Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Trumps “hush money” sentencing moved back to late November!
test
The Sandbox - PittsburghThe Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here. If it's NOT an adult-themed topic, then it belongs here
Turley and his opinion is right leaning, despite the claims of him being a Democrat. He's only on one network if that tells you ANYTHING.
Therefore his conclusions are no surprise as they come from the DJT network that has been forced to pay almost 800 million dollars for lying about Trump and his election.
Also, anytime a person is acting as a candidate vs a POTUS, that is what is being referred to here by Jack Smiths filings.
Despite bams claim of a 24/7 job, that's just not the case. Every time Trump went to a rally or held a election related speech, or raised money, or spent money on his election, or had conversations about his CANDIDACY in an election, that is NOT official acts of a president. They are acts as a candidate for office.
Despite your claim, the ruling was NOT 100% immunity RATHER
The current law on this subject is relatively simple: Until changed by the Supreme Court, a president may not be charged with a crime for anything he does while he is acting as president. Once he leaves office, a president may be charged for any crimes he may have committed in office, unless they can be characterized as “official acts” within the capacious framework of Article II of the Constitution, which outlines the powers of the presidency. There is no such category as “private acts,” just acts that are not “official acts.”
so candidate Trump can be subject to charges when not doing official acts of the office. (Like being a candidate for it instead.)
i have no idea what you are talking about. where did i say immunity had any bearing here? it's a civil case.
someone not so "right" agrees with Turley. Alan Dershowitz. a lifelong Democrat who voted for Clinton in 2016 and Biden in 2020. will probably vote for Harris.
do yerself a favor, eh? watch the first 5-6 minutes before you dismiss Dershowitz as a "right leaning biased expert"
Is this the same douchawitz who claimed to "have recently left the Democrat part"?
Let's be honest, like Turley, AD only appears on one network -FOX, and that's because he only sees through the vision of the well scripted Republican lens. It's comical to say that it's even a news station as EVERY SINGLE ONE of their shows is scripted, and 99% are tapped, like Hannity, Ingram and Levin. Even their experts are given a script to follow.
It is like watching a Laundromat washer... expecting something new, but it's the same old rinse and repeat.
DJT immunity will be tested on multiple fronts from now till the cows come home. Hush money, election interference, and defamation will be front and center. ...with some lovely new charges to come I'm sure. He will spend the remainder of his money on attorneys who will buy him a few years till he either croaks or ends up in the pokey.
Fuck douchebag Alan and his books along with all the other GOP tit suckler books out there. It's just a ruse to get money from "the base." The group that will buy anything the GOP or supporters are selling, as they are desperate to cling to any sense of power and control.
