trastrick Posted August 21, 2022 Share Posted August 21, 2022 13 minutes ago, Magilla said: The ticket for highlighting how ridiculous your claims re: Clinton, Biden, Pelosi etc... ...absolutely! How Donald Trump Shifted Kids-Cancer Charity Money Into His Business: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2019/12/23/best-stories-of-the-decade-how-donald-trump-shifted-kids-cancer-charity-money-into-his-business/ ...via Eric Trump Pays Court-Ordered $2 Million For Illegally Using Trump Foundation Funds https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2019/donald-j-trump-pays-court-ordered-2-million-illegally-using-trump-foundation So... about Hunter? Lol So, no, Eric still hasn't been "nicked". This article from 2017, the "Russian Collusion"/Impeachment era, is full of the usual. speculation. And as usual, "no beef"! "apparently used announced an investigation, seems to defy federal tax rules also raises larger questions this maneuver would appear to have more in common with a drug cartel's money-laundering operation is at best an appearance problem. other extra expenditures raise eyebrows" I'd say if any of that has criminal implications, what are they doing about it after 5 years? How many Democrats does it take to screw in a lightbulb? As for those pearl clutchers and curtain peepers getting their panties in a knot about this stuff, I'd suggest they read the New York Time best seller "Clinton Cash". We're talking $billions there, and no sick kids being helped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Tomlinson Posted August 21, 2022 Share Posted August 21, 2022 1 hour ago, Slinny said: I live and learn never thought corbyn would it be rich at all , I did not do my home work , by the way book is exerlent , small things we have seen ,athis could come back if we are not carefull . Tha Ragged Trousered Hassalls Castles Philathropists , We have been there , seen it first hand and got the sack , many times . eh!!!!!/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted August 21, 2022 Share Posted August 21, 2022 1 hour ago, trastrick said: As for those pearl clutchers and curtain peepers getting their panties in a knot about this stuff, I'd suggest they read the New York Time best seller "Clinton Cash". Peter Schweizer, senior editor-at-large of far-right media organization Breitbart News. It's a NYT Bestseller by virtue of the number of copies it sold, not that they endorse or are in any way involved with it. 1 hour ago, trastrick said: We're talking $billions there, and no sick kids being helped. Sure, except one was part of a criminal enterprise... ...the other wasn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash "The book has zero evidence to back up its outlandish claims ..." "some of the claims in the book have been proven factually inaccurate" "Schweizer does not prove corruption on the part of the Clintons" "PolitiFact found the assertion that Clinton changed her views on a nuclear deal with India in response to donations to her family's foundation to be false." Better luck next time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trastrick Posted August 22, 2022 Share Posted August 22, 2022 16 hours ago, Magilla said: Peter Schweizer, senior editor-at-large of far-right media organization Breitbart News. It's a NYT Bestseller by virtue of the number of copies it sold, not that they endorse or are in any way involved with it. Sure, except one was part of a criminal enterprise... ...the other wasn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash "The book has zero evidence to back up its outlandish claims ..." "some of the claims in the book have been proven factually inaccurate" "Schweizer does not prove corruption on the part of the Clintons" "PolitiFact found the assertion that Clinton changed her views on a nuclear deal with India in response to donations to her family's foundation to be false." Better luck next time... Lol ""The book has zero evidence to back up its outlandish claims ..." sez John Podesta, Clinton's campaign Manager. A more sober analysis of the book is contained in the WIKI article you posted. To whit: "Writing for The Washington Post, academic and political activist Lawrence Lessig wrote "On any fair reading, the pattern of behavior that Schweizer has charged is corruption."[18] James Freeman reviewed the book for The Wall Street Journal, writing that "Almost every page of the fascinating Clinton Cash ... will be excruciating reading for partisans on both sides of the aisle".[19] Ed Pilkington, writing for The Guardian, reported that it was factually correct that "large donations to the foundation from the chairman of Uranium One, Ian Telfer, at around the time of the Russian purchase of the company and while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, were never disclosed to the public. The multimillion dollar sums were channeled through a subsidiary of the Clinton Foundation, CGSCI, which did not reveal its individual donors."