Indicting former presidents.? So let's indict Obama over his DACA program

[Nordberg]

While I fully agree that a serious crime was committed, it hardly rose to the level of anyone being imprisoned.
Cohen's disbarment and fine were probably appropriate.
His incarceration was nothing less than a ridiculous over-reach.

As for the charges against Trump, I admittedly haven't seen them.

Cohen was following orders from person 1. Trump is person 1. Wesselberg was Trump companies CFO. He too was acting on Trump's instructions. It does not look good for Trump.

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

In fact, with charges to a twice impeached, thoroughly disgraced ex-president who never got the most votes,

TWice-impeached??? HAHAHA. And both times trump was ACQUITTED!!! Dems had nothing.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Trump never sued Hillary. Your fiction won't save you.

I guess someone should tell the court that all those filings by Trump lawyers were non-existent.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66801076/donald-trump-v-hillary-clinton/

Not talking about Federal statute of limitations, dumbass. Your false equivalency and pivoting won't save you.

ROFLMAO. Do you always wear your tutu when you do your pirouettes?
The Federal statutes of limitations don't apply to state statutes. TDAK was asking that Obama be prosecuted under federal statutes. Federal statutes are 5 years.

 

[Nordberg]

Your fiction will not save you. Trump has never lost an election.

Every fucking one of them he got fewer votes. If you do not understand that, you should be ignored.

 

[Nordberg]

When a radically far left news site such as Slate says there's a problem w/ the indictment, I'll take their word for it before yours. https://slate.com/news-and-politics...-indictment-donald-trump-jury-challenges.html
You've proven to be dishonest repeatedly and constantly in virtually every post I've seen from you. It's obviously wishful thinking on your part. Slate is only dishonest about 80% of the time. I'll go with Slate. I don't care what happens to Trump. Just being objective, same as Slate in this case which is rare for them.

Of course, you will. That is your proclivity. You want to believe Trump will walk.

 

[Into the Night]

I guess someone should tell the court that all those filings by Trump lawyers were non-existent.
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66801076/donald-trump-v-hillary-clinton/


ROFLMAO. Do you always wear your tutu when you do your pirouettes?
The Federal statutes of limitations don't apply to state statutes. TDAK was asking that Obama be prosecuted under federal statutes. Federal statutes are 5 years.

You poor sap. An appeal is not a lawsuit. Redefinition fallacy.
Not talking about Federal statute of limitations. Fixation. Pivot fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Every fucking one of them he got fewer votes. If you do not understand that, you should be ignored.

Your fiction and random numbers will not save you. Go ahead. Put me on your ignore list, for all the good it will do you.

 

[Into the Night]

Of course, you will. That is your proclivity. You want to believe Trump will walk.

He's not only walked every time you idiots try something like this, he's walked all over you!

 

[Text Drivers are Killers]

Every fucking one of them he got fewer votes. If you do not understand that, you should be ignored.

Liar. In 2016 and 2020 trump got more LEGAL votes than the dem. In 2020 it wasn't even close.