Like Trump always says.
"I love the poorly educated".
Obviously, Trump loves you
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.
Like Trump always says.
I don't think any of it is going to survive.
I also think that, just like Leticia James in NY, Fani Willis tried to fly too close to the sun with poorly handcrafted wings.
It is a politically motivated case with weak legal underpinnings. In essence a gross misuse of the justice system for political gain.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/27/us/politics/fake-electors-explained-trump-jan-6.html...
All of the charges pertaining to "alternative electors" should be thrown out as a matter of law because naming alternative electors is not against the law no matter what the fake news tell you.
At age 13, Donald Trump entered the New York Military Academy, a private boarding school. In 1964, he enrolled at Fordham University, transferring two years later to the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, graduating in 1968 with a Bachelor of Science in economics.LMAO Love the way you communist leftists answer questions you are too STUPID to answer. Like Trump always says. The educated ones of society are now the RETARDS of Society! You are a PERFECT EXAMPLE! Start paying attention on whats happening and avoid the communist MSM, you just may gain a few brain cells... but its HIGHLY DOUBTFUL! ! You will all be branded the dumb fucks of society from here on out! Good luck and once again,,, NOTHING CAN STOP WHATS COMING!
At age 13, Donald Trump entered the New York Military Academy, a private boarding school. In 1964, he enrolled at Fordham University, transferring two years later to the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, graduating in 1968 with a Bachelor of Science in economics.
That makes him one of the 'educated ones of society and now the RETARD of Society, a perfect example.'
"Nothing can stop whats (sic) coming!"
Lookee here. We've got ourselves a real live QAnon supporter in the wild.... NOTHING CAN STOP WHATS COMING! WWG1WGA! TRUTH
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/27/us/politics/fake-electors-explained-trump-jan-6.html
You are correct that creating alternative slates of electors is not illegal. But there came a point at which the actions of those perpetuating those slates became illegal.
He didn't say that. Stop day drinking with boomer.So you're saying that not breaking the law is actually breaking the law?
WTF are you smoking?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/27/us/politics/fake-electors-explained-trump-jan-6.html
You are correct that creating alternative slates of electors is not illegal. But there came a point at which the actions of those perpetuating those slates became illegal.
That is based on an assumption that has yet to be proven. It will be exceedingly difficult to prove that Trump "didn't" believe there was fraud or that he "didn't" believe that uncounted or fraudulent ballots did exist. Trump as the constitutional chief law enforcement officer in the United States, had every right to see that the federal election laws were faithfully executed. His effort to do so does not create an "enterprise" as required by the RICO statutes. Which is what he is being charged under.The New York Times article above explained very well the background of the alternate slate of electors, tracing its origin back to Nixon and Kennedy’s Presidential race. Team Trump bent that process and eventually broke the law, as noted below.
Trump’s legal team members created an elaborate scenario to form alternate certificates, knowing that there was no election ballot fraud in those seven contested states. The key here is the team had no basis for contesting the ballots but proceeded willfully to create a plan to subvert the electoral certification process conducted by Mike Pence in Congress on January 6th.
Only idiots like you think there was massive election fraud. We don't give a shit if you disagree, the evidence has spoken.That is based on an assumption that has yet to be proven.
His phone call specifically focused on finding the precise amount of votes that would allow him to win. That specific detail exposes that he was doing so as a candidate wanting to win rather than a President seeking to ensure a fair election.So explain where and how that happened.
That is based on an assumption that has yet to be proven. It will be exceedingly difficult to prove that Trump "didn't" believe there was fraud or that he "didn't" believe that uncounted or fraudulent ballots did exist. Trump as the constitutional chief law enforcement officer in the United States, had every right to see that the federal election laws were faithfully executed. His effort to do so does not create an "enterprise" as required by the RICO statutes. Which is what he is being charged under.
That he believed existed.His phone call specifically focused on finding the precise amount of votes that would allow him to win. That specific detail exposes that he was doing so as a candidate wanting to win rather than a President seeking to ensure a fair election.
That he believed existed.
And you believed him so now you're both wrong.That he believed existed.
You are not a serious person.That he believed existed.
I don't smoke anything except brisket or a few steaks on occasion.So you're saying that not breaking the law is actually breaking the law?
WTF are you smoking?
Proving what Trump didn't believe so is indeed difficult. Yet, the judge will attempt and eventually rule on that in Georgia and Washington, D.C. What will be used as a measure most assuredly is that a 'reasonable' person given a preponderance of evidence and the testimony by those who told him he most certainly didn't win, and that research of the ballot system showed no significant mis-voting that rose to the level of changing the count to his favor was found.So explain where and how that happened.
That is based on an assumption that has yet to be proven. It will be exceedingly difficult to prove that Trump "didn't" believe there was fraud or that he "didn't" believe that uncounted or fraudulent ballots did exist. Trump as the constitutional chief law enforcement officer in the United States, had every right to see that the federal election laws were faithfully executed. His effort to do so does not create an "enterprise" as required by the RICO statutes. Which is what he is being charged under.
A judge ruled on this. I stated that. It is beyond assumption based on his decision.So explain where and how that happened.
That is based on an assumption that has yet to be proven. It will be exceedingly difficult to prove that Trump "didn't" believe there was fraud or that he "didn't" believe that uncounted or fraudulent ballots did exist. Trump as the constitutional chief law enforcement officer in the United States, had every right to see that the federal election laws were faithfully executed. His effort to do so does not create an "enterprise" as required by the RICO statutes. Which is what he is being charged under.
You aren't a knowledgeable person. Fani has to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump knew those votes didn't exist. We all know there is voter fraud happening everywhere in the US. Even if there weren't any, you still have to prove that Trump didn't believe in his mind there were sufficient numbers of votes to be counted.You are not a serious person.
Why was he so precise and why were the votes the exact amount needed to win?
The judge has also allowed an appeal of his findings as well. But at trial, they have a very tough row to hoe. As I said, they have to prove he didn't believe those votes existed. Also, the effort to uphold the law and find those votes is going to be very hard to prove to be an "enterpriseA judge ruled on this. I stated that. It is beyond assumption based on his decision.
It's not about Fani - it's about his specific statement.You aren't a knowledgeable person. Fani has to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump knew those votes didn't exist. We all know there is voter fraud happening everywhere in the US. Even if there weren't any, you still have to prove that Trump didn't believe in his mind there were sufficient numbers of votes to be counted.
I don't smoke anything except brisket or a few steaks on occasion.
I pointed out how the law was violated and the judge's ruling it was so. Case explained, how it arrived at the point where the parties involved broke the law and the ruling.
As an attorney, you know that.
Don't attempt to obfuscate the obvious in the points I corrected for Rightguide.
The number doesn't matter one wit. It's his intent to break a law that must be proven.It's not about Fani - it's about his specific statement.
If he wanted to make sure it was fair as President, then why the specific number?
Because he was acting as a candidate who wanted to pressure the SoS to deliver a victory.