[20] Following publication and in reaction to areas where it said improvements were warranted, the Clinton Foundation said it would put into place some new procedures for better financial reporting and that it would limit some kinds of foreign donations. Pilkington assessed those claims made by the Clinton Foundation as unlikely to put the matter to rest: "But with Bill refusing doggedly to give up his speaker engagements – 'I gotta pay our bills' – and foreign corporations and super-rich individuals still able to donate to the family charity, it looks like this controversy may run and run."[20] And, of course, there is "no evidence" of criminality. Hillary made sure of that by destroying 30,000 emails from her private bathroon server, that she used while Secretary of State to conduct State Depaertment business. Emails that were under Congressional Subpoena, at the time. She even had the hardware hammered and bleached the to ensure they would never, ever surface. So she, like Hunter and Joe, remains "innocent until proven guilty" in a Court of Law! We can at least agree on that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slinny Posted August 22, 2022 Share Posted August 22, 2022 17 hours ago, Magilla said: Peter Schweizer, senior editor-at-large of far-right media organization Breitbart News. It's a NYT Bestseller by virtue of the number of copies it sold, not that they endorse or are in any way involved with it. Sure, except one was part of a criminal enterprise... ...the other wasn't. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash "The book has zero evidence to back up its outlandish claims ..." "some of the claims in the book have been proven factually inaccurate" "Schweizer does not prove corruption on the part of the Clintons" "PolitiFact found the assertion that Clinton changed her views on a nuclear deal with India in response to donations to her family's foundation to be false." Better luck next time... That book my friend is very true if you left school when myself and Leo did then you will know what we are talking about ,you had to put up with little hitlers bullying you, I could tell you some tales you my not believe, but are all true , I have been put on time and time again , by jumped upformen cutting prices to make themselves look good with bosses, and this is not just the trade I was in it was all over England. and this book tells a very true story , this is no fairytale. . Nothing to do with trump But allot to do with the way things are in this country today So wake up. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trastrick Posted August 26, 2022 Share Posted August 26, 2022 (edited) On 19/10/2017 at 17:52, phil752 said: Ok so what as he, done while being in power that is so bad. When judged against any other American President. Crickets! Lol But if the opinions stated above were to be valid, you can see why his political opponents will bend, or even break, every law on the books to get him in jail for something, anything! I mean, it would be the patriotic thing to do! We all would want to save democracy, right? Meanwhile, today is another day of "bombshell" revelations. The Guardian DoJ to release redacted Trump Mar-a-Lago affidavit after judge’s order Affidavit contains key information about investigation into retention of government secrets at ex-president’s Florida home "The justice department is expected to file on Friday a redacted version of the affidavit justifying the search warrant used to seize sensitive government documents from Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida earlier this month, after being ordered to do so by a federal judge. The order from judge Bruce Reinhart, who approved the warrant and is overseeing the case from West Palm Beach, Florida, instructed the justice department to submit the redacted affidavit that he had reviewed – itself previously under seal – in the public docket before noon. In an earlier two-page ruling, the judge said the justice department’s proposed redactions were narrowly tailored to keep secret grand jury material, the identities of uncharged individuals and sources and methods used in the criminal investigation – and the remainder could become public. “The government has met its burden of showing that its proposed redactions are narrowly tailored to serve the government’s legitimate interest in the integrity of the ongoing investigation and are the least onerous alternative to sealing the entire Affidavit,” Reinhart wrote. "The affidavit contains key information – notably the probable cause – about the justice department’s investigation into the unauthorized retention of government secrets at Mar-a-Lago, which, according to the warrant, could constitute violations of at least three criminal statutes. "The imminent partial release of the affidavit is set to prove a major juncture in the developing investigation, being led by the justice department’s national security division, and the attorney general, Merrick Garland, who personally approved the warrant after days of deliberations. Exactly how much of the affidavit will be redacted was not clear, but they are expected to be extensive. The justice department had originally opposed unsealing the affidavit at all, and only filed a redacted version after being forced by Reinhart last week. "But