[Crimson Dynamo]

The pathetically trivial, dumb case against Trump damages the US – and gives
him one foot back in the White House

Trump’s enraged support has never looked more fired up, or more determined
to see him re-elected

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/282402...x=1717180861-1

That was my instant reaction as I left the recording of Thursday night’s BBC
Question Time to hear the bombshell breaking news that Donald Trump had
been convicted on all counts in the Stormy Daniels hush money trial.

And my feelings only intensified on the journey home into utter incredulity
that such a stinking, stupid, senseless act of self-harming partisan political
claptrap had been allowed to happen.

Trump’s no angel, we all know that.

But for America to drag one of its 46 presidents through a criminal court over
this tawdry, tacky, pathetically trivial case is so damaging to the country’s
reputation.

Frankly, who cares if Trump did or didn’t have a one-night stand with a porn
star 18 years ago, and then paid her off to keep quiet about it?

Is that any worse than what Bill Clinton did when he had ‘sexual relations’
with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office and then lied to the American people
about it, or paid Paula Jones off with $850,000 to settle her sexual
harassment case against him?

And don’t even get me started on JFK and all his sexual shenanigans which
included one of his myriad girlfriends Judith Exner passing classified CIA
plans for the assassination of Fidel Castro to Chicago mafia boss Sam
Giancana.

There’s a sickening hypocrisy behind the Democrat campaign to beat Trump
in the 2024 election by trying to incarcerate him for doing far less serious
things with Stormy Daniels than their own presidents did with women.

And Trump’s conviction sets a horribly dangerous precedent for US political
parties to weaponize the justice system against their opponents.

More popular martyr
But the reason it’s so dumb as well as dangerous is because it will inevitably
make Trump an even stronger candidate to win back the White House against
an ageing, ailing, deeply disliked President Biden.

Within hours of the verdicts, his presidential campaign received a staggering
$34 million in donations, nearly doubling its single-day fundraising record.

Money talks in elections, and Trump’s enraged support has never looked more
fired up, or more determined to see him re-elected.

Even if he’s jailed when he’s sentenced in July, it will only make him a bigger
and more popular martyr.

The Democrats think they scored a big win by finally making a crime stick
against Teflon Don, but come November, I suspect Trump will have the last
vengeful laugh.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/282402...x=1717180861-1

[Kazanne]

he has a point about Clinton

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

he has a point about Clinton

And JFK

[Quantum Boy]

"The people who were definitely 100% already voting for Trump are now going to vote for him EVEN HARDER!"



How does that work then.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

he has a point about Clinton

clinton didn't try to hide his payment, thats why this is a crime and clinton's was not

You know the saying, the cover up is usually worse than the crime, well thats exactly what trump did

[bots]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

"The people who were definitely 100% already voting for Trump are now going to vote for him EVEN HARDER!"



How does that work then.

1 person, 1 vote

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

clinton didn't try to hide his payment, thats why this is a crime and clinton's was not

You know the saying, the cover up is usually worse than the crime, well thats exactly what trump did

It's not just that: the Clinton payment was an official out-of-court settlement of a publicly disclosed civil lawsuit. That is, in fact, the usual conclusion of a civil lawsuit - a negotiated settlement between the two involved parties.

Trump's "hush money" payment was a private arrangement made before any lawsuit was officially presented. It might seems similar but it's completely different, and notably, there's a reason they did it. Otherwise they would simply have let it go to court and then made the settlement offer to normal way. The key is that the court case itself is then publicly disclosed (as Clinton's was).

TBF I don't agree with either and US politics really is absolute dog****... BUT... it's important to point out that the two events are both functionally and legally completely different.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

And JFK

Yes and him so I have been told.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

It's not just that: the Clinton payment was an official out-of-court settlement of a publicly disclosed civil lawsuit. That is, in fact, the usual conclusion of a civil lawsuit - a negotiated settlement between the two involved parties.

Trump's "hush money" payment was a private arrangement made before any lawsuit was officially presented. It might seems similar but it's completely different, and notably, there's a reason they did it. Otherwise they would simply have let it go to court and then made the settlement offer to normal way. The key is that the court case itself is then publicly disclosed (as Clinton's was).

TBF I don't agree with either and US politics really is absolute dog****... BUT... it's important to point out that the two events are both functionally and legally completely different.

Trumps misdemeanour was 16 years ago Before he was in politics .

[bots]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Trumps misdemeanour was 16 years ago Before he was in politics .

he paid off Stormy during the 2016 election, which is not 16 years ago, and is why he was found guilty of election interference

[The Slim Reaper]

Prayers up for this brave truth teller. Oh, sorry, I mean the dude that harassed the grieving families of Sandy Hook.

[Crimson Dynamo]

American-Israeli billionaire set to donate more than $100 MILLION to Trump Super PAC to help get the former President re-elected.

Dr. Miriam Adelson, the widow of the late casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson, plans to help bankroll the Preserve America PAC.

The Israeli born physician who specializes in substance abuse, was previously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the Trump White House.

