I hate to break it to you, but you don't own this forum, and you have no authority on this site what so ever.

I made a thread about an extremely newsworthy event.

There are many perfectly valid things you could say on this subject like

"wow, there's going to be a lot of protests"

or

"this will help Trumps 2024 campaign"

But instead, you are trying to have a discussion about Hillary Clinton, by presenting wild legal theories that demonstrate that you do not know anything about how the law works in the US.

This is not a difficult concept to understand...

The topic of discussion is the arrest of Donald Trump.

I have never reported a single user on this forum ever and that will change today if you can not stay on topic.

This post was edited by mki on Mar 18 2023 09:59am

I mean you are on JSP, don't you sit around playing video games all day too？
This is not exactly a Politico forum.

Everything Goom said was relevant, you are just upset because it makes it obvious how ridiculous this whole situation is

So, just curious are you reporting anyone who mentions Hillary Clinton in this thread?

No I play the d2r ladders. Politico has a forum?

Imagine being so oblivious to your own topic that you're going to threaten to tattle to the PARD hall monitors when someone tries- with completely undeserved patience- to explain to you what the topic you posted about, is about.

The topic of discussion is the arrest of Donald Trump for allegations that he committed campaign finance fraud in the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton.
An allegation which is false, because by the FEC's own standards his payments to Stormy Daniels were legally done with personal funds.
An allegation which is true when applied to Hillary Clinton, in that same election, over mirrored circumstances in which she illegally used unreported campaign funds to pay for the Steele Dossier

The exact same elements of the crime that the prosecutors are trying to establish in this case against Donald Trump- that he was engaged in a conspiracy to hide an underlying crime by misreporting his campaign expenditures as 'legal expenses'- is literally, exactly what Hillary Clinton did. Except it was actually illegal when Hillary did it. She funneled campaign funds to pay for the dossier by disguising them as legal expenses to Perkins Coie, even though they were actually opposition research- a clear example of a campaign expenditure which by law must be reported. By disguising the payments, she engaged in a criminal conspiracy to hide the underlying crime, which constitutes the exact same felony case that the prosecutors are making here against Trump.

And yet in the Trump case, from the same election, from the other side of that mirror, he did not commit an underlying crime, nor misreport his campaign expenditures, and thus not engage in a criminal conspiracy, because per the FEC's own definition of personal vs campaign expenses and every expert that's ever discussed the topic and indeed the FEC commissioner himself, have all stated that the 'irrespective test' of the FEC clearly establishes that a payment like Donald Trump made is a personal, not campaign expense. And not only would that be true in the general case of a businessman paying a mistress, but in the particular specific case we have ample evidence that Trump had a pre-existing intention to silence Stormy Daniels from before the election and had made payments to other mistresses in similar circumstances, which just totally obliterates the legal case here.

Do you understand it now? I could use small words and maybe draw you some pictures with crayons and pay some woman to read it to you in a soothing motherly coo

You can comment on their stories if you sign up with them. And I supposed it is no difference in this current situation.

Hi. The Manhattan District Attorney office is not the FEC...

What do you not understand?

Oh. I didn't know that. I don't actually read politico unless it's a newsworthy story.

I check drudgereport and reddit/r/politics / r/news daily to get headlines and I read whatever seems noteworthy.

You have to double check the sources because drudge is currently reporting that Trump could be denied bail due to incitement fears, but the source is dailymail, which is a tabloid sold in grocery stores in the UK. So the story might as well read "Is Trump Considering Fleeing to Mars on Elon Musk Rocket?"

To be clear, as far as we know, he will see the judge over his arrest warrant and he will be immediately released.

This post was edited by mki on Mar 18 2023 10:23am

The problem with your country is that you no longer have a strong bi partisan center / middle for domestic politics and issues.

This post was edited by Hamsterbaby on Mar 18 2023 10:32am

I would say PBS, but even that has been polluted some. It's not as bad as most others though.

I can see that a lot of people are going to get arrested over the weekend judging by the chan site talk.

One of the more "civil" discussions is people talking about pulling their money out of the banks to trigger a bank run.