Trump Hints at Potential Prosecution of Political Opponents if Re-Elected

[Eric Loh]

52 minutes ago, neeray said:

Whatever treatment Trump has received, he brought it all on himself. 

Ditto also his absolutist approach to his trial defense, he hamstrung his attorneys. Self inflicted. 

[JonnyF]

48 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I'm for waterboarding him every day for eight hours for a week, not asking him any questions, just waterboarding him. 

 

Spoken like a true Democrat. 😃

[pomchop]

3 hours ago, charleskerins said:

"neither side will accept defeat is total BS"  

Beyond BS ...so far in my life there is only ONE presdental candidate that refused to accept defeat...yes gore v bush was very very close but when the court ruled in the end gore shook W hand and said congratulations..he did not try to foment a coup or whine like a five year old about how unfair it all was.....

 

Trump  not only lost but lost by the exact same electoral count that he won over hillary but of course he called that a landslide...but when trump lost four years later he  whines like a five year old then immediately went to work to try and overturn by claiming fraud...next after losing 60 court cases and recount after recount almost all done by republicans and still no evidence of fraud he tried to foment an evil plan to have a bunch of moronic state officials submit forged signed slates of electors to claim falsely that he won...when even that didn't work he tried his best to stir up his moronic red neck thug base with lie after lie to storm the capitol and stop the counting of votes...and when even that was failing he sat on his fat butt and watched on TV and did nothing for hours on end while his thugs beat cops and were looking to hang his lapdog vp pence..now he calls the thugs hostages and promises to pardon them if he were to win again

 

..now here we are almost four years later and trump is already banging the drum that 2024 will be rigged and here we go again..  trumps actions do not surprise me as he has certainly shown anyone with even a sliver of a functioning brain and a set of eyes and ears who and what he is...

 

what surprises me is how many trumpers absolutely refuse to believe what they have seen and heard and have enough sense to say ok u fooled me once but not again ....people get taken by conmen all the time and trump is perhaps the best con man ever...but there is nothing wrong with admitting you got conned and stop trying to defend the indefensible...i won't hold my breath for magas to have the courage to admit that were and are wrong and got conned.  

[Eric Loh]

5 hours ago, thaipo7 said:

Tug - What would you do if you were treated like Trump for 8 years now.  Not many people could take what Trump has taking since Sept 2016.  I know your Dear Leader could not.

Trump is all bluff and bluster. He may think that many of his supporters will fight for him but in reality not may of his supporters or even his most loony ones are totally invested in his personal battles. He escalate his rhetoric about potentail death and destruction warning if he is charged in the Manhattan case. He posted to his supporters to protest and take our nation back. He whined that the stock market will crashed if he is convicted. What then happened in Manhattan was a no event with a subdued reception from his small crowd of supporters. Stock market was up on that day of his conviction and has been up last 3 days. More of his supporters will fade away from him as November approach. 

[Purdey]

Nothing wrong with prosecuting those who have committed crimes that can be proven in a court of law as Trump has been. No one is every above the law. 

 

 

Maybe a little problem about evidence....

[thaibeachlovers]

6 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Nothing wrong with prosecuting those who have committed crimes that can be proven in a court of law as Trump has been. No one is every above the law. 

 

 

Maybe a little problem about evidence....

If that is the case, why is Kissinger not in jail for his illegal war on Cambodia?

[candide]

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Having opened the door to prosecuting a former president, the Dems can hardly complain if Biden is investigated and prosecuted if crimes are found.

Perhaps they thought that only they could do so.

Lol! Which crimes? 🤣

[simple1]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If we are going to talk about potential criminal politicians in the US, there are plenty to pick from in congress. Let's start with those that became unusually rich, despite loitering in Washington for decades.
 

First of all trump is a convicted felon, found guilty in civil actions resulting in fines of millions of dollars, as well as out of Court settlements for fraud - trump has a long record of criminality. Sure there are other politicians who would likely not be cleared if investigated, but not really the point. trump is a proven criminal who due to flaws in the Constitution can stand as a presidential candidate. We know why, because Republican senators corruptly failed in their sworn duty to protect the Constitution.

[charleskerins]

2 hours ago, pomchop said:

Beyond BS ...so far in my life there is only ONE presdental candidate that refused to accept defeat...yes gore v bush was very very close but when the court ruled in the end gore shook W hand and said congratulations..he did not try to foment a coup or whine like a five year old about how unfair it all was.....

