More indictments on the way

[lennypartiv]

We're going to see additional indictments of Trump coming out over the course of the next few months. It is not an if but when.

The persecution continues.

 

[konradv]

"Maybe it is time for The Republican Party to finally cross his name off the list of viable and legitimate candidates going into the primaries."

Donald J. Trump is the nominee. You don't like it? Oh well, that is just too bad.

Have you seen recent polls? His popularity has gone way up since these bogus indictments started.

View attachment 800063

I don't care how many triathlons Jack Smith has run. He is in over his head and he knows it- he is the one that looks scared.

MAGA
TRUMP 2024

Oh boy, another one of those!

 

[forkup]

Both your statements are stupid and therefore typical for a Democrat to say.

I don't have the power to indict anyone, idiot, I'm not a prosecutor.

Well neither is Comer but he is claiming crimes. He doesn't seem to be able to name a crime either. So what does it tell you when a highly partisan person who has every incentive to cite actual crimes isn't able to name anything specific?

 

[Mac1958]

The Trumpsters' denials and deflections and conspiracy theories and victim-playing aren't going to matter.

More indictments are coming, the Trumpsters will need to say "fake news" a lot, and then we'll see what the juries say. Who knows.

The rest of this is noise. They won't even read the indictments.

 

[j-mac]

The Trumpsters' denials and deflections and conspiracy theories and victim-playing aren't going to matter.

More indictments are coming, the Trumpsters will need to say "fake news" a lot, and then we'll see what the juries say. Who knows.

The rest of this is noise. They won't even read the indictments.

Why waste time on bs?

 

[Mac1958]

The Trumpsters' denials and deflections and conspiracy theories and victim-playing...

Why waste time on bs?

And there ya go. The next post.

 

[j-mac]

And there ya go. The next post.

I was talking about you. Idiot

 

[SeaMajor7]

We're going to see additional indictments of Trump coming out over the course of the next few months. It is not an if but when.
By the end of summer this joker could be staring down over 100 felony charges.
Maybe it is time for The Republican Party to finally cross his name off the list of viable and legitimate candidates going into the primaries.
I mean, it is bad enough that The GOP doesn't even have a platform to run on anymore, but dragging the dead weight of Trump around with them from now on seems ridiculous.

Prosecutors are now prepared to “stack” an “additional 30 to 45 charges” on top of the 37-count indictment brought against Mr Trump on 8 June. They would do so using evidence against the ex-president that has not yet been publicly acknowledged by the department, including other recordings prosecutors have obtained which reveal Mr Trump making incriminating statements.

Special Counsel Jack Smith Prepares For Hot Indictment Summer - Above the Law

More indictments! More venues! More witnesses!

abovethelaw.com

You Stalinist shit libs are going to start Civil War 2.0 over Orange Man Bad, ain't ya`?

 

[Batcat]

They have substantial evidence to say Trump tried to steal/undermine the election for himself, with his illegal fake electorate scheme and the call to Raffsberger, there will be another indictment.

We are a nation of laws, nobody is above the law.

Anybody with any sense would realize that in this nation at this time there are certain people who are totally above the rule of law. Trump is definitely not one of them.

 

[The Banker]

Anybody with any sense would realize that in this nation at this time there are certain people who are totally above the rule of law. Trump is definitely not one of them.

View attachment 800119

Meanwhile, there is overwhelming evidence of Trump's guilt.

You live in a fantasy land, void of fact

 

[Chillicothe]

Well, I ain't following this latest 'we-got-him-now' Trump-palooza too closely, but......but the tempo and temperature do seem to be perking up a bit. No?

The 'Independent' has reported some notable developments (and true, they do have some honesttoGod credibility in that they were about the only ones to nail exactly when the that first set of Miami indictments landed. Do they have an 'inside' source?)

Anyway, they reported this stuff (it's been bullet-pointed below out of their reportage):

Prosecutors are prepared to hit Trump and his allies with new charges, sources say

Prosecutors could bring between 30 to 45 additional criminal charges against the former president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned

www.independent.co.uk

"The Department of Justice is prepared to seek indictments against multiple figures in former president Donald Trump’s orbit and may yet bring additional charges against the ex-president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned.

According to sources familiar with the matter, the department has made preparations to bring what is known as a “superseding indictment” — a second set of charges against an already-indicted defendant that could include more serious crimes — against the ex-president in the Southern District of Florida."