depending on how the affidavit was produced, several former US attorneys said, it could also contain elements that are not directly related to the investigation, such as descriptions of potential crimes that the justice department suspected were being committed at Mar-a-Lago. The former president has indicated on his social media website that he supports unsealing the affidavit but his lawyers never filed a formal motion to that effect, and instead left the effort to a coalition of media outlets that pushed to have the affidavit become public. "Trump has since filed a separate motion to have a so-called special master appointed to determine what seized materials prosecutors can use as evidence in the investigation, and to force the justice department to provide a more detailed list of what was retrieved by the FBI." https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/aug/26/doj-redacted-trump-affidavit-mar-a-lago-search Let me speculate here, before the Media get involved. The Democrats are so sure he's a villain, there must be a smoking gun somewhere. Nixon had his tapes. The Clinton's had their 700 illegal raw FBI files on their Republican political enemies, her billing records for Whitewater, which she had denied, and her 30,000 emails she managed somehow to destroy while they were under Congressional Subpeona. Bill had his gifts from Monika stashed under his secretary's bed! Lol So obvously this "threat to democracy" must have some like evidence secreted away. A secret taping machine, or an "enemies" list. Maybe even a Plan to Overthrow Democracy. They know they are not going to find a written contract signed by Trump, to sell Putin and Xi U.S. Secrets. Enter yet another "whistle blower", anonymous, of course, who has tipped off the FBI that there's some stuff in Trumps house that is illegal. That's all they need, So they do an armed raid on Trump's house. They wouldn't do that if it was just an official documents handling process claim. Those things can take years to resolve, complicated by the very fact that Trump has had proper legal access to them for his entire term of office, and he also has the sole right to classify and declassify any document. Then there's the "intention" bit, that got Hillary off. If they only specified that on an affidavit, they wouldn't be allowed to take anything else they found. If all they found is documents that should be in the archive. the heavy handed FBI raid would be, and is, considered an embarrassment to the DOJ. However, if they have found some peripheral evidence of a criminal offense, they will be justified. I doubt they have, because the situation would be leaked to the press, and there'd be no need for the Media's second guessing of Joe's Attorney-General, Garland. Will today's revelation clear up a few questions, or will it just add more fog, to the doings of Foggy Bottom, as DC is humorously referred to? Edited August 26, 2022 by trastrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted August 26, 2022 Share Posted August 26, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, trastrick said: Crickets! Lol I wouldn't call 528 pages of various views on the matter "crickets" That you had to go back 5 years to find something to reply to, and still got it wrong... priceless! Quote But if the opinions stated above were to be valid, you can see why his political opponents will bend, or even break, every law on the books to get him in jail for something, anything! ...or just for something he's actually guilty of doing Quote The Democrats are so sure he's a villain, there must be a smoking gun somewhere. Nixon had his tapes. ...and Trump has his documents Quote The Clinton's had their 700 illegal raw FBI files on their Republican political enemies, her billing records for Whitewater, which she had denied, and her 30,000 emails she managed somehow to destroy while they were under Congressional Subpeona. Bill had his gifts from Monika stashed under his secretary's bed! Lol Both were investigated. Bill was impeached. There is no imbalance here. Quote So obvously this "threat to democracy" must have some like evidence secreted away. A secret taping machine, or an "enemies" list. Maybe even a Plan to Overthrow Democracy. They know they are not going to find a written contract signed by Trump, to sell Putin and Xi U.S. Secrets. They don't have to... possession of them at all is an offence. Quote Enter yet another "whistle blower", anonymous, of course, who has tipped off the FBI that there's some stuff in Trumps house that is illegal. That's all they need, So they do an armed raid on Trump's house. *After* repeated attempts to get Trump to hand them over voluntarily, and after Trump lied by claiming they had all been returned. Trump was raided as a direct result of his own actions... no-one else's. It was entirely avoidable. Quote They wouldn't do that if it was just an official documents handling process claim. Those things can take years to resolve, complicated by the very fact that Trump has had proper legal access to them for his entire term of office, and he also has the sole right to classify and declassify any document. ...via