ADVERTISEMENT

Testimony focused on Trump's unfounded claims of widespread voter fraud

This is the headline of a story this afternoon on Fox news.com.

The rats are thinking of leaving a sinking ship.

To be fair, foxnews.com isn't totally in the bag for Trump and the Pubs like their prime time people are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Indyhorn
There's now the additional issue of Trump leveraging the Big Lie to rake in $250 million in post-election donations for an "election defense fund" that didn't exist.

The facts keep getting worse for this crook.

https://thehill.com/news/house/3521474-jan-6-panel-says-trump-preyed-on-small-campaign-donors/

Sadly, I doubt anything comes out of this particular grift. Campaign finance laws and PACs and all that nonsense are so corrupt that it would be impossible to bring a case that would stick, especially against Trump.
 
Sadly, I doubt anything comes out of this particular grift. Campaign finance laws and PACs and all that nonsense are so corrupt that it would be impossible to bring a case that would stick, especially against Trump.
Have they even identified where the funds went that were supposed to go for the inaugural ball?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
There's now the additional issue of Trump leveraging the Big Lie to rake in $250 million in post-election donations for an "election defense fund" that didn't exist.

The facts keep getting worse for this crook.

https://thehill.com/news/house/3521474-jan-6-panel-says-trump-preyed-on-small-campaign-donors/
Trump cries like a baby when he loses and claims the game is rigged: the fact that he would engage in a $250 million swindle while alleging the game was fraudulent is a nice touch. What a crook. He played his supporters like a fiddle.
 
Sadly, I doubt anything comes out of this particular grift. Campaign finance laws and PACs and all that nonsense are so corrupt that it would be impossible to bring a case that would stick, especially against Trump.
The path to federal prosecution could be wire fraud conspiracy and/or tax violations, much like what happened with the "We Build the Wall" scam that Steve Bannon was involved in and two others pled guilty to. Consumer protection statutes might also apply, with state prosecutions for consumer fraud.

On a different note, gotta love campaign manager Bill Stepien's testimony that there were essentially two camps in the Donald Trump post-election White House - - Rudy's team and "Team Normal." Sounds like Rudy was drinking on the job on Election Night. Hard to believe how far that guy has fallen.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
Sounds like Rudy was drinking on the job on Election Night. Hard to believe how far that guy has fallen.

Yeah, they're making a big deal out of that. Kind of unseemly if you ask me. If you're a drinker, that would be the night and the circumstances you'd be expected to get loaded, wouldn't it? Regardless, it shouldn't matter unless you think it's important that Trump was listening to drunk Rudy as opposed to sober Rudy. Neither one should have been allowed anywhere near him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IUPaterade724
Yeah, they're making a big deal out of that. Kind of unseemly if you ask me. If you're a drinker, that would be the night and the circumstances you'd be expected to get loaded, wouldn't it? Regardless, it shouldn't matter unless you think it's important that Trump was listening to drunk Rudy as opposed to sober Rudy. Neither one should have been allowed anywhere near him.
I don't know. Seems to me that if you're an advisor to the president and it's likely the president is going to want to speak with you that evening, you've got an obligation to stay sober.

I'm sure Trump wanted him around because he was one of the few who kept telling Trump what he wanted to hear.

I wonder if drunk Rudy scheduled that presser at Four Seasons Landscaping.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC and UncleMark
Both sides are loaded with crooks

So because both side have crooks, then it is all equal and being a crook is then alright? Similar to the "he did it first" excuse when a kid gets caught ;) My kids would give that thought process a thumbs up.

Here in the world of adults, crooks existing on both sides doesn't mean it SHOULD be a free for all in crookedness and that we should just look the other way and not discuss it.

Furthermore, I would say there is 1 side that has a lot more crooks than the other side. Plus, dems tend to get rid of their crooks/scandal (Cuomo, Franken) and don't sit on here defending them to the death, whereas the GOP worship/defend their crooks (Trump, Gaetz).
 
There's now the additional issue of Trump leveraging the Big Lie to rake in $250 million in post-election donations for an "election defense fund" that didn't exist.

The facts keep getting worse for this crook.

https://thehill.com/news/house/3521474-jan-6-panel-says-trump-preyed-on-small-campaign-donors/
Honestly, I think this might be was does him in. I think.

I don't think he'll do any jail time or anything like that, but if enough people are pissed at him for ripping them off, maybe enough of them won't make any donations to his campaign.

Then again, who am I kidding? These people don't care. He'll probably be sworn in as president again in January '25.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC and Bowlmania
Honestly, I think this might be was does him in. I think.

I don't think he'll do any jail time or anything like that, but if enough people are pissed at him for ripping them off, maybe enough of them won't make any donations to his campaign.

Then again, who am I kidding? These people don't care. He'll probably be sworn in as president again in January '25.

Dems would be smart to find someone else to run against Trump. Don't need to make the same mistake as GOP did by trotting out Trump for re-election.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
Honestly, I think this might be was does him in. I think.