Her late husband previously donated $20 million to the Trump campaign in 2016 and used his leverage to push for Trump to announce the relocation of the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem when he won the Presidency.

Some sources connected to the billionaire Republican megadonor speculate that the decision to pump more than $100 million into the PAC came after Trump took a more firm stance on his support for Israel.

Trump told donors at a recent fundraiser that he will support Israel’s “war on terror” and vowed to crush the pro-Palestinian protests across university campuses and deport foreign activists.

The Adelson’s also contributed $90 million to the Trump campaign during the 2020 election.

Source: Politico, The Forward

[Crimson Dynamo]

Donald Trump gained over 1 Million followers on TikTok overnight

[DemRed]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

American-Israeli billionaire set to donate more than $100 MILLION to Trump Super PAC to help get the former President re-elected.

Dr. Miriam Adelson, the widow of the late casino tycoon Sheldon Adelson, plans to help bankroll the Preserve America PAC.

The Israeli born physician who specializes in substance abuse, was previously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom during the Trump White House.

Her late husband previously donated $20 million to the Trump campaign in 2016 and used his leverage to push for Trump to announce the relocation of the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem when he won the Presidency.

Some sources connected to the billionaire Republican megadonor speculate that the decision to pump more than $100 million into the PAC came after Trump took a more firm stance on his support for Israel.

Trump told donors at a recent fundraiser that he will support Israel’s “war on terror” and vowed to crush the pro-Palestinian protests across university campuses and deport foreign activists.

The Adelson’s also contributed $90 million to the Trump campaign during the 2020 election.

Source: Politico, The Forward

He's good on so many levels, but not on this. If he's not careful, this will lose him a lot of votes.

I'm on a Trump group on Telegram and I'd say 75% of the posters want Trump to stop the war.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by DemRed

He's good on so many levels, but not on this. If he's not careful, this will lose him a lot of votes.

I'm on a Trump group on Telegram and I'd say 75% of the posters want Trump to stop the war.

And 100% want Hamas/palestine to first release the hostages

[DemRed]

Trump has said that he will reveal the truth around JFK's assassination.

[DemRed]

@LT, The problem is, the world as we know it is changing at a fast rate of knots. The BRICS nations have just announced that they are not only sanctioning Israel but they are ready to defend justice in the world. Looks likely we are about to go into a 3rd world war and if so, there will be no elections.

Biden and Fauci go to trial on the 3rd of June! Further to that, Biden will likely stand trail as a war criminal

[Crimson Dynamo]

PIERS MORGAN: “Why is Bill Clinton able to have sex with an intern in the Oval Office when he’s President and lie to the American people about it on national television? And why is he able to pay off Paula Jones $850,000, four times as much, five times as much as the Trump payment to Stormy Daniels, to get rid of a sexual harassment claim, again, while he’s President, and he has no criminal court recourse for that? Why is that deemed to be better than what happened with Trump and Stormy?”

FRANCESCA FIORENTINI: “I don’t think anyone is making that case, Piers.”

PIERS MORGAN: “No, I’m asking you, what’s the difference? What’s the difference?”

FRANCESCA FIORENTINI: “The difference is that he didn’t cook the books financially using his own, like using back channels in order to pay.”

PIERS MORGAN: “So paying somebody off who says you sexually harassed her, paying her nearly a million dollars while you’re the President of the United States and then having sex with an intern in the Oval Office and lying about it, that’s fine because he’s a Democrat?”

FRANCESCA FIORENTINI: “Only the leftists in your mind are making that argument.”

PIERS MORGAN: “Sorry?”

short video here: https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1797861702584688994

[Quantum Boy]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

PIERS MORGAN: “Why is Bill Clinton able to have sex with an intern in the Oval Office when he’s President and lie to the American people about it on national television? And why is he able to pay off Paula Jones $850,000, four times as much, five times as much as the Trump payment to Stormy Daniels, to get rid of a sexual harassment claim, again, while he’s President, and he has no criminal court recourse for that? Why is that deemed to be better than what happened with Trump and Stormy?”

FRANCESCA FIORENTINI: “I don’t think anyone is making that case, Piers.”

PIERS MORGAN: “No, I’m asking you, what’s the difference? What’s the difference?”

FRANCESCA FIORENTINI: “The difference is that he didn’t cook the books financially using his own, like using back channels in order to pay.”

PIERS MORGAN: “So paying somebody off who says you sexually harassed her, paying her nearly a million dollars while you’re the President of the United States and then having sex with an intern in the Oval Office and lying about it, that’s fine because he’s a Democrat?”

FRANCESCA FIORENTINI: “Only the leftists in your mind are making that argument.”

PIERS MORGAN: “Sorry?”

short video here: https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1797861702584688994

It's daft - the debate is short and only people being performative would pretend otherwise.

Why is one thing not allowed and one thing is? It's not about the morality of "the indiscretion" - going through official channels and making an out of court settlement is allowed, doing it under a dodgy table sat outside the back door is not.

That's it That's the whole answer. You can go into the morality of it as an interesting debate, sure, but in terms of outcome, ALL that matters is the legal answer for why one is illegal and the other isn't. The law isn't about morals.