a process, that wasn't followed. Trump's claim's in this regard have been disputed by his own cabinet members! Quote Then there's the "intention" bit, that got Hillary off. He lied on a sworn statement. Quote If they only specified that on an affidavit, they wouldn't be allowed to take anything else they found. Wrong Quote If all they found is documents that should be in the archive. Documents they'd been asking to be returned for well over 6 months Quote the heavy handed FBI raid would be, and is, considered an embarrassment to the DOJ. Nope Quote However, if they have found some peripheral evidence of a criminal offense, they will be justified. And as your post demonstrates... if they do, you still wouldn't believe it... ...never heard such a laughable load of hyperbole. Don't you ever just read the crap you post back to yourself and think... I'd love it to be true, but you'd have to be an idiot to fall for it so it's clearly not? Edited August 26, 2022 by Magilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trastrick Posted August 27, 2022 Share Posted August 27, 2022 14 hours ago, Magilla said: I wouldn't call 528 pages of various views on the matter "crickets" That you had to go back 5 years to find something to reply to, and still got it wrong... priceless! ...or just for something he's actually guilty of doing ...and Trump has his documents Both were investigated. Bill was impeached. There is no imbalance here. They don't have to... possession of them at all is an offence. *After* repeated attempts to get Trump to hand them over voluntarily, and after Trump lied by claiming they had all been returned. Trump was raided as a direct result of his own actions... no-one else's. It was entirely avoidable. ...via a process, that wasn't followed. Trump's claim's in this regard have been disputed by his own cabinet members! He lied on a sworn statement. Wrong Documents they'd been asking to be returned for well over 6 months Nope And as your post demonstrates... if they do, you still wouldn't believe it... ...never heard such a laughable load of hyperbole. Don't you ever just read the crap you post back to yourself and think... I'd love it to be true, but you'd have to be an idiot to fall for it so it's clearly not? Yeah, we know the "narrative". No need to repeat Democrat talking points here. because all that is covered in the newspapers! For 4 years it was it was "Russian Collusion" For a year it was "bribing" the Ukraine President, our hero Zelensky, who said it never happened. Then it was "an armed ressurection" to overthrow democracy. This week, it's "Espionage Act" crimes. Yesterday, it's some 74,000,000 Republican voters (Hillary's "deplorables") who are "semi-fascist" supporters, whatever that means Wearing a cap with the words, "Make America Great again" is likened to wearing a NAZI swastika. And, guess what? The Democrat hacks at the New York Times, who pushed all this nonsense to the gullible, for years, are calling for Trump to be Indicted. NY Times demands 'criminal prosecution' of Donald Trump ... "18 hours ago — The New York Times editorial board called on the Department of Justice to criminally prosecute former President Donald Trump in an editorial ..." https://www.foxnews.com/media/ny-times-demands-criminal-prosecution-donald-trump-despite-risks-greatest-crisis-since-civil-war Of course the only thing missing, as usual, is an actual Criminal Charge from the duly authorized law enforcement agencies. The fear and desperation is palpable, because it's election time, and one last long shot attempt to save their self destroyed credibilty. Stay tuned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted August 27, 2022 Share Posted August 27, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, trastrick said: Yeah, we know the "narrative". Trump’s narrative takes big hit with affidavit’s release https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3617635-the-memo-trumps-narrative-takes-big-hit-with-affidavits-release/ Quote No need to repeat Democrat talking points here. because all that is covered in the newspapers! Yawn... Quote For 4 years it was it was "Russian Collusion" Speaking of which: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3614681-unredacted-barr-memo-details-doj-rationale-for-not-charging-trump/ ...so much for Banana Republics! Quote For a year it was "bribing" the Ukraine President, our hero Zelensky, who said it never happened. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/21/trump-bribe-ukraine-228151/ "What Trump is alleged to have done is not a garden variety crime; it’s worse. It involved misusing $250 million in aid appropriated by Congress for his benefit—the kind of gross misconduct that easily clears the bar of high crimes and misdemeanors set by the Constitution when impeaching a president." Quote Then it was "an armed ressurection" to overthrow democracy. Which clearly did happen, fermented and stoked by Trump Quote This week, it's "Espionage Act" crimes. 