Fraud in blue Minnesota for power

[BDKJMU]

After 4 years of the the Biden regime using lawfare against their opponents that’s rich.

While you might have an argument that the NY cases against trump were lawfare, the federal (i.e. biden administration) indictments of trump were justified, not lawfare.

The lawfare that trump has waged against his opponents, universities, states, etc. has been exponentially worse than anything that was done to him.

You know what they say about opinions..

[UNI88]

While you might have an argument that the NY cases against trump were lawfare, the federal (i.e. biden administration) indictments of trump were justified, not lawfare.

The lawfare that trump has waged against his opponents, universities, states, etc. has been exponentially worse than anything that was done to him.

You know what they say about opinions..

Let's get an unbiased opinion - where does Ganny stand on the question of whether the federal indictments of trump were justified or "lawfare"?

There is a lot more evidence that bondi is acting on trump's orders then there was that garland or smith were acting on biden's. This is another MAQA effort to whitewash history in their favor.

[BDKJMU]

You know what they say about opinions..

Let's get an unbiased opinion - where does Ganny stand on the question of whether the federal indictments of trump were justified or "lawfare"?

There is a lot more evidence that bondi is acting on trump's orders then there was that garland or smith were acting on biden's. This is another MAQA effort to whitewash history in their favor.

lol unbiased. Everyone is biased.

[GOD]

Let's be honest, this is certainly a both sides do it issue. The Dems screaming about Trump now looked the other way when Biden did it, and the MAGA folks screaming when Biden did it are quiet now. Not to mention the amazing ability of folks in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, to get really good at timing stock purchases and enhancing their wealth only after they win their seat in Congress. Corruption in the political class is pretty much a given nowadays.

True but I think it's another thing that the trump regime has taken to another level like using lawfare against his opponents.

How much has the trump family made in crypto since election day 2024? Who did those funds come from?

Everyone that is in crypto is making money. Crypto hasn't even scratched the surface yet, 3 billion market cap with little to no buy in so far. When the market cap shoots to hundreds of trillions or quadrillions, think about how rich the people that got in early are gonna be.

[UNI88]

True but I think it's another thing that the trump regime has taken to another level like using lawfare against his opponents.

How much has the trump family made in crypto since election day 2024? Who did those funds come from?

Everyone that is in crypto is making money. Crypto hasn't even scratched the surface yet, 3 billion market cap with little to no buy in so far. When the market cap shoots to hundreds of trillions or quadrillions, think about how rich the people that got in early are gonna be.

I would thought God would be above a "but but but deflection" post but I guess not.

How much has the trump family made in crypto since election day 2024? Who did those funds come from?

[GOD]

[UNI88]

How much has the trump family made in crypto since election day 2024? Who did those funds come from?

"Investors" in trump's World Liberty Financial (WLFI):

• $500  million (a 49 % stake in WLFI) - Aryam Investment 1 — a company tied to Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, UAE national security adviser and brother of the UAE President (and head of major sovereign investment interests).
• $100  million - Aqua1 Foundation — a United Arab Emirates‑based Web3 fund in governance tokens from WLFI.
• $75 million - Justin Sun (Tron Founder) in WLFI token purchases and coincidentally a major SEC case against Sun’s earlier companies was paused in 2025.

[GannonFan]

You know what they say about opinions..

Let's get an unbiased opinion - where does Ganny stand on the question of whether the federal indictments of trump were justified or "lawfare"?

There is a lot more evidence that bondi is acting on trump's orders then there was that garland or smith were acting on biden's. This is another MAQA effort to whitewash history in their favor.

IMO, the NY cases were clearly lawfare. The Jack Smith stuff, as it related to J6, was justified. However, it was also politically implemented in terms of when they finally brought the charges. It was more about trying to damage Trump's chances in 2024 than it was about conviction. That case should've been brought in 2021, months after the event. I never cared for the secret document case, that was lawfare too. That should've just been handled behind closed doors like it was with other past Presidents who had documents they shouldn't have had. They had the legitimate J6 case and they should've gone with that right away, but doing the right thing got lost once folks started thinking how it could be parlayed into election wins.

