TRUMP 2024

212,680 Views | 3446 Replies | Last: 59 min ago by BBW12OG
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:49p, 2/16/24
I thought I'd help #Sieve, #Nappy and #Gobbler out for a few minutes this afternoon. ;-)

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
2
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:53p, 2/16/24
OK, I did my generous deed for the day, back to it.

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
1
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 6:58p, 2/16/24
Werewolf said:
I thought I'd help #Sieve, #Nappy and #Gobbler out for a few minutes this afternoon. ;-)

Lol, wow, I just starred a Were post!
Reply Quote
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SmaptyWolf • 7:07p, 2/16/24
SmaptyWolf said:
Werewolf said:
I thought I'd help #Sieve, #Nappy and #Gobbler out for a few minutes this afternoon. ;-)

Lol, wow, I just starred a Were post!
Darn, I believe they've got him now! America First many have come to an end.

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:32p, 2/16/24
Back in the day baby!!!

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:04p, 2/16/24


Well said, Mitt.
Reply Quote
3
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 10:10p, 2/16/24
Civilized said:


Well said, Mitt.


Adorable.

Nobody doubts that your vote is for the dementia ridden old man, pretindependent. You voted for Hillary right??!! lol.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:30p, 2/17/24
Crazy how the left has weaponized the judicial system.



Reply Quote
5
1 edit
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:38p, 2/17/24
Reply Quote
4
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packgrad • 12:56p, 2/17/24
packgrad said:
Apparently becoming a vocal right-wing idiot is bad for a business that mostly sells electric cars to lefties. And apparently Disney doesn't like advertising next to white nationalist screeds.

Who could have predicted?
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:22p, 2/17/24
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
2 edits
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:23p, 2/17/24
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:41p, 2/17/24
Where's #daSieve?

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:12a, 2/18/24
#DaSieve, #daNappy and #daGobbler, you've got him now!!
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
1
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:20a, 2/18/24
Bout that time..... Pick a side!

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:32p, 2/18/24
#daSIeve, folks are waking up 2 the truth....
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8KeWx68/
#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 12:59p, 2/18/24
Unsurprisingly you seem to think I support all the NYC cases against Trump. I honestly don't. I think they shouldn't have been brought.

I think he's basically guilty and I have little personal sympathy for him given his contempt for the law, but the prosecutions are obviously political. I'm sorry if I don't fit your strawman.
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
Reply Quote
1
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:20p, 2/18/24
Reply Quote
5
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packgrad • 7:27p, 2/18/24
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Reply Quote
3
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SmaptyWolf • 7:57p, 2/18/24
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
Reply Quote
2
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 8:14p, 2/18/24
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?

Is this a serious question? Inflating and/or undervaluing your assets to get favorable loan terms and favorable insurance premiums is called fraud, and yes, it's very illegal.

So you're saying that Trump paid the actual loan terms and insurance premiums he would have paid had he not lied? Somehow I doubt it.

And are you saying that if your average non-billionaire applies for business loans with grossly inflated assets and applies for insurance with grossly undervalued assets, then as long as they eventually pay their bogus loans it's no harm no foul? You don't think those folks are convicted all the time?
Reply Quote
2
3 edits
hokiewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SmaptyWolf • 8:38p, 2/18/24
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?

Is this a serious question? Inflating and/or undervaluing your assets to get favorable loan terms and favorable insurance premiums is called fraud, and yes, it's very illegal.

So you're saying that Trump paid the actual loan terms and insurance premiums he would have paid had he not lied? Somehow I doubt it.

And are you saying that if your average non-billionaire applies for business loans with grossly inflated assets and applies for insurance with grossly undervalued assets, then as long as they eventually pay their bogus loans it's no harm no foul? You don't think those folks are convicted all the time?
What I'm saying is that the banks he borrowed money from and the insurance companies he worked with were perfectly fine with the valuations of his properties. The Trump Organization then followed the terms of the loans. There was no aggrieved parties in this case.