184 classified, secret, and top secret documents, and a clear attempt at obstruction re: getting them back. Quote Yesterday, it's some 74,000,000 Republican voters (Hillary's "deplorables") who are "semi-fascist" supporters, whatever that means Wearing a cap with the words, "Make America Great again" is likened to wearing a NAZI swastika. Everyone with half a braincell knows what it means Quote And, guess what? The Democrat hacks at the New York Times, who pushed all this nonsense to the gullible, for years, are calling for Trump to be Indicted. NY Times demands 'criminal prosecution' of Donald Trump ... Not just them Quote Of course the only thing missing, as usual, is an actual Criminal Charge from the duly authorized law enforcement agencies. 'Trump will be indicted': Mar-a-Lago affidavit spells trouble for the former president and decimates his main defense: https://www.businessinsider.com/mar-a-lago-fbi-affidavit-signals-trump-could-get-indicted-2022-8 "Decimates" your "narrative" Quote The fear and desperation is palpable, because it's election time, and one last long shot attempt to save their self destroyed credibilty. I think it's pretty obvious who's desperate here... A Trump cheerleader harping on about destroyed credibility, with your propensity for also getting it completely wrong... laughable! Edited August 27, 2022 by Magilla Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trastrick Posted August 27, 2022 Share Posted August 27, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Magilla said: Trump’s narrative takes big hit with affidavit’s release https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3617635-the-memo-trumps-narrative-takes-big-hit-with-affidavits-release/ Yawn... Democrat talking points deleted. Wake up! More on the FBI's dirty doings. The Agency that bought the Clinton Campaign package of "Russian Collusion", lock stock and barrel, and actually broke the law and forged an email support the FISA warrant request to "surveil" read "spy" on the Trump campaign has long since lost any real credibility. But they are still desperate to make something stick to Trump. But even after Hillary destroyed 30,000 emails from her bathroom server she used to conduct State Department Business, Classified documents were still found on perv Anthony Weiner's laptop (Oh those laptops! Omama's FBI Director Comey, found only that she was "extremely careless", and opined that "Although there is evidence of potential violation of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." "Our judgement" his, and senior FBI Officials McCabe and Strocz who were overseeing the investigation of the Trump campaign for "Russian Collusion". It wasn't his job as an Investigation unit to even make that call, that decision rests with the Justice Department. (But after a hasty tarmac meeting between Obama's Attorney General and Bill Clinton, close to the eve of the Hillary "exoneration", Loretta Lynch (remember her? Thought not!) relied on his recommendation. So we might get to see whether that "prosecutorial discretion" also applies to Trump. Lol Fast forward to recent news. in 2021, someone organized a letter from 50 "former intelligence" officials dismissing the NY Post's reporting of Hunter Biden's laptop. The term used was "Russian Disinformation". Then a visit by the FBI to Facebook and who knows who else, and the story was dropped by the MSM. Except from the pesky New York Post the only major newspaper that did NOT endorrse Biden for President On January 5. Report: FBI warned Washington and the Capitol Police "that extremists were preparing to come to Washington, attack Congress and engage in “war.” The warning was issued internally by the FBI’s Norfolk, Virginia, field office a day before the Capitol riot, according to The Washington Post. Imagine a U.S. Civil War in 2022 but nobody did anything about it, no call for National Guard deployment, other than Trump's VP, Mike Pence. As the FBI bumbles from one Trump failed allegation to the next. and everybody is tightlipped about the Biden allegations, that have some real currency, and sparked a real Criminal Investigation. The Democrat coalition to de-legitimize Trump continues, using Congress, the Justice Department, and the FBI. Ramped up with only a couple months before the next election. What has he NOT been "accused" of? And still, after 5 years, not one criminal charge that would stand up in a real Court of Law. If the Democrats manage to hold on to Congress, expect the Hunter Biden story to fade, like Hillary, Afghanistan, and COVID mismanagement. As my partner says, "aye yi yi" And as I repeat. When they make a criminal charge against Trump, do let us know? I mean this is the either the biggest crook ever to get into politics. (or an outsider trying to drain the Government Swamp status quo, and the complicit Media) Yer takes yer pick! Lol But what the voters want to know is what is their government doing to fight real crime, and looting of Main street shops, in their neighborhoods. By the way, The Hill has a different article, from a real law professor! https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3617916-what-did-not-happen-with-the-release-of-the-mar-a-lago-affidavit/ Edited August 27, 2022 by trastrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now