One did because they all committed crimes. The other did it because a lunatic is out to harm as many enemies as possible.
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
-32 points (24.2% liked)
Conservative
462 readers
115 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
So you are worried that the Trump admin might find little things turn them into felonies and go after his political opponents. Wonder where he learned that?
You're politically illiterate if that's what you took from my comment. Trump is not accused / convicted of little things. But sure, be like my mother, someone who truly believes he's a good leader. (Your bullshit) Doesn't bother me. (My mother's bullshit makes me sad.)
When multiple democrats admitted the charges against Trump were bogus you should probably be suspicious of the claims but critical thinking is not for everyone.
Source. Now. You're full of shit. He committed crimes. Lots of them. Come suck his dick some more.
It's quite impressive how much you've insulated yourself from reality.
Have you asked yourself why the judge didn't even fine Trump.
What penalties would have been proscribed had a vindictive man not been returned to power vs when he can unleash hell upon a judge? It's a fun thought experiment.
A former New York Attorney General, and rabid Trump hater, says he shouldn't have been charged, the judge doesn't sentence him and the conclusion you draw is the judge was intimidated.
Provide sources.
Since you seemed to miss it the first time.
https://lemm.ee/post/53270418/17727028
Let's see if you can provide a source that the judge was intimidated by Trump.
False equivalence.
He'll do it in 4 years time. Calling it now.