No really! We really, REALLY mean it this time!!!

Death by a thousand cuts ? It's a low-flo toilet. Trump himself indicates you need to flush 10 times

"Death by a thousand cuts ?"

Well, that is clearly the intent, since they have yet to find anything criminal against him.

As with most liberals, obviously it is cool to you that they take the approach, "It's not the truthfulness of the claims, it's the seriousness of them."

Lets be serious. You seem to be foregoing everything that's happened during the last 2 yrs. Backtracking:

1- Trump did take home documents that were not properly declassified.18 USC § 1924. Ask Laura Ingram. Judge Judy. Both conservative PRO TRUMP lawyers. Both had the same opinion about this specific statute back in 2016, when applied to a Hillary Clinton investigation...
The FBI went and removed 15 boxes worth of the stuff. Trump appointed Mr. Wray would not have been tasked for this, and would not have executed otherwise. Did it warrant an armed raid? Different topic.
So THERE. 18 USC § 1924. "Anything Criminal against him" ... your words.

Why stop there ?

2- According to multiple witnesses in Trump's inner circle, he was advised in every way possible not to follow John Eastman's plan to subvert the election results. I mean, the entire legal team walked off.
Credible, sworn testimony from Jan 6 hearings witnesses displays how Trump and a handful cronies conspired to defraud the US government. There's multiple documents evidencing this as well.
So we have cut and dry requirements to indict for a violation
18 USC § 371. "Anything Criminal against him" ... your words again.

Let's add one more.
3- Using email and texts to conspire to defraud the government (or any other party) infringes upon 18 USC § 1343 and § 1349. Wire Fraud. That's pretty clear cut too. Eastmans, Flynns, Giuiliani and Powells' communications with Trump are subject to this. But more than anything, that phone call with Raffensperger "I just need 10798 votes which is one more than we have" - Thats "Anything Criminal against him" ... your words yet again.

Bonus
We could talk as well of the Jan 6 rally where Trump invited his 'attendees' to go march up to the capitol, plus previous documents evidencing intention to stall the electoral vote. (Again Eastman's plan, plus Rudy Giuiliani's and Flynns depo and communications) That's 18 USC § 371 - Obstruction of Congress.

It's cute how you are missing important details in all you cite . . .

Those 15 boxes were already identified, and the Trump lawyers were told to keep them there, and keep them safe. Trump and team had been working and cooperating for over 9 months with regard to all of this, so none of this drama was necessary. As was the drama not necessary when they raided Roger Stone's house with the Media in tow.

Trump was not intended to defraud anything, but rather was trying to expose the obvious election fraud that had just taken place. There were certainly a lot more than 2,000 mules involved. And since he has not been charged with anything criminal over this, like everything else your morons have concocted up, you shouldn't count your chickens before they hatch.

Even if your presumption were true, thinking about committing a crime and actually committing a crime are not the same.

Context is everything, and the comments you have taken out of context were referring to enough fraud being uncovered to restore the real results.

All of this is based on your opinion and interpretation of sketchy information, and you are a deranged liberal, so there's really no hope that you are going to arrive at an accurate conclusion.

As for January 6th, at least you have pointed to the real reason they just raided his home. It had nothing to do with unclassified docs, esp given that Trump could have declassified them to begin with, and in fact may have done so, but failed to wait out the process. And what exactly are those documents? You, of course, are not the least bit concerned with that.

They would not have needed to do any of this had the Jan 6 sham committee produced anything real. As with all the other nonsense sham trials the Democrats have conducted, they literally have nothing.

And as for "marching on the capital", welcome to America and its 1st Amendment. There is literally nothing you have twisted here that is not 100% true when it comes to the Democrats and their specific, demonstrable actions over the last 6 years- whether it is Hillary violating all sorts of statutes with her bathroom server, or smashing cell phones and wiping servers, to the riots that were outright encouraged by loudmouthed Democrats, to their wasting of time using falsified FBI warrants for their Russia collusion hoax.