 

Trump  not only lost but lost by the exact same electoral count that he won over hillary but of course he called that a landslide...but when trump lost four years later he  whines like a five year old then immediately went to work to try and overturn by claiming fraud...next after losing 60 court cases and recount after recount almost all done by republicans and still no evidence of fraud he tried to foment an evil plan to have a bunch of moronic state officials submit forged signed slates of electors to claim falsely that he won...when even that didn't work he tried his best to stir up his moronic red neck thug base with lie after lie to storm the capitol and stop the counting of votes...and when even that was failing he sat on his fat butt and watched on TV and did nothing for hours on end while his thugs beat cops and were looking to hang his lapdog vp pence..now he calls the thugs hostages and promises to pardon them if he were to win again

 

..now here we are almost four years later and trump is already banging the drum that 2024 will be rigged and here we go again..  trumps actions do not surprise me as he has certainly shown anyone with even a sliver of a functioning brain and a set of eyes and ears who and what he is...

 

what surprises me is how many trumpers absolutely refuse to believe what they have seen and heard and have enough sense to say ok u fooled me once but not again ....people get taken by conmen all the time and trump is perhaps the best con man ever...but there is nothing wrong with admitting you got conned and stop trying to defend the indefensible...i won't hold my breath for magas to have the courage to admit that were and are wrong and got conned.  

That's a great summation -hard to believe isn't it?

[charleskerins]

10 minutes ago, candide said:

Lol! Which crimes? 🤣

imaginary ones

[charleskerins]

5 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Elie Honig, a former colleague of Bragg’s, called the case an “ill-conceived, unjustified mess,” lamenting the “unprecedented” and “obscure” nature of the “inventive” and “inflated” charges in a Friday piece for New York Magazine. He criticized the judge’s $35 donation to a pro-Biden operation as a “plain violation” of a New York rule for judges.

 

“The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge,” Honig wrote.

 

“This will be eventually overruled after the election. But what if there’s a close election? And Biden squeaks through, and then the case is overruled? Half the country is gonna feel this was a stolen election and again, this is a grave injustice and disservice to the country,” Barr continued.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2024/06/05/bill-barr-alvin-bragg-verdict-2024-election-donald-trump/

"Barr"   Who GAF what that moral coward has to say?

[candide]

Frankly, I doubt Biden will try to overturn election results, ask someone to find him 11,700 votes, plot fake electors list, organise a "stop the steal" (😅) protest and send a mob to assault the Capitol. 

I also doubt he will go with tons of presidential records, refuse to give them back, hide them and lie about it.

I may be wrong but I don't think he will do that! 😁

[farang51]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Frankly, I doubt Biden will try to overturn election results, ask someone to find him 11,700 votes, plot fake electors list, organise a "stop the steal" (😅) protest and send a mob to assault the Capitol. 

I also doubt he will go with tons of presidential records, refuse to give them back, hide them and lie about it.

I may be wrong but I don't think he will do that! 😁

Maybe Biden will not because he is too old to do those things. But it is sooo unfair to Trump that all the other presidents that did all of those things got away scot free.

[candide]

35 minutes ago, farang51 said:

Maybe Biden will not because he is too old to do those things. But it is sooo unfair to Trump that all the other presidents that did all of those things got away scot free.

What are you talking about? Which president did what I indicated in my post  (with details)? You have nothing.

[jerrymahoney]

1 hour ago, charleskerins said:

"Barr"   Who GAF what that moral coward has to say?

Obviously not you.

[jerrymahoney]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If that is the case, why is Kissinger not in jail for his illegal war on Cambodia?

He's dead.

[cdemundo]

8 hours ago, WDSmart said:

I am bracing myself for what will happen after the November elections. Neither side will accept defeat, and I fear no matter who wins, there will be blood in the streets. Of course, I'll be watching it all on CNN from my easy chair, safe in the mountains of northeastern Thailand. I just hope whoever wins, my Social Security benefits will not be affected. 

". I just hope whoever wins, my Social Security benefits will not be affected. "

 

Amen brother.

[jerrymahoney]

 

6 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Whilst I understand your aim is to be seen as an "honest broker" in the commentary on Mr Trumps legal imbroglios, lately perhaps "your slip has been showing"?

 

An honourable mention for laying the ground work for a possible "we were robbed" scenario?

• I  voted against Trump twice. And would be happy to see him lose again. I will admit that I would prefer to see him lose based upon the usual criteria and not this felony conviction which might be reversed after he loses the election thus giving him the 'we was robbed' scenario.

[farang51]

1 hour ago, candide said:

What are you talking about? Which president did what I indicated in my post  (with details)? You have nothing.

None other that Trump (which was my point). But try to tell that to his disciples ...

[candide]

5 minutes ago, farang51 said:

None other that Trump (which was my point). But try to tell that to his disciples ...

Ooops! Sorry, I did not get it. I read your post too quickly.

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

No. There are 2 William Barrs. BTW I remember your saying the same for Judge Mukasey who said he did not expect any of Trump's 4 criminal trials would take p;lace before the election.