So, I don't expect you average non-billionaire to be taken to court for grossly inflated assets and applying for insurance with grossly undervalued assets if there is no aggrieved party. Generally, someone has to bring forth a complaint for the State of NY to go after the average non-billionaire. In this case, the State of NY took it upon themselves to go and manufacture a case against the Trump Organization without an aggrieved party. If all parties agreed to the valuations, there is no fraud.

That my friend, is the difference here. If it wasn't for Trump being a lightning rod for political discourse, the State of NY would have never put forth a case. I expect this sham to be appealed and rejected at some point.

Again, as I stated above, I think he's basically guilty and I have little personal sympathy for him given his contempt for the law, but the prosecutions are obviously political.
Originator of the Tony Adams Scale
Reply Quote
2 edits
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 9:20p, 2/18/24
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?

Is this a serious question? Inflating and/or undervaluing your assets to get favorable loan terms and favorable insurance premiums is called fraud, and yes, it's very illegal.

So you're saying that Trump paid the actual loan terms and insurance premiums he would have paid had he not lied? Somehow I doubt it.

And are you saying that if your average non-billionaire applies for business loans with grossly inflated assets and applies for insurance with grossly undervalued assets, then as long as they eventually pay their bogus loans it's no harm no foul? You don't think those folks are convicted all the time?
What I'm saying is that the banks he borrowed money from and the insurance companies he worked with were perfectly fine with the valuations of his properties. The Trump Organization then followed the terms of the loans. There was no aggrieved parties in this case.

So, I don't expect you average non-billionaire to be taken to court for grossly inflated assets and applying for insurance with grossly undervalued assets if there is no aggrieved party. Generally, someone has to bring forth a complaint for the State of NY to go after the average non-billionaire. In this case, the State of NY took it upon themselves to go and manufacture a case against the Trump Organization without an aggrieved party. If all parties agreed to the valuations, there is no fraud.

That my friend, is the difference here. If it wasn't for Trump being a lightning rod for political discourse, the State of NY would have never put forth a case. I expect this sham to be appealed and rejected at some point.

Again, as I stated above, I think he's basically guilty and I have little personal sympathy for him given his contempt for the law, but the prosecutions are obviously political.
Actually, the way NY state law works, the Attorney General does have standing to bring charges against billionaires, banks, etc, regardless of there being an aggrieved party... it's how they've dealt with the mob, shady investment banks (like DeutcheBank, the ****heads likely laundering Russian money and "loaning" it to Trump), and all sorts of other powerful bad actors.

This prosecution is only "political" in the sense that if Trump hadn't been such a crook and then ran for President these financial records (dug up during multiple criminal investigations) would probably never have found themselves in the Attorney General's lap, obligating her to act. Repeatedly lying to banks is illegal. Even if the bank is happy to look the other way for some reason. Also, selling crack to 14 year olds is illegal, even if both parties are happy with the arrangement.

So too bad. The lesson is if you're going to crime constantly, you probably should keep your head down and maybe not run for President.
Reply Quote
5
4 edits
Werewolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:27p, 2/18/24
I don't know who this Turley guy is, lol. Maybe some of the constitutional scholars here should tweet to him to help him out.

turley is a Democrat too.... a principled one too.....sparse and hard to find.

#Devolution #Expand Your Thinking #Eye of The Storm #TheGreatAwakening
Reply Quote
caryking
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:34a, 2/19/24
I'm sure, even though I haven't looked it up, the NY AG department can bring charges against people, for crimes. In fact, Rudy brought the RICO charges against the Mob. Certainly, the NY AG can bring charges against Trump, for a crime. That said, who was the victim here?

All people, involved, were satisfied, according to them. Also, if the Trump organization inflated values, would they have been reflected in the tax value? If so, I'm sure the City, County, State, received more taxes on an inflated value.

