Trump indicted over hush money payments in Stormy Daniels probe

Yet none of you guys are able to find it when asked. So far we've seen two articles: one which didn't support the claim at all and one that directly contradicts it.

 

Quote the part that "proves" that. So far, it seems to prove the opposite. It's starting to look like that, just with the first article you shared, you didn't read this one either.

 

Well, hopefully it's not just to waste my time. I have room on my list to add names to.

 

He can legally run from jail (even though he won't go to jail). And he can probably still win the GOP primary from there. Practically speaking, though, no. He won't win the general if he's in jail.

 

You seem too eager to jump off the cliff before looking. Look over your shoulder.

 

Do you honestly expect any common sense out these authoritarians who hate Trump so much? They also questioned the 2016 election for 4 solid years, they built statues and murals of criminals who fought the law and lost. They live in a fantasy world where they're surrounded by misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, islamaphobic, sexist, racists and never realize they're staring back at themselves in the mirror when they point their fingers. They call us dictators and authoritarians because we won't bend the knee and do exactly as they demand.

 

So wanting to see evidence before coming to a conclusion sounds to you like jumping off of a cliff before looking? Can you explain?

 

The leaks are far more likely to come from Trump and his team.

 

You're basing it on people's feelings. If it's believed he was railroaded into jail it might gain him more support.

 

Yea, I posted a link, per request.

 

That's what totalitarians do.

 

Funny thing about votes: they come from people.

His base will believe that and maybe even a tiny handful of other Republicans. That's about it. Trump is a professional victim, but it going to turn off independents (something else he excels at). He can't win with just his rabid conspiracy theorist base.

 

In which post?

 

You're thinking of Trump and his supporters who want their Dear Leader to be above the law.

 

Go fish!

 

Nobody believed Trump could win in 2016. Were you one of them?

 

Tempting. But if I do find your link and read it and address it, you aren't going to respond anyway. I don't see the point.

 

Then,

Look

 

So, there's no link.

 

Nope. I didn't think he could win the primary, but after he won, I warned people it wasn't going to be a slam dunk win for Clinton. But his approval among independents has spiraled since then, and he needs those to win.

 

LOL... poorly written? What Nancy suggested is fundamentally a violation of due process. That isn't "poorly written" it is unconstitutional.

 

Think you for confessing that you were not engaging in intellectually honest discussion. The irony here is just perfect though: you are complaining that it would be a waste of time while confessing that you were actually the one trying to waste mine.

 

Dude, donating to a political pac is the only way large corporations and people like Soros can donate to pollical campaigns in the US. Figure it out, just once.

 

What does any of that have to do with the grand jury indictment? Again: you might as well be talking about conspiracy theories about leprechaun gold.

 

Nothing in The Constitution addresses the current indictment against Trump in NY.