 

Whatever his opinion, my concern with all this is that declaring Trump as a felon -- deservedly or not -- will help him win the election come NOV 2024. And I would prefer him not be for the next 4 years.

And Mukasey was wrong. And if there are 2 William Barrs speaking on the subject, one must have been cloned recently.

[stoner]

7 hours ago, Tug said:

Now as for trump the CONVICTED FELON twice impeached disgraced ex president is threatening dire retribution

 

grow up. you saying convicted felon over and over is not helping the cause. in fact its akin to saying deplorables. we already know how that one worked out. 

[jerrymahoney]

, you don't have tgi=o agrfee.

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

And Mukasey was wrong. And if there are 2 William Barrs speaking on the subject, one must have been cloned recently.

Sure but at the time it was the thought that all of them would underway before election. Barr was the former attorney general. but you don't have to agree with him.

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

, you don't have tgi=o agrfee.

Sure but at the time it was the thought that all of them would underway before election. Barr was the former attorney general. but you don't have to agree with him.

Really? It was the general opinion that all the trials would be underway?  I don't ever recall seeing that. It's not a matter of whether I agree with Barr or not. Clearly, he's extremely biased and not above misrepresenting evidence and rejecting evidence that doesn't support his prejudices.

[jerrymahoney]

5 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Really? It was the general opinion that all the trials would be underway?  I don't ever recall seeing that. It's not a matter of whether I agree with Barr or not. Clearly, he's extremely biased and not above misrepresenting evidence and rejecting evidence that doesn't support his prejudices.

I put up his quote verbatim -- if you want to attack it that's up to you. But I don't have to justify it to your liking.

 

And the Mukasey quote was AUG 18, 2023:

 

Michael B. Mukasey, a former U.S. attorney general and longtime Manhattan federal judge, said because of the complex issues raised in all four of Mr. Trump’s cases, “I think the odds are slim to none that any of them gets to trial before the election.”

Edited June 6 by jerrymahoney

[stoner]

7 hours ago, WDSmart said:

7 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

There are uncountable reasons not to vote for him but jail and gag him, just for the sake of America 👍

I'm for waterboarding him every day for eight hours for a week, not asking him any questions, just waterboarding him. 

 

wow. the fact you received any positive emoji responses from this is appalling. you now have people on here supporting waterboarding trump just because. 

 

how far many of you have fallen is quite scary. but you are fighting for democracy as you say so i get it. heaven forbid i ever forget to pay a parking ticket and some of you are in charge of punishment. 

 

seems there are a number of posters here who think torturing the former president is a good idea. you make me sick.  

[GroveHillWanderer]

10 hours ago, stoner said:

he's a criminal and an addict. you forgot that other detail. knowingly lying on a gun permit application is quite serious if you ask me. 

It isn't according to Lindsey Graham.

 

Graham: ‘Average American’ wouldn’t face Hunter Biden’s gun charges

 

It's also not considered particularly serious by the law enforcement authories - it's very rare for them to prosecute anyone for this, unless the gun is used in another crime subsequently.

 

Quote

South Texas College of Law Professor Dru Stevenson, who has published research on gun charges against drug users, says it's unusual for such cases to make it to court.

[...]

Of the 7,454 people sentenced for illegal gun possession in 2021, only about 5% of them were charged due to drug use, according to US Sentencing Commission data.

 

Why a rare gun charge against Hunter Biden could misfire

 

Professor Stevenson has an interesting opinion on why this particular prosecution is going ahead, when it's so rare for it to happen.

 

Quote

"It's just really rare that they would go after someone and prosecute them for this," Prof Stevenson said.

 

"But this [Hunter Biden] is a high-profile person and there's been members of Congress demanding he be prosecuted."

 

[placeholder]

9 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I put up his quote verbatim -- if you want to attack it that's up to you. But I don't have to justify it to your liking.

 

And the Mukasey quote was AUG 18, 2023:

 

Michael B. Mukasey, a former U.S. attorney general and longtime Manhattan federal judge, said because of the complex issues raised in all four of Mr. Trump’s cases, “I think the odds are slim to none that any of them gets to trial before the election.”

Stop raising straw men. You can quote whomeover you like on any subject whatsoever. No one's denying your right to do so.  Just as it's my right to point out that you made a pretty poor choice in the case of Barr.

[stoner]

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Just as it's my right to point out that you made a pretty poor choice in the case of Barr.

 

regardless of how wrong you are i still support your right to say it. 

[jerrymahoney]

8 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Stop raising straw men. You can quote whomeover you like on any subject whatsoever. No one's denying your right to do so.  Just as it's my right to point out that you made a pretty poor choice in the case of Barr.

I was really interested in the Elie Honig comment but next time I'll be more careful.

Edited June 6 by jerrymahoney