I know, You know, Everyone knows, this is nothing more than a witch hunt! This will get overturned! In fact, not a single case, that Trump is facing, will end up in the losing category, for him.

You still may not like his politics and that's ok. I don't like some people's politics either. We just have a different world views!
On the illegal or criminal immigrants…

“they built the country, the reason our economy is growing”

Joe Biden
Reply Quote
2
packofwolves
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Werewolf • 10:48a, 2/19/24
Werewolf said:
I don't know who this Turley guy is, lol. Maybe some of the constitutional scholars here should tweet to him to help him out.

turley is a Democrat too.... a principled one too.....sparse and hard to find.



Turley's opinion was published in The Hill. Don't know why you dismiss him as a Democrat. I have read/listened to some of his opinions in the past and they seemed fair.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4473974-obscene-award-against-trump-is-testing-the-new-york-legal-systems-integrity/

This will be overturned in one of the courts.
Reply Quote
1 edit
packofwolves
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hokiewolf • 11:05a, 2/19/24
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?


NY used a 70 year old civil fraud law, 63(12), that does not require someone be defrauded. The law has been used frequently, but it's the first time someone was prosecuted for which no one was defrauded. It was clearly a deliberate political hit against Trump. Now Hochul is saying not to worry, we won't come after any other business that defrauds no one.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packofwolves • 11:42a, 2/19/24
packofwolves said:
Werewolf said:
I don't know who this Turley guy is, lol. Maybe some of the constitutional scholars here should tweet to him to help him out.

turley is a Democrat too.... a principled one too.....sparse and hard to find.



Turley's opinion was published in The Hill. Don't know why you dismiss him as a Democrat. I have read/listened to some of his opinions in the past and they seemed fair.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4473974-obscene-award-against-trump-is-testing-the-new-york-legal-systems-integrity/

This will be overturned in one of the courts.
Lol, Turley is a "Democrat" the same way Tulsi Gabbard is... both slid down the rabbit hole to MAGA crazy town long ago. I guess being the "even Dems are saying this!" commentators makes them relevant.
Reply Quote
2 edits
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SmaptyWolf • 12:58p, 2/19/24
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?

Is this a serious question? Inflating and/or undervaluing your assets to get favorable loan terms and favorable insurance premiums is called fraud, and yes, it's very illegal.

So you're saying that Trump paid the actual loan terms and insurance premiums he would have paid had he not lied? Somehow I doubt it.

And are you saying that if your average non-billionaire applies for business loans with grossly inflated assets and applies for insurance with grossly undervalued assets, then as long as they eventually pay their bogus loans it's no harm no foul? You don't think those folks are convicted all the time?
What I'm saying is that the banks he borrowed money from and the insurance companies he worked with were perfectly fine with the valuations of his properties. The Trump Organization then followed the terms of the loans. There was no aggrieved parties in this case.

So, I don't expect you average non-billionaire to be taken to court for grossly inflated assets and applying for insurance with grossly undervalued assets if there is no aggrieved party. Generally, someone has to bring forth a complaint for the State of NY to go after the average non-billionaire. In this case, the State of NY took it upon themselves to go and manufacture a case against the Trump Organization without an aggrieved party. If all parties agreed to the valuations, there is no fraud.

That my friend, is the difference here. If it wasn't for Trump being a lightning rod for political discourse, the State of NY would have never put forth a case. I expect this sham to be appealed and rejected at some point.

Again, as I stated above, I think he's basically guilty and I have little personal sympathy for him given his contempt for the law, but the prosecutions are obviously political.
Actually, the way NY state law works, the Attorney General does have standing to bring charges against billionaires, banks, etc, regardless of there being an aggrieved party... it's how they've dealt with the mob, shady investment banks (like DeutcheBank, the ****heads likely laundering Russian money and "loaning" it to Trump), and all sorts of other powerful bad actors.