• "Likely superseding indictment with 30-45 more charges
• Based on evidence not yet publicly acknowledged by DOJ
• Including more recordings of Trump
• Charges will include several Trump attorneys
• Rudy Giuliani being one, apparently for J6 stuff
• Rudy's recent talk with prosecutors was part of a "Queen For A Day" deal
• Which means Rudy's flipped or about to and is likely to take a plea
• Meadows has signed a cooperation deal with prosecutors but it's not clear yet if it includes a plea
• DOJ preparing to bring charges in different jurisdictions if it feels it is not getting a fair shake from Judge Cannon. "
  
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do they got-him-this-time? Hell, I dunno. And wouldn't bet on it; however......
.....however, it sure is interesting to watch this train-wreck and it is wrecking. No?

 

[konradv]

Well, I ain't following this latest 'we-got-him-now' Trump-palooza too closely, but......but the tempo and temperature do seem to be perking up a bit. No?

The 'Independent' has reported some notable developments (and true, they do have some honesttoGod credibility in that they were about the only ones to nail exactly when the that first set of Miami indictments landed. Do they have an 'inside' source?)

Anyway, they reported this stuff (it's been bullet-pointed below out of their reportage):

Prosecutors are prepared to hit Trump and his allies with new charges, sources say

Prosecutors could bring between 30 to 45 additional criminal charges against the former president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned

www.independent.co.uk

"The Department of Justice is prepared to seek indictments against multiple figures in former president Donald Trump’s orbit and may yet bring additional charges against the ex-president in the coming weeks, The Independent has learned.

According to sources familiar with the matter, the department has made preparations to bring what is known as a “superseding indictment” — a second set of charges against an already-indicted defendant that could include more serious crimes — against the ex-president in the Southern District of Florida."

• "Likely superseding indictment with 30-45 more charges
• Based on evidence not yet publicly acknowledged by DOJ
• Including more recordings of Trump
• Charges will include several Trump attorneys
• Rudy Giuliani being one, apparently for J6 stuff
• Rudy's recent talk with prosecutors was part of a "Queen For A Day" deal
• Which means Rudy's flipped or about to and is likely to take a plea
• Meadows has signed a cooperation deal with prosecutors but it's not clear yet if it includes a plea
• DOJ preparing to bring charges in different jurisdictions if it feels it is not getting a fair shake from Judge Cannon. "
  
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do they got-him-this-time? Hell, I dunno. And wouldn't bet on it; however......
.....however, it sure is interesting to watch this train-wreck and it is wrecking. No?

Yes, Trump is a train wreck.

 

[mudwhistle]

How are his rights to due process being abused?
Specifics please.

If you can't figure out how, I'm not going to waste any bandwidth trying to explain it to you.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes, Trump is a train wreck.

Yeah........LOL.....Trump is the train wreak.
Biden has a habit of "Cropdusting" at important meetings and meet & greets with Royalty, and the Pope.

 

[Care4all]

Good, I like nice round numbers.

If I were Trump, I'd sue that for every indictments proven false, the government has to pay all his legal fees + 1 million dollars.

They are just trying to bankrupt the guy otherwise they would just lump all of this crap under one or two indictments.

The DOJ has already admitted that how they proceed depends on how the other indictments go (meaning, their indictments are not based on broken laws but upon the desire to just GET TRUMP), and it will depend on the judge. If this judge Trump appointed obeys the law and isn't rough enough on him, they will just have to STEP IT UP because like a good banana republic, it isn't about the law, IT IS ABOUT THE MAN.

He hasn't used a penny of his own money for these indictments, he's using his followers donations to his campaign PACs to pay for his lawyers.

 

[mudwhistle]

He hasn't used a penny of his own money for these indictments, he's using his followers donations to his campaign PACs to pay for his lawyers.

And so that makes this constant harassment from the DOJ A Okay?

 

[Independent thinker]

We're going to see additional indictments of Trump coming out over the course of the next few months. It is not an if but when.
By the end of summer this joker could be staring down over 100 felony charges.
Maybe it is time for The Republican Party to finally cross his name off the list of viable and legitimate candidates going into the primaries.
I mean, it is bad enough that The GOP doesn't even have a platform to run on anymore, but dragging the dead weight of Trump around with them from now on seems ridiculous.

Prosecutors are now prepared to “stack” an “additional 30 to 45 charges” on top of the 37-count indictment brought against Mr Trump on 8 June. They would do so using evidence against the ex-president that has not yet been publicly acknowledged by the department, including other recordings prosecutors have obtained which reveal Mr Trump making incriminating statements.