I don't think he'll do any jail time or anything like that, but if enough people are pissed at him for ripping them off, maybe enough of them won't make any donations to his campaign.

Then again, who am I kidding? These people don't care. He'll probably be sworn in as president again in January '25.

Diverting money to hotels might be a problem depending upon the amounts. We know what stays/rooms cost and dates
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ohio Guy
It'll be DeSantis not Trump
I'll believe it when I see it. I just read an article claiming that Trump is set to announce this July 4th that he is running. Obviously who knows if there is any truth to that.

DeSantis would win easily in 2024. And honestly I may vote for him just to get someone stable and prototypical back into the office. I'd literally vote for a sack of shit over Trump though. Yes a sack of shit would(is?) do better than Trump.
 
She's down there in Indian Creek with Tom Brady and Kurt's friend. If she had half a brain she'd just spend her days goofing
Well, she's a Trump and, like the Kardashians, the only way they make money these days is being on TV or putting their name on shit.
 
I'll believe it when I see it. I just read an article claiming that Trump is set to announce this July 4th that he is running. Obviously who knows if there is any truth to that.

DeSantis would win easily in 2024. And honestly I may vote for him just to get someone stable and prototypical back into the office. I'd literally vote for a sack of shit over Trump though. Yes a sack of shit would(is?) do better than Trump.

Not sure I could ever vote for DeSantis after his crusade against Disney and anyone that uses their 1st amendment rights to dare say a negative thing about his laws. Revenge legislation is almost as dangerous as Trump.
 
But then Donald wouldn't want to sleep with her lol
umm-okay-sure.gif


Well....
 
I'll believe it when I see it. I just read an article claiming that Trump is set to announce this July 4th that he is running. Obviously who knows if there is any truth to that.

DeSantis would win easily in 2024. And honestly I may vote for him just to get someone stable and prototypical back into the office. I'd literally vote for a sack of shit over Trump though. Yes a sack of shit would(is?) do better than Trump.
Sure, if being an autocrat is prototypical.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DANC
Have they shown the pee video yet?

If they show the pee video, I’ll believe it all.

But without the pee video, I’m stuck between lies and truth, unable to know what to believe.

I’ve been lied to so often, I just need some truth.

My vote for a pee video!

 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
None of this J6 committee sham means anything. They have no power to do anything. It truly is a show trial. It's political and not legal. Their hope is it will lead to the DOJ indicting Trump and in hopes he will not be able to run again. The fact the committee has already had to apologize and correct multiple pieces of 'evidence' is telling. They are deliberately misrepresenting information knowing that it won't matter because the mainstream media will run with the errors and not even mention the corrections.

The question is will Garland go forward with an indictment? I hope he does because then you get a real trial where the other side can correct the fraud allegations. That will only make it worse for dems as another show trial blows up in their faces.

Meanwhile. all the kings horses and all the kings men cannot put Old Joe back together again. And no matter how the dems scream and shout and no matter how much the Beta Boys on this forum cry, November will be an absolute rout. Why? Because everyone knows it is Joe/The Ho Ho Ho /Nancy/Chuck and company that crashed the country and they are reminded every time they stop at the gas station and grocery store.
These hearings are at least as important as the Watergate hearings, as there needs to be a public presentation and historical record of the unprecedented and egregious misconduct of an American president.

I'm not sure what "corrections" you're speaking of, but the testimony of a number of witnesses was presented yesterday. They were all Republicans and members of Trump's inner circle when he was president. All of them described Trump's allegations of election fraud as unfounded. One called them "bullshit." Trump was told the allegations were bullshit, but he's continued with the con and has fleeced supporters for contributions in the name of a bogus "election defense fund." Which of these several witnesses has recanted their testimony?
 
These hearings are at least as important as the Watergate hearings, as there needs to be a public presentation and historical record of the unprecedented and egregious misconduct of an American president.

I'm not sure what "corrections" you're speaking of, but the testimony of a number of witnesses was presented yesterday. They were all Republicans and members of Trump's inner circle when he was president. All of them described Trump's allegations of election fraud as unfounded. One called them "bullshit." Trump was told the allegations were bullshit, but he's continued with the con and has fleeced supporters for contributions in the name of a bogus "election defense fund." Which of these several witnesses has recanted their testimony?
When liars tell the truth, how do we know?

Who to believe? When?

If you like your plan, you can keep it.
Vaccination will stop the spread.
I am not a crook.
CBS has a document that proves Bush lied about his National Guard service.
Iraq has or tried to get WMD.

This is all a crisis in integrity in an amoral society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
When liars tell the truth, how do we know?

Who to believe? When?

If you like your plan, you can keep it.
Vaccination will stop the spread.
I am not a crook.
CBS has a document that proves Bush lied about his National Guard service.
Iraq has or tried to get WMD.

This is all a crisis in integrity in an amoral society.
Dumb. You can do better. I think.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT