47 Empty Top Secret Folders .......

You mean, when the orange slob was an unindicted co-conspirator in felonies that sent his person lawyer to prison, and was only spared prosecution and prison due to being a sitting president?

Haha, you might want to find a better example to whine about.
He wasn't prosecuted because there was nothing to prosecute, you fucking douchebag.
 
He took JFK and UFO files
We can always hope that is what he grabbed. If true perhaos he will reveal what’s in those files when he campaigns for President in 2024. I would love to know who actually terminated JFK before I die as I lived through that assassination.

Perhaps we will learn if President Eisenhower met with space aliens too. (I tend to doubt this story but who knows?)

 
And you have no proof of your claims. I doubt that you have a security clearance to even look inside these empty folders and just make your lies to make yourself feel important, Hint: you are worthless.
There is proof that Trump has additional top secret documents, besides the jackets with missing contents....

Any copy of top secret documents requested that leaves the vault, is signed out by the guardians, with logs of who eligible took it.... And then logged back in, when the copy is returned....

Allegedly, there are more top secret and classified documents that Trump has not returned and were not logged back in as him returning them.
 
There is proof that Trump has additional top secret documents, besides the jackets with missing contents....

When a Nazi tells a lie, it's usually easily refuted. Wait a week or two after the lie was refuted, and the Nazi will be back telling the same lie - hoping people forgot and will fall for it/

Any copy of top secret documents requested that leaves the vault, is signed out by the guardians, with logs of who eligible took it.... And then logged back in, when the copy is returned....

Hey Stupid Fuck, Trump was commander in chief. HE was the guardian and decided what was classified, secret, top secret, etc.

You Nazis were defeated on this a month ago - but look at you back here lying all fresh, like no one mentioned Egan v. Dept. Navy


Allegedly, there are more top secret and classified documents that Trump has not returned and were not logged back in as him returning them.

In three days you traitor scum are voted out of power. You better concentrate of Biden's first impeachment.
 
There is proof that Trump has additional top secret documents, besides the jackets with missing contents....

Any copy of top secret documents requested that leaves the vault, is signed out by the guardians, with logs of who eligible took it.... And then logged back in, when the copy is returned....

Allegedly, there are more top secret and classified documents that Trump has not returned and were not logged back in as him returning them.
Your entire response relies on the world "allegedly", meaning not proven or a fact. If there were indeed such proof as you suggest, don't you think the democrats would have already started spew out loud about it and posting to their media slaves? Or perhaps the archives would have listed the titles of such documents?

In other words, just another lie worthy of only the terrified democrats with zero proof.
 
Merrick Garland and The Department of Justice is deposed from power in a week?

Who told you that?

The Nazi democrat Reich will be voted from power on Tuesday.

That means Republicans have the power to conduct investigations.

Garland, as the most corrupt AG in history - will be a top priority, as will the Department Of Injustice in general.

Will Xi's man Quid Pro declare martial law and refuse the results of the election? Very possibly.

More likely though, the democrat Reich will just dispatch the Brown Shirt terrorist troops and start another Kristallnacht.

The decent folk need to Rittenhouse early and often, if/when democrats send terrorists out again.
 
Last edited:
Clearly there was, as his personal lawyer went to prison for felonies he committed at the direction of Trump. Trump avoided prosecution by being a sitting president.
Sorry, turd, but your attempt to commit logic failed. Your theory that if A works for B, and A gets arrested, then B must be guilty of something isn't accepted in any court of law. However, all you progressive morons believe it.
 
Your theory that if A works for B, and A gets arrested, then B must be guilty of something isn't accepted in any court of law.
False, and you are either abjectly ignorant of the facts or are having a cultist breakdown. Trump was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the felonies that sent his personal lawyer to prison. If you don't understand what that means, then you're stupid. But you do understand. As evidenced by the bizarre, irrelevant outburst above.
 
False, and you are either abjectly ignorant of the facts or are having a cultist breakdown. Trump was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the felonies that sent his personal lawyer to prison. If you don't understand what that means, then you're stupid. But you do understand. As evidenced by the bizarre, irrelevant outburst above.
So you're saying that the courts will accept the crimes committed by some professional acquaintance as evidence that you have committed a crime?

You're even dumber than I thought.

BTW, the term "unindicted co-conspirator" is not a legal term. It's purely a media creation, and the media are the only people who tried to use it on Trump.

You only succeeded in proving yourself to be a moron.
 
False. Like I said, you don't get it. Which is the norm, the bar isn't real high for you.
If I'm wrong, then explain where you didn't disagree with the following statement:

"The courts will accept the crimes committed by some professional acquaintance as evidence that you have committed a crime"

Otherwise, admit that you lack the capacity to commit logic.
 
If I'm wrong, then explain where you didn't disagree with the following statement:

"The courts will accept the crimes committed by some professional acquaintance as evidence that you have committed a crime"

Otherwise, admit that you lack the capacity to commit logic.
It's wrong and idiotic. You clearly don't understand what was meant in the court filing. And I sure as hell am not going to exert any effort to crack that nut that is your thick litte skull. Not my problem. Sorry.

Hint: it states that the evidence shows Trump committed the same crimes for which Cohen was convicted.

Good luck, crybaby.
 
It's wrong and idiotic. You clearly don't understand what was meant in the court filing. And I sure as hell am not going to exert any effort to crack that nut that is your thick litte skull. Not my problem. Sorry.
"Meant" in what court filing?
Hint: it states that the evidence shows Trump committed the same crimes for which Cohen was convicted.

Good luck, crybaby.
Why would the indictment of Cohen mention any crimes committed by Trump? Please quote the language in Cohen's indictment that does that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top