Search results for query: *

“Speculating” being the operative word here. Maybe barbos will google up an actual reference to the DOJ offering Trump a plea deal.

Yes. Maybe English isn’t your primary language so you could have misunderstood. in the article it says: Rachel was musing about a plea deal. Then O’Donnell mused that the plea offer would have to come from the defense. If you think you have an actual reference to the DOJ offering a plea deal...

Yes you did. So you must have forgotten.

Never? Except for the times you demonstrably lied about things that I personally said. Thats why I don’t believe you. Have you forgotten?

Because there has been no plea deal for him to drop out. At least none that anyone has heard about. Do you even think Trump would offer to drop out as part of a plea deal?? Did you even read the article you linked to?

I know how to google. But coming from you I didn’t think it worthy of following up. Anyway. Thanks for the link. I was always against this kind of thing as it would have indicated that it actually was a politically motivated prosecution. I’m glad that the actual people in power (DOJ) did not do...

I think financial crimes by wealthy, powerful people are going to be quite recurrent if they are constantly passed over for prosecution.

Citation or link please.

Sorry if I don’t believe you when you make claims of what other people have said. You’ve openly lied about what I’ve said so you have no credibility. If you provide citations then I might listen. As i said “facts and logical argument”.

The question was whether you had an actual argument and as yet you have not presented one. Feel feee to provide it when you think one up.

If they are so convinced that only violence can fix our country why are they waiting for Trump to ask them? Maybe because they can blame him when they get caught and tried?

Haha!! Your go-to response when you have nothing intelligible to say.

I would think that more damaging than Trump actually fairly winning the election would be Trump losing but the politicians figuring out a way to give him the Presidency, which could only be done by completely undermining the fair election process.

so, that’s a “no”. Thanks.

So, you believe the jury was rigged? Why else would you put quotes around the word "criminal"? One can argue that the crime was too middling to be taken up by the District Attorney, equivalent to going 57 mph in a 55 mph zone, and only taken up because the DA had a political vendetta against...

That might be a good way to precipitate the end of the Electoral College. But getting there could be nasty if it goes this way.

Interesting news: From Reuters:

He's saying that the DA only pursued the charges because Trump is running for President. Many Republicans are saying that too. And I'm sure many people are believe that too. And even if it were true, it wouldn't change the fact that he got convicted on the facts of the case and his poor...

Karen McDougal. And the Enquirer didn't want to do another 'catch and kill' for Trump, which is why he had to have Cohen pay Daniels instead of Pecker.

Does it matter? Should criminals only be charged and convicted if it fits in with the goals of specific political parties?