This prosecution is only "political" in the sense that if Trump hadn't been such a crook and then ran for President these financial records (dug up during multiple criminal investigations) would probably never have found themselves in the Attorney General's lap, obligating her to act. Repeatedly lying to banks is illegal. Even if the bank is happy to look the other way for some reason. Also, selling crack to 14 year olds is illegal, even if both parties are happy with the arrangement.

So too bad. The lesson is if you're going to crime constantly, you probably should keep your head down and maybe not run for President.

Exactly.

If you don't want the scrutiny, don't run for President twice; don't be a colossally unlikeable asshat and make a ton of enemies; don't sex-assault and brag about it; don't bang porn stars and pay them hush money and then try to write that off as a business expense; don't obstruct the feds when they try to get back confidential docs that are obviously theirs; don't openly solicit insurrect...errrrr riots that obstruct the peaceful transfer or power; don't openly flout tax laws in NY ever since you and your siblings inherited half a billion dollars of property and paid taxes on 10% of that amount and laugh about it for decades; generally don't crime and get caught in other ways that bring negative attention to yourself; and on and on.

Trump wrote the playbook for how to bring unwanted attention to yourself legally.

He's lying in a bed that he's made himself over the last 50 years. He's not a victim of anything other than his own bad behavior and colossally poor judgment.

At this point I'm almost ready for him to be in office so he can start up his revenge tour. Either he actually finds criminal behavior by Biden and roots it out, or he and his worshipers are reminded that it takes a lot more than simply wanting to charge someone for crimes to get it done since you need some semblance of actual evidence.

Either way, America is better off in the end for his (likely completely inept and fruitless) vengeful efforts.
Reply Quote
2
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Civilized • 1:13p, 2/19/24
Civilized said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?

Is this a serious question? Inflating and/or undervaluing your assets to get favorable loan terms and favorable insurance premiums is called fraud, and yes, it's very illegal.

So you're saying that Trump paid the actual loan terms and insurance premiums he would have paid had he not lied? Somehow I doubt it.

And are you saying that if your average non-billionaire applies for business loans with grossly inflated assets and applies for insurance with grossly undervalued assets, then as long as they eventually pay their bogus loans it's no harm no foul? You don't think those folks are convicted all the time?
What I'm saying is that the banks he borrowed money from and the insurance companies he worked with were perfectly fine with the valuations of his properties. The Trump Organization then followed the terms of the loans. There was no aggrieved parties in this case.

So, I don't expect you average non-billionaire to be taken to court for grossly inflated assets and applying for insurance with grossly undervalued assets if there is no aggrieved party. Generally, someone has to bring forth a complaint for the State of NY to go after the average non-billionaire. In this case, the State of NY took it upon themselves to go and manufacture a case against the Trump Organization without an aggrieved party. If all parties agreed to the valuations, there is no fraud.

That my friend, is the difference here. If it wasn't for Trump being a lightning rod for political discourse, the State of NY would have never put forth a case. I expect this sham to be appealed and rejected at some point.

Again, as I stated above, I think he's basically guilty and I have little personal sympathy for him given his contempt for the law, but the prosecutions are obviously political.
Actually, the way NY state law works, the Attorney General does have standing to bring charges against billionaires, banks, etc, regardless of there being an aggrieved party... it's how they've dealt with the mob, shady investment banks (like DeutcheBank, the ****heads likely laundering Russian money and "loaning" it to Trump), and all sorts of other powerful bad actors.

This prosecution is only "political" in the sense that if Trump hadn't been such a crook and then ran for President these financial records (dug up during multiple criminal investigations) would probably never have found themselves in the Attorney General's lap, obligating her to act. Repeatedly lying to banks is illegal. Even if the bank is happy to look the other way for some reason. Also, selling crack to 14 year olds is illegal, even if both parties are happy with the arrangement.

So too bad. The lesson is if you're going to crime constantly, you probably should keep your head down and maybe not run for President.

Exactly.