The Democrat Party was literally committing insurrection with all of their made up pretexts to investigate Trump.

" just because you claim to think something is true does not make it true.” - Judge Maya Guerra @Alex Jones trial.

The letter of the law is clear. Evidence has been presented warranting an indictment on any, all and even more of the listed statutes. I provided a reply based on facts - eg: legally presented evidence during official government proceedings.

You came back with anecdotal talking points fed to you by conservative talking heads. You cannot presume to know what was on Trumps head when he took home a trove of documents he should not have taken.

There was Fraud in 2020's election. Funny that it was perpetrated to favor Trump. It was not enough to sway the election. Thats the legal facts, as concluded in ~30 legal decisions from Trump's own politically appointed justices...

How cuter is it that your make believe world colors everything your apparent idol does in pink ? Let's be realistic. You're terrified of Trump being indicted, because it will tear down your whole belief system. Thats OK. But that does not mean we should just ignore the evidence. and the evidence IS THERE.

"You're terrified of Trump being indicted, because it will tear down your whole belief system. Thats OK. But that does not mean we should just ignore the evidence. and the evidence IS THERE."

And therein lies the difference between Conservatives and liberals. We are not slaves to identity politics, so if he is guilty, he needs to be charged. And just like he was found guilty of colluding with Russia and sentenced to 100 years in a maximum security prison, anything they find *this* time should be added to that sentence.

No, liberals geniuses like yourself have no trouble looking the other way on the obvious infractions of your idols, because you are not remotely concerned with what is right and what is wrong. That would require you to admit there is such a thing as right and wrong, a set of distinctions that you innately realize you are on the wrong side of on nearly every issue imaginable.

RANT. But Thanks for the laugh.
"We are not slaves to identity politics " IS THAT SSSSSSOOO ? 😁

"Patriot Patriot White Genocide Holy Christians !!!" what do you call that ?

I was wrong. You must be living under a rock.

Hey Charlie! You don't happen to know when visiting hours are for GITMO, do you? I would like to go visit President Trump now that the FBI has successfully proven their case, and he has been jailed.

Wait, what?! You mean that the raid on MAL was yet ANOTHER hoax you desperate libs fell for?

Say it ain't so, Charlie!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQwUxR4H-6E

LMAO. A JESSEE WATERS video ? That's your trustworthy source ?
Did you miss the video where he and his lawyers claimed he was "not a news reporter, just an entertainment host" ? And that "nobody with a shred of sanity would believe what he said " ?
Well, either he and his lawyers were lying, or...

As opposed to the ever trustworthy ad hominem attack?

As is normally the case, a liberal coward resorts to the ad hominem attack vs actually dealing with the argument being made, in this case, by Jesse Watters.

OK, to be fair, perhaps it's not so much cowardice as it is intellectual insufficiency? Just asking . . .

"As is normally the case, a liberal coward resorts to the ad hominem attack vs actually dealing with the argument being made, in this case, by Jesse Watters.

OK, to be fair, perhaps it's not so much cowardice as it is intellectual insufficiency? Just asking"

"coward"

"intellectual insufficiency"

"resorts to the ad hominem attack"

@Serenity: "As is normally the case, a liberal coward resorts to the ad hominem attack" ...

That's the funniest projection this week (so far). You're funnier than that traitor lover Watters. What is it about traitors and crooks that attracts insane people so much?

And my money is on you not even noticing you're calling yourself an "insufficiently intellectual coward"... 😆

"The Democrat Party was literally committing insurrection with all of their made up pretexts to investigate Trump."

And now, fools like you get to say, "Sure, Trump was never convicted of it, but just being accused of it all is enough. Surely something must be true for there to be so much he was accused of."

All of this was tailored for liberal morons, libtards who let the TV tell them what to think. 6 years of accusations, and none of them landed. Trump is the most investigated President in all of American history, and yet none of it stuck. But maybe this time, right, genius?

