Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Cool. But if there was a point in sharing that information (unasked for and unneeded), you failed to explain how it addresses anything.
Federal Indictments: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
For many people, a federal indictment is an intimidating and inscrutable document. Here, we provide some information designed to help you better understand fedwww.burnhamgorokhov.com
Biden is a JaBroni.Oh c'mon, Biden is doing a great job! Just look at his initials.... JB.
What other great men in history had those initials:
That's a pedigree that must be respected.
- James Bond
- Jason Bourne
- Jack Bauer
But you said there was no such thing.Cool. But if there was a point in sharing that information (unasked for and unneeded), you failed to explain how it addresses anything.
Explain that please.But you said there was no such thing.
One might think you talk out your ass… a lot
I said there was “no such thing” as what, you fucking idiot?But you said there was no such thing.
One might think you talk out your ass… a lot
I'm telling you, man. Ends stages of methamphetamine addiction.Now Trump appears to be threatening Jack Smith and his family.
I believe his all caps rantings are nothing but an attempt to rally his base to do something he can't or won't do himself.
The walls are closing in and he feels it.
“COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN TO THE DERANGED, TRUMP HATING JACK SMITH, HIS FAMILY, AND HIS FRIENDS, THAT AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, I COME UNDER THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT, AS AFFIRMED BY THE CLINTON SOCKS CASE, NOT BY THIS PSYCHOS’ FANTASY OF THE NEVER USED BEFORE ESPIONAGE ACT OF 1917,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.
NOBODY HAS MORE RIGHT TO BE ANGRY ABOUT THIS WITCH HUNT THAN PRESIDENT TRUMPNow Trump appears to be threatening Jack Smith and his family.
I believe his all caps rantings are nothing but an attempt to rally his base to do something he can't or won't do himself.
The walls are closing in and he feels it.
“COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN TO THE DERANGED, TRUMP HATING JACK SMITH, HIS FAMILY, AND HIS FRIENDS, THAT AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, I COME UNDER THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT, AS AFFIRMED BY THE CLINTON SOCKS CASE, NOT BY THIS PSYCHOS’ FANTASY OF THE NEVER USED BEFORE ESPIONAGE ACT OF 1917,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.
Go away sissy.
Idiot forgets his posts as soon as he makes them.There is no such thing as a speaking indictment. The indictment crafted by the special counsel does make allegations and claims that there is evidence to support the charges. That doesn’t make it evidence.
And you “noted” something incorrectly. You overlook the prospects of outright dismissal. (Very slim perhaps, but still existing.)
You overlook acquittals.
You overlook the prospect that even a conviction doesn’t mandate any prison time.
You overlook reversals on appeal should there be any convictions.
And you overlook (for the alleged federal cases) the prospect of a Presidential pardon.
The charges are mostly fluff, stuff and nonsense anyway.
It's all in the OP's tiny, tiny, tiny mind.ARE YOU GOING TO POST THE THREAT
You're delusional - there's no threat of any kind.Now Trump appears to be threatening Jack Smith and his family.
I believe his all caps rantings are nothing but an attempt to rally his base to do something he can't or won't do himself.
The walls are closing in and he feels it.
“COULD SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLAIN TO THE DERANGED, TRUMP HATING JACK SMITH, HIS FAMILY, AND HIS FRIENDS, THAT AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, I COME UNDER THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT, AS AFFIRMED BY THE CLINTON SOCKS CASE, NOT BY THIS PSYCHOS’ FANTASY OF THE NEVER USED BEFORE ESPIONAGE ACT OF 1917,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.
Liberals, not the left, but yes.So that was threatening, huh?
Sounds like another word has been redefined by the left to fit their mantra.
You do? Maybe that’s why you can’t answer.Idiot forgets his posts as soon as he makes them.
So does everyone else
You’d never know.Was that supposed to make any sense?
You’d never know.
That's not the case you were talking about, because in your case Trump settled, not Trump was found guilty.
Horseshit.You still misunderstand. The case I'm talking about sprung from the other, they are both tied together. In essence, what Trump was found "guilty" of was settling the case long ago claiming he did it to advance politics, either way, it should have obviated her claim then that she had been sexually mistreated, because the settlement was an agreement based on the DROPPING of that matter.
Horseshit.