Special Counsel Jack Smith Prepares For Hot Indictment Summer - Above the Law

More indictments! More venues! More witnesses!

abovethelaw.com

And this is a surprise from Biden's weaponized DOJ? The more this crap happens the more Trump rises in the polls and gets more donations. It's rather quite funny that you guys haven't figured that out yet.

 

[Care4all]

And so that makes this constant harassment from the DOJ A Okay?

It's sad and awful, that Trump put us all in this embarrassing, and shameful light.

The man of lawlessness made this bed he is sleeping in....

NOT bringing charges for his alleged beyond a reasonable doubt crimes would be worse for the Nation and our future.

The President’s Duty to Faithfully Execute the Law

The Honorable Bob GoodlatteA‌braham Lincoln is often paraphrased as saying, “The best way ‌to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” While that paraphrase summarizes the gist of what Lincoln was saying, the full text of his remark is worth repeating. In 1838, early in his career...

www.heritage.org

A‌braham Lincoln is often paraphrased as saying, “The best way ‌to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” While that paraphrase summarizes the gist of what Lincoln was saying, the full text of his remark is worth repeating.

In 1838, early in his career, Abraham Lincoln delivered an address to the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois. It was entitled “The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions.” In it, he said:

Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well-wisher to his posterity, swear by the blood of the Revolution, never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others. As the patriots of seventy-six did to the support of the Declaration of Independence, so to the support of the Constitution and Laws, let every American pledge his life, his property, and his sacred honor;—let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children’s liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every American mother, to the lisping babe, that prattles on her lap—let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let it be written in Primers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;—let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice.

He went on to say:

When I so pressingly urge a strict observance of all the laws, let me not be understood as saying there are no bad laws.… But I do mean to say, that, although bad laws, if they exist, should be repealed as soon as possible, still while they continue in force, for the sake of example, they should be religiously observed.

When Lincoln refers to religiously observing the law “for the sake of example,” he is referring also to the example of the American Republic itself as an example to the world. Without enforcement of the law, there cannot be accountability under law, and political accountability is essential to a functioning democracy.

...

The President and the Take Care Clause​

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This clause, known as the Take Care Clause, requires the President to enforce all constitutionally valid Acts of Congress, regardless of his own Administration’s view of their wisdom or policy. The clause imposes a duty on the President; it does not confer a discretionary power. The Take Care Clause is a limit on the Vesting Clause’s grant to the President of “the executive power

 

[Batcat]

Meanwhile, there is overwhelming evidence of Trump's guilt.

You live in a fantasy land, void of fact

Time will tell if indeed there is “overwhelming” evidence. Keep in mind the number of times you liberals have said, “Stick a fork in Trump, he’s done.”

What is happening now reminds me of a woman throwing spaghetti against a wall to see if it sticks.

 

[mudwhistle]

It's sad and awful, that Trump put us all in this embarrassing, and shameful light.

The man of lawlessness made this bed he is sleeping in....

NOT bringing charges for his alleged beyond a reasonable doubt crimes would be worse for the Nation and our future.

The President’s Duty to Faithfully Execute the Law

The Honorable Bob GoodlatteA‌braham Lincoln is often paraphrased as saying, “The best way ‌to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” While that paraphrase summarizes the gist of what Lincoln was saying, the full text of his remark is worth repeating. In 1838, early in his career...

www.heritage.org

A‌braham Lincoln is often paraphrased as saying, “The best way ‌to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly.” While that paraphrase summarizes the gist of what Lincoln was saying, the full text of his remark is worth repeating.

In 1838, early in his career, Abraham Lincoln delivered an address to the Young Men’s Lyceum of Springfield, Illinois. It was entitled “The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions.” In it, he said:


He went on to say:


When Lincoln refers to religiously observing the law “for the sake of example,” he is referring also to the example of the American Republic itself as an example to the world. Without enforcement of the law, there cannot be accountability under law, and political accountability is essential to a functioning democracy.

...

The President and the Take Care Clause​

Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This clause, known as the Take Care Clause, requires the President to enforce all constitutionally valid Acts of Congress, regardless of his own Administration’s view of their wisdom or policy. The clause imposes a duty on the President; it does not confer a discretionary power. The Take Care Clause is a limit on the Vesting Clause’s grant to the President of “the executive power

It's pretty funny that you're so hopelessly blind that you spent so much time to build this post based on fraud.