Liberals are, by definition, immoral and reprobate, but never has it been more true than it is today. Congratulations on being one of the crowd.

You're just making shit up as you go. Stop embarrassing yourself.
If there's enough evidence for a VERY strong case, a Trump indictment is soon to follow. We both know the evidence is there, I'm sure you don't live under a rock despite all that garbage you just spewed.
However, Garland is not one to move recklessly. He's been holding against all kinds of pressure to indict. Following republican standards from 5 years ago, I was one of many calling him a pu55y.
He won't indict unless it's near open and shut. In which case you will be in happy happy fingerpointing dreamland.

But, if Garland indicts, what kind of lawyer will defend Trump ? He has a track record of either not paying or lawyers just walking away from him... Halloween is coming. I just figured I'd give you some nightmares 😂

"Stop embarrassing yourself."

That would require that a) you were right about your assertions, something you have no way of knowing at this point, and b) I cared one whit about what you think of me.

You don't care ? AAAAAAAAre Youuuuuu Sssssssssuuuuure ? 😆

Well, we should find out soon enough, and then we can revisit it later. Gotta tell you though, based on the spin coming from the Left, it doesn't look like it's going your way right now.

I dunno about that @Serenity_now. It sure sounds like all right wing media is scrambling to apologize for trump... I mean, "documents labeled secret are sometimes not really [that] secret" ? "The president can declassify any document he wants" ? "Hillary kept secret docs in her email server' (while she was still State Sec)...

It's like they have a 12 yr old spin dr in charge. The masterminds have abandoned Trumpism.

The fact that he might not have turned in SC1 level docs, and was keeping them in a locked closet bodes VERY VERY ILL. And thats assumming we can't find proof he intended to benefit privately from said docs.

The Timeline: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/timeline-of-trump-raid-how-it-all-unfolded

"And thats [sic] assumming [sic] we can't find proof he intended to benefit privately from said docs."

1. You have no idea what documents were taken, so you have really jumped ahead here.
2. Trump had declassified everything already.
3. They were aware of what he had, and told him to add another lock in the room they were being stored in.
4. Exactly how are you going to find such proof? Have you developed the ability to read minds? And what about Trump indicates that he intended to use his term in office for personal gain? We have a plethora of examples of how Democrats do exactly this, from Pelosi's insider trading schemes, to seeing to her husband getting away with a serious DUI, to taking her son with her to Taiwan- a son who is pretty much as reprobate as Hunter Biden is, to Biden's associations with his disgusting son's foreign money scams, to Biden bragging on video about extorting Ukraine to fire an investigator looking into Burisma. Etc. Etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseam.

Your selective outrage is hypocritical, to say the least. And what have the Democrats, whose corruption you so easily overlook, done for you lately? Telling you that going from 8.5% inflation in one month to 8.5% in the next month = 0.00% inflation?

This abuse of the FBI happened almost a week ago. I came back here to look over your gloating about how you FINALLY GOT TRUMP! I am, not surprisingly, disappointed.

One wonders why the timeline for seizing such important stolen documents stretched out over such a long period of time.

Unless . . . no, it couldn't be! Could it? Unless Democrats were abusing power, *again*, and did this for the optics? The best part is, you fell for it again, even after all of their other hoaxes were found to be just that- hoaxes.

I don't know if you realize it, but this makes you look desperate. Very desperate, indeed.

I'm not gonna bother with your gish gallop. It sounds like it's meth fueled and very, very poorly researched. Q sourced ? 8chan ?

But thanks for asking: -"And what about Trump indicates that he intended to use his term in office for personal gain?"

Right off the top of my head (i could go on and on):
* Did not divest upon taking over the presidency in 2017 - Not illegal, but BIG RED FLAG
* Having Secret Service stay at HIS OWN properties, and blowing up their rates ($400/night)
* Having international summits at his properties, and having guests stay there
* Started several PACs, and directed funds for personal affairs

While some of that shit might circumvent the law, it certainly shows his lack of respect toward the taxpayers.