If you don't want the scrutiny, don't run for President twice; don't be a colossally unlikeable asshat and make a ton of enemies; don't sex-assault and brag about it; don't bang porn stars and pay them hush money and then try to write that off as a business expense; don't obstruct the feds when they try to get back confidential docs that are obviously theirs; don't openly solicit insurrect...errrrr riots that obstruct the peaceful transfer or power; don't openly flout tax laws in NY ever since you and your siblings inherited half a billion dollars of property and paid taxes on 10% of that amount and laugh about it for decades; generally don't crime and get caught in other ways that bring negative attention to yourself; and on and on.

Trump wrote the playbook for how to bring unwanted attention to yourself legally.

He's lying in a bed that he's made himself over the last 50 years. He's not a victim of anything other than his own bad behavior and colossally poor judgment.

At this point I'm almost ready for him to be in office so he can start up his revenge tour. Either he actually finds criminal behavior by Biden and roots it out, or he and his worshipers are reminded that it takes a lot more than simply wanting to charge someone for crimes to get it done since you need some semblance of actual evidence.

Either way, America is better off in the end for his (likely completely inept and fruitless) vengeful efforts.

Except there is a zero percent chance he'd find criminal behavior by Biden, and a zero percent chance his worshipers, given the 600,000 teachable moments they've already been able to spin away, would learn any kind of lesson whatsoever that would make America better off.
Reply Quote
1
packgrad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:16p, 2/19/24
You might have clinical TDS if you justify the political prosecution and verdict in this case. Lol. Bat**** crazy.

I also love how the ****** supporter is so traumatized that Trump had sex with a porn star. Lolol. Seek help dude. You're embarrassing yourself.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
TheStorm
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packgrad • 1:28p, 2/19/24
packgrad said:
You might have clinical TDS if you justify the political prosecution and verdict in this case. Lol. Bat**** crazy.

I also love how the ****** supporter is so traumatized that Trump had sex with a porn star. Lolol. Seek help dude. You're embarrassing yourself.
I'm just entertained and amused that the word ****** is blocked here.
Reply Quote
3
Civilized
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to SmaptyWolf • 1:31p, 2/19/24
SmaptyWolf said:
Civilized said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
hokiewolf said:
SmaptyWolf said:
packgrad said:
Uh huh. Here's her actual quote:

"I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they're very different than Donald Trump and his behavior... by and large, they are honest people and they're not trying to hide their assets and they're following the rules."
Question for you - who was the actual aggrieved party here? From all that I've seen, none of the banks that Trump got loans from were part of the complaint, and they were paid back in full for the loans he took. What exactly was the rule the Trump organization broke?

Is this a serious question? Inflating and/or undervaluing your assets to get favorable loan terms and favorable insurance premiums is called fraud, and yes, it's very illegal.

So you're saying that Trump paid the actual loan terms and insurance premiums he would have paid had he not lied? Somehow I doubt it.

And are you saying that if your average non-billionaire applies for business loans with grossly inflated assets and applies for insurance with grossly undervalued assets, then as long as they eventually pay their bogus loans it's no harm no foul? You don't think those folks are convicted all the time?
What I'm saying is that the banks he borrowed money from and the insurance companies he worked with were perfectly fine with the valuations of his properties. The Trump Organization then followed the terms of the loans. There was no aggrieved parties in this case.

So, I don't expect you average non-billionaire to be taken to court for grossly inflated assets and applying for insurance with grossly undervalued assets if there is no aggrieved party. Generally, someone has to bring forth a complaint for the State of NY to go after the average non-billionaire. In this case, the State of NY took it upon themselves to go and manufacture a case against the Trump Organization without an aggrieved party. If all parties agreed to the valuations, there is no fraud.

That my friend, is the difference here. If it wasn't for Trump being a lightning rod for political discourse, the State of NY would have never put forth a case. I expect this sham to be appealed and rejected at some point.

