"If you’re innocent why are you taking the Fifth Amendment"? Donald Trump

you don't know that - why? because he hasn't shown any of his taxes. the ONE year it was revealed... & not by him there was a whopping $750.00 'bill'.
i know the IRS doesn't miss shit.
i made mistakes back to back on tax returns and they for sure let me know. for a few hundred dollars.

if trump were doing something wrong, they'd let him know.
 
James’s office noted that Eric Trump and Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg each invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 500 times.

Eric Trump did so during an Oct. 5, 2020, interview: “Eric Trump then invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to more than 500 questions over six hours.”


4 big points from the N.Y. attorney general’s Trump allegations

I suppose this is related to other threads noting Trump being investigated but you have to get a special chuckle over this.

Trump made the statements concerning Hillary associated taking the fifth. I have to imagine he was correct and for the most part I see this as verification that Trump and Hillary are pretty much the same where corruption is concerned.

If the government or any law enforcement official wants to question you over a made up crime they are investigating please talk, talk, talk away. Say as much as you can. It can only help your chances.
 
If the government or any law enforcement official wants to question you over a made up crime they are investigating please talk, talk, talk away. Say as much as you can. It can only help your chances.

Don't tell me. Tell Trump. He is the one who said you only plead the 5th if you are guilty.
 
James’s office noted that Eric Trump and Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg each invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 500 times.

Eric Trump did so during an Oct. 5, 2020, interview: “Eric Trump then invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to more than 500 questions over six hours.”


4 big points from the N.Y. attorney general’s Trump allegations

I suppose this is related to other threads noting Trump being investigated but you have to get a special chuckle over this.

Trump made the statements concerning Hillary associated taking the fifth. I have to imagine he was correct and for the most part I see this as verification that Trump and Hillary are pretty much the same where corruption is concerned.
s lot has changed since then…namely the Obamagate gang and what the demafascist did to Flynn. I don’t hink anyone expected that sort of abuse of power for political purposes…so now, it makes absolute sense to not cooperate with these demafascist storm troopers fishing expedition
 
s lot has changed since then…namely the Obamagate gang and what the demafascist did to Flynn. I don’t hink anyone expected that sort of abuse of power for political purposes…so now, it makes absolute sense to not cooperate with these demafascist storm troopers fishing expedition
The supposed abuse of power with Flynn was requesting a voluntary interview.

Scary.
 
s lot has changed since then…namely the Obamagate gang and what the demafascist did to Flynn. I don’t hink anyone expected that sort of abuse of power for political purposes…so now, it makes absolute sense to not cooperate with these demafascist storm troopers fishing expedition
really don't care what has "changed". pleading the 5th is either a legal right or it's instant guilt. trump can't have it both ways.

it's the double talk that drives people crazy. well, when the OTHER side does it. when your side does it, it's for good reason.

if it's wrong, it's wrong. in this case, it's part of our legal process and while you can think what you want, it doesn't change the legal process. shut up and let the process handle it.
 
Pay for play isn't actually a law. I paid to play minigolf once. That's legal. Be more specific. Who paid who for what?
China and Ukraine paid for the play and the play was favors....thats the allegation. He is innocent until proven guilty. Feel free to research it since you're obviously unaware.


Read up and educate yourself. Now these are allegations. But let's see what happens in early 23?
 
They can not force you to but you can be charged with contempt. Contempt can get you locked up.

They can compel me to show up but I don’t have to actually answer questions. Put me on the stand, ask whatever you want. ”I don’t recall” Is the only answer you’ll get.
 
China and Ukraine paid for the play and the play was favors....thats the allegation. He is innocent until proven guilty. Feel free to research it since you're obviously unaware.

Read up and educate yourself. Now these are allegations. But let's see what happens in early 23?
Maybe nobody bothered to tell you, but Hunter Biden wasn't elected president, nor is he part of the Biden administration.
 
They can compel me to show up but I don’t have to actually answer questions. Put me on the stand, ask whatever you want. ”I don’t recall” Is the only answer you’ll get.

That's not how it works or nobody would have went to jail over not testifying.
 
Stop your trolling. I sent you multiple links of the ALLEGATIONS.

Are you bored? Can't read?
This isn't a trolling. I don't see favors in here that would be considered illegal.

Is it illegal to pay Hunter Biden to have him introduce him to Joe Biden? I don't think so. That's the allegation in the first NY Post article. I don't see anywhere in the article that claims such a thing was illegal.
There's no allegation of anyone doing anything illegal in the Des Moines register piece. Just a lot of speculation.
The second NY Post article, an Op-Ed, details a business deal after Biden was out of office. The article itself says the arrangement was legal.
The fourth ABC article covers the same non-illegal arrangement as the second NY Post article and does not allege illegality.

Can I ask again what exactly you're alleging was illegal without you biting my head off?

I you didn't actually read the articles.
 
really don't care what has "changed". pleading the 5th is either a legal right or it's instant guilt. trump can't have it both ways.

it's the double talk that drives people crazy. well, when the OTHER side does it. when your side does it, it's for good reason.

if it's wrong, it's wrong. in this case, it's part of our legal process and while you can think what you want, it doesn't change the legal process. shut up and let the process handle it.
it’s a legal right obviously…his opinion of it obviously changed.

people can have opinions and they can change
 
This isn't a trolling. I don't see favors in here that would be considered illegal.

Is it illegal to pay Hunter Biden to have him introduce him to Joe Biden? I don't think so. That's the allegation in the first NY Post article. I don't see anywhere in the article that claims such a thing was illegal.
There's no allegation of anyone doing anything illegal in the Des Moines register piece. Just a lot of speculation.
The second NY Post article, an Op-Ed, details a business deal after Biden was out of office. The article itself says the arrangement was legal.
The fourth ABC article covers the same non-illegal arrangement as the second NY Post article and does not allege illegality.

Can I ask again what exactly you're alleging was illegal without you biting my head off?

I you didn't actually read the articles.
Nope. You may not ask me. I showed you the data. Obviously it is that Hunter only got his gigs due to Joe and as such siphoned millions to Joe. That is the pay for play allegation. We will see in early 23 what laws if any were broken. At best the optics are bad. I am not a legal expert but to me sending millions to the VP of the US to garner favors with foreign entities is illegal.
 
then start a movement to change the constitution - the cornerstone & THE law of the land.

quote the article in the Constitution that talks about Congress investigating private citizens. I’ll wait.

heck quote me the article where it says they can investigate anything.


“Congressional oversight is one of the most important responsibilities of the United States Congress. Congressional oversight refers to the review, monitoring, and supervision of federal agencies, programs and policy implementation, and it provides the legislative branch with an opportunity to inspect, examine, review and check the executive branch and its agencies. The authority of Congress to do oversight is derived from its implied powers in the U.S. Constitution, various laws, and House rules.”

Thats from the House rules chairwoman. You’ll notice it says the oversight powers are for exactly what I said they were for.
 

Forum List

Back
Top