly dude. Your worthless opinion as to me and anybody else, espcially over the net, is meaningless. Im never stressed, nice bowl of Orange Kush, a super sweet mango (.80 cents a kilo), 97 degrees, swimming pool. Most of you TDS kids, except for your antisemites and terr lovers are generally harmless, so the babbling is more amusing than anyhting.

 

 

Meanwhile your idol sits docilely in the courtroom, sometimes sleeping, while his lawyers provide a weak defense.

 

Do you think he'll testify?

Edited by Danderman123
  • Agree 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes. And the case is under appeal. And part of the appeal is that the Judge excluded evidence such that the jury might not have found some witnesses as credible.

IMHO, Trump's appeals are the real show, that's how he avoids jail or big fines.

Posted
36 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Any time one of you truth deniers brings up "Fox," I have to remind you about the lawsuit that cost them almost $1 BILLION for being LIARS, and that there is another lawsuit in the works for almost $3 BILLION for the same thing. I understand your real agenda is to troll, but we will call you on it each and every time.


Please continue.  We’re always looking forward to a good laugh.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbcs-nicolle-wallace-rejects-durham-report-career-built-upon-fraud-russiagate
 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-rachel-maddow-quickly-dismissed-durham-report-after-spending-years-pushing-collusion-narrative

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
57 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

To you trolling is fun? Gawd.

Im not the one trolling silly goose, its watching you guys. I love clown shows.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2
Posted

Even to have a laughingstock as Candidate Americans are still so narrow minded to vote for this cheater and criminal?😳 Unbelievable 🙏

  • Agree 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump's campaign manager provided private polling data to the Russians to allow them to micro-target US voters 

well, Killton won the popular vote apparently, so their 'micro targeting' 🤡 didnt work 

  • Confused 2
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

well, Killton won the popular vote apparently, so their 'micro targeting' 🤡 didnt work 

The micro-targeting from the Trump campaign polling data enabled them to eke out wins in swing states - barely.

 

Which is the point of micro-targeting voters, you do it if you don't think you are going to win the popular vote.

Edited by Danderman123
  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

Is it 350 million people you have, and this is what you want to bring to the table as your designated leader to speak on behalf of the American people?

I voted against him twice -- and in 2016 I voted for Bernie Sanders in the Florida primary who may have been the better 2016 Democratic candidate.

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted

Trump is claiming he never had sex with Stormy. She is saying he did.

 

If he never had sex with her, why would he shell out $130,000 on a baseless claim, when he is known for litigating everything?

 

OTOH, she would have the perfect defense if she was sued for defamation, and described his genitalia accurately.........

  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
53 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Idol? You mean the Great Orange Boogeyman.? I like him because he stirs up the woke, rascist, terrorist supporting, war mongering, jew hating, elitist, spook, power mad, mysognistic, inluencers and shills like no other. 

 

My Idol is his policies. Drill baby drill. Deport baby deport. Pay your fair share you greedy Eurotrash. Screw climate change. Law and order. Screw Russia, Ukraine and China. Eat sanctions, mullah. etc.

Policies. Give me a break. Didn't know that you are comedian. 

  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger countered that "the details of her story are important" while saying the prosecution will not ask about "certain details that might be too salacious." She said Daniels would be asked to testify about "how she ended up engaging in a sexual act."

 

"It's not going to include any details about genitalia or anything of that nature," Hoffinger said.

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/trump-trial-testimony-bookkeeping-gag-order-contempt/

But of course once the witness is sworn in, on the stand and speaking any attempt to prevent her giving a ‘truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’, might wander into the realms of witness interference.

 

Daniels is reported to have been speaking at pace, and perhaps has a different idea of what constitutes ‘too much detail’ than do others.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

OTOH, she would have the perfect defense if she was sued for defamation, and described his genitalia accurately.........

Hearsay. Another girl who did have non-adulterous sex with Trump during the almost 6 years between his 2nd and 3rd marriage could have told her.

  • Confused 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Go away like the bad smell you try and use as a source.


Voice your complaints to the moderators.  

 

Unless otherwise directed Fox is a qualified source on the forum.

 

 

  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Hearsay. Another girl who did have non-adulterous sex with Trump during the almost 6 years between his 2nd and 3rd marriage could have told her.

It would be interesting to see polling about who is telling the truth, Trump or Ms. Daniels.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

It would be interesting to see polling about who is telling the truth, Trump or Ms. Daniels.

There are only twelve opinions that matter.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Go away like the bad smell you try and use as a source.


And can you provide proof/links that the links I provided from Fox are false?

 

I didn’t think so.

 

Next.

  • Confused 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...