Again, as I stated above, I think he's basically guilty and I have little personal sympathy for him given his contempt for the law, but the prosecutions are obviously political.
Actually, the way NY state law works, the Attorney General does have standing to bring charges against billionaires, banks, etc, regardless of there being an aggrieved party... it's how they've dealt with the mob, shady investment banks (like DeutcheBank, the ****heads likely laundering Russian money and "loaning" it to Trump), and all sorts of other powerful bad actors.

This prosecution is only "political" in the sense that if Trump hadn't been such a crook and then ran for President these financial records (dug up during multiple criminal investigations) would probably never have found themselves in the Attorney General's lap, obligating her to act. Repeatedly lying to banks is illegal. Even if the bank is happy to look the other way for some reason. Also, selling crack to 14 year olds is illegal, even if both parties are happy with the arrangement.

So too bad. The lesson is if you're going to crime constantly, you probably should keep your head down and maybe not run for President.

Exactly.

If you don't want the scrutiny, don't run for President twice; don't be a colossally unlikeable asshat and make a ton of enemies; don't sex-assault and brag about it; don't bang porn stars and pay them hush money and then try to write that off as a business expense; don't obstruct the feds when they try to get back confidential docs that are obviously theirs; don't openly solicit insurrect...errrrr riots that obstruct the peaceful transfer or power; don't openly flout tax laws in NY ever since you and your siblings inherited half a billion dollars of property and paid taxes on 10% of that amount and laugh about it for decades; generally don't crime and get caught in other ways that bring negative attention to yourself; and on and on.

Trump wrote the playbook for how to bring unwanted attention to yourself legally.

He's lying in a bed that he's made himself over the last 50 years. He's not a victim of anything other than his own bad behavior and colossally poor judgment.

At this point I'm almost ready for him to be in office so he can start up his revenge tour. Either he actually finds criminal behavior by Biden and roots it out, or he and his worshipers are reminded that it takes a lot more than simply wanting to charge someone for crimes to get it done since you need some semblance of actual evidence.

Either way, America is better off in the end for his (likely completely inept and fruitless) vengeful efforts.

Except there is a zero percent chance he'd find criminal behavior by Biden, and a zero percent chance his worshipers, given the 600,000 teachable moments they've already been able to spin away, would learn any kind of lesson whatsoever that would make America better off.

If there is no sweater string to pull with Biden, even better since Trump and his Bad News Bears attorneys will trip all over their dicks and embarrass themselves even more than they already have over the last several years.

Although we're back in a place where Trump is again holding the Republican party hostage, there is clearly more pushback now than there was during his first reign. Sane Republicans understand that his schtick is unique to him and Trump acolytes likley aren't going to be able to emulate his ability to capture enough of the party to be electorally viable, effectual leaders, especially when they don't have an electorally unpopular president like Biden to run against.
Reply Quote
stickwolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:46p, 2/19/24
This may have been covered, as I don't visit here much. But help me believe in a system where "Intel community has 6 ways to Sunday" to "get back" at somebody. I really have a problem with this no matter who the victim is. And boy its become apparent that some that somebody could possibly be "getting back" at Trump. So somebody who believes in this kind of "justice" help me understand.


I preface this to say if I was at a service station and heard a cop utter these words about a citizen and then indictments started coming from all over, it would be a problem. Why is this different? Why is this OK?

Reply Quote
4
1 edit
SmaptyWolf
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to stickwolf • 2:15p, 2/19/24
stickwolf said:
This may have been covered, as I don't visit here much. But help me believe in a system where "Intel community has 6 ways to Sunday" to "get back" at somebody. I really have a problem with this no matter who the victim is. And boy its become apparent that some that somebody could possibly be "getting back" at Trump. So somebody who believes in this kind of "justice" help me understand.


I preface this to say if I was at a service station and heard a cop utter these words about a citizen and then indictments started coming from all over, it would be a problem. Why is this different? Why is this OK?


What do you imagine the intelligence community has to do with any of Trump's current indictments?
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.