ADVERTISEMENT

Special Prosecutor for Jan 6 and classified docs cases involving Trump

How many times can you get duped? Seriously, he admitted to the documents. We heard what he said in Ukraine case. We heard his words on January 6. Can’t imagine what it feels like to make constant excuses for a corrupt clown like this. You’ve been doing it for 6 years now, so have to admire the commitment.
🤣
 
I hope the new house majority calls all these informants. If the US was going to be taken down by Trump, Oath Keepers and Proud Boys these folks should tell us all about it including why it wasn’t stopped ahead of time.

 
Court of Appeals tells Trump shill district judge "nice try but no dice", full speed ahead for DoJ now on classified docs case.


 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory
Court of Appeals tells Trump shill district judge "nice try but no dice", full speed ahead for DoJ now on classified docs case.


By Gawd they'll get him this time. We all knew it was only a matter of how many attempts. He toast.
 
How many times can you get duped? Seriously, he admitted to the documents. We heard what he said in Ukraine case. We heard his words on January 6. Can’t imagine what it feels like to make constant excuses for a corrupt clown like this. You’ve been doing it for 6 years now, so have to admire the commitment.
11515327095178955116
 
I am convinced.....


You're an idiot.
I could care less about anything you have to say about anything, you are convinced stupidity is a badge of honor and you wear it with pride. I was showing Zeke about how much her idol lies and was lying about his great accomplishments all proven false.
 
What was your opinion about the HRC email case and mishandling highly classified information?
I sent an entire spool of rope, but no one had the balls to use it.
I think you have outlined how improper it was for her to have them. The x 1mill multiplier for me was the blatant malicious coverup. She should have swung, but she has VERY deep roots. Possibly only second to Nancy but it's a tight race.

I know I know, your response will be, But Trump... blah blah blah.. Not even remotely the same. Not in the same universe even. Hadn't the FBI (or some alphabet) already viewed the docs, knew they were there for months, requested ANOTHER lock be put on the door? And when they finally decided "oh god those are dangerous", they were STILL THERE in that locked room. Apples to moon pies.
 
I sent an entire spool of rope, but no one had the balls to use it.
I think you have outlined how improper it was for her to have them. The x 1mill multiplier for me was the blatant malicious coverup. She should have swung, but she has VERY deep roots. Possibly only second to Nancy but it's a tight race.

I know I know, your response will be, But Trump... blah blah blah.. Not even remotely the same. Not in the same universe even. Hadn't the FBI (or some alphabet) already viewed the docs, knew they were there for months, requested ANOTHER lock be put on the door? And when they finally decided "oh god those are dangerous", they were STILL THERE in that locked room. Apples to moon pies.
You are a hypocrite. What she did was indefensible and so is what Trump has done. Your attempt to defend Trump is not only weak, it’s inaccurate.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Crayfish57
It certainly sounds bad, but who knows what might be on there to provide context that is different. I trust the system, the truth will be found. Then we can get worked up, or not.
Marvin, I believe you - and you alone, of the libs on this board - have learned a lesson from the Russian Collusion Hoax.

Kudos and I agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
Looks like Indictment #2, this time out of south Florida, is imminent. Charges, it appears, will focus on obstruction and sharing confidential docs with others. Then it's Georgia's turn next month, with election interference and racketeering charges. And a fourth indictment in DC remains a possibility.

Don the Con is going to be the first candidate for president wearing an ankle bracelet.


 
That makes sense. I'm just asking, technically speaking, even without signing an NDA, it would still be a crime for, say, me to intentionally disclosed classified info, too, right?
Yes. Usually, an NDA is signed at the end of employment requiring a clearance as well. Basically, it reminds people that they're still bound by the rules.
 
That makes sense. I'm just asking, technically speaking, even without signing an NDA, it would still be a crime for, say, me to intentionally disclosed classified info, too, right?
You would have an additional burden of having to explain why you even had the information to share to begin with.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT