This is simple-to-read, ( No Marauder Links!!) The Trial For Dummies (I made that up).
Here is the last paragraph, if you are worn out from SHouse posts. It makes the point.
""After taking a long, hard look at potential state charges against Trump stemming from the payment to Daniels, Vance concluded they were too iffy to pursue. Now Bragg is desperately looking for a legal pretext to punish what he takes to be the essence of Trump's crime: keeping from voters information they might have deemed relevant in choosing between him and Hillary Clinton. But that is not a crime, and treating it as 34 felonies stretches the bounds of credulity as well as the bounds of the law.""
This is simple-to-read, ( No Marauder Links!!) The Trial For Dummies (I made that up).
Here is the last paragraph, if you are worn out from SHouse posts. It makes the point.
""After taking a long, hard look at potential state charges against Trump stemming from the pay ...[text shortened]... and treating it as 34 felonies stretches the bounds of credulity as well as the bounds of the law.""
A simple question with a simple answer.
Apparently because Vance was hesitant and weak, while Alvin Bragg is no coward.
"Vance ... felt hesitant to charge famous defendants if he was not absolutely certain he could convict them. That context may help connect the dots between the decision not to pursue either the Trump siblings in 2012 or Harvey Weinstein in 2015."
@spruce112358 "Keeping voters from information is not a crime'. I think even Bragg knows that, even suechild knows that. So, he is trying to identify a crime to hang on Trump. DURING a trial!
@spruce112358said A simple question with a simple answer.
Apparently because Vance was hesitant and weak, while Alvin Bragg is no coward.
"Vance ... felt hesitant to charge famous defendants if he was not absolutely certain he could convict them. That context may help connect the dots between the decision not to pursue either the Trump siblings in 2012 or Harvey Weinstein in 2015." ...[text shortened]... orker.com/news/news-desk/why-didnt-manhattan-da-cyrus-vance-prosecute-the-trumps-or-harvey-weinstein
what do you think should be done about the 17 officials that lied about Trump on Russia collusion?
Or about Clinton creating the fake Russia dossier?
This is simple-to-read, ( No Marauder Links!!) The Trial For Dummies (I made that up).
Here is the last paragraph, if you are worn out from SHouse posts. It makes the point.
""After taking a long, hard look at potential state charges against Trump stemming from the pay ...[text shortened]... and treating it as 34 felonies stretches the bounds of credulity as well as the bounds of the law.""
@averagejoe1said @spruce112358 "Keeping voters from information is not a crime'. I think even Bragg knows that, even suechild knows that. So, he is trying to identify a crime to hang on Trump. DURING a trial!
Unfortunately not. The fact is, you let him con you again, keeping you in the dark, putting you on notice that he doesn't care what you think, as long as you continue to slavishly vote for him. He thinks that you can't handle the truth.
Too bad that you show us all here every day, that you don't mind being conned. that you actually enjoy it, trying to put a criminal back into the Oval Office. Despite all your talk, you love being a sub to his dom.
@suziannesaid Did Trump use campaign funds for the payoff?
Instead of randomly cleverly writing, do it this way for more followers:
"Trump used campaign funds for the payoff. Worth a trial, for this reason........." And then make your point. Cool. Then a fellow poster has something to answer to.
@suziannesaid No one lied about Russia's involvement in the 2016 election, except the Trump campaign.
There was no "fake dossier". The dossier was quite real.
Again, the only ones who lied about Hunter's laptop were Republicans.
You'd be well-advised to stop telling fibs. They only show you don't mind being taken in by a liar. In fact, you seem proud of it.
Child, the dossier, which was proven to have been bought and paid for by Hillary, was fabricated. You can find it all over google. Authored by crook Christopher Steele.
Any 'lies' about the laptop, if there were any, are quite moot now, would you not agree? Why waste computer ink and our reading comprehension on something like that. I have not even availed myself of Trumphouse posts yet.
@suziannesaid Unfortunately not. The fact is, you let him con you again, keeping you in the dark, putting you on notice that he doesn't care what you think, as long as you continue to slavishly vote for him. He thinks that you can't handle the truth.
Too bad that you show us all here every day, that you don't mind being conned. that you actually enjoy it, trying to put a criminal back into the Oval Office. Despite all your talk, you love being a sub to his dom.
Sue, you referred to me TEN times, personally, in this post. Pitiful debating. Imagine debating in your High School debate class, the judges getting weary listening to that. They would forget the issue. And give you an F.
Stick to the Advent of Pronouns, which We dont understand, but it may help you settle.
"That is not a crime" clarified
Back to Top