As for Trump now, sure, he's absolutely abusing the DOJ and certainly doing his share of lawfare. And, he and his family are corrupt as heck when it comes to profiting off of being in office. However, I don't really care for determining if it's "next level" or not - I think it's all bad, no matter how much he and his family are doing it now versus how bad Biden's family did, and so on.

[UNI88]

Let's get an unbiased opinion - where does Ganny stand on the question of whether the federal indictments of trump were justified or "lawfare"?

There is a lot more evidence that bondi is acting on trump's orders then there was that garland or smith were acting on biden's. This is another MAQA effort to whitewash history in their favor.

IMO, the NY cases were clearly lawfare. The Jack Smith stuff, as it related to J6, was justified. However, it was also politically implemented in terms of when they finally brought the charges. It was more about trying to damage Trump's chances in 2024 than it was about conviction. That case should've been brought in 2021, months after the event. I never cared for the secret document case, that was lawfare too. That should've just been handled behind closed doors like it was with other past Presidents who had documents they shouldn't have had. They had the legitimate J6 case and they should've gone with that right away, but doing the right thing got lost once folks started thinking how it could be parlayed into election wins.

As for Trump now, sure, he's absolutely abusing the DOJ and certainly doing his share of lawfare. And, he and his family are corrupt as heck when it comes to profiting off of being in office. However, I don't really care for determining if it's "next level" or not - I think it's all bad, no matter how much he and his family are doing it now versus how bad Biden's family did, and so on.

We agree on the timing of the January 6 case. My perception is that they tried to handle the documents behind closed doors but trump not only refused to cooperate, he obstructed attempts to retrieve the documents so the DoJ resorted to a subpoena.

trump pulls a lot of crap and then plays the victim when it blows up in his face. Nothing is ever his fault. I've asked before and I'll ask again - can anyone give me examples of trump voluntarily admitting to a mistake and/or apologizing for the impact of his words or actions? Has he ever taken personal responsibility when something important has gone wrong?

[houndawg]

True but I think it's another thing that the trump regime has taken to another level like using lawfare against his opponents.

How much has the trump family made in crypto since election day 2024? Who did those funds come from?

Everyone that is in crypto is making money. Crypto hasn't even scratched the surface yet, 3 billion market cap with little to no buy in so far. When the market cap shoots to hundreds of trillions or quadrillions, think about how rich the people that got in early are gonna be.

Its impossible not to make money, buy more crypto with your crypto profits, right? How can you lose?

[BDKJMU]

You know what they say about opinions..

Let's get an unbiased opinion - where does Ganny stand on the question of whether the federal indictments of trump were justified or "lawfare"?

There is a lot more evidence that bondi is acting on trump's orders then there was that garland or smith were acting on biden's. This is another MAQA effort to whitewash history in their favor.

You asked Fed, which were only 2 of the 6 cases, but he said:
-the NY cases were clearly lawfare (were 3, 1 criminal, 2 Civil).
-of the 2 Fed, only J6 not lawfare, but politically timed. I would call politically timed counting as lawfare.

The GA case was tossed against Trump, and the 18 others indicted too, because it, too, was lawfare. Fatty Willis was removed from the case and then fined for violating GA‘s open records law.

[Caribbean Hen]

IMO, the NY cases were clearly lawfare. The Jack Smith stuff, as it related to J6, was justified. However, it was also politically implemented in terms of when they finally brought the charges. It was more about trying to damage Trump's chances in 2024 than it was about conviction. That case should've been brought in 2021, months after the event. I never cared for the secret document case, that was lawfare too. That should've just been handled behind closed doors like it was with other past Presidents who had documents they shouldn't have had. They had the legitimate J6 case and they should've gone with that right away, but doing the right thing got lost once folks started thinking how it could be parlayed into election wins.

As for Trump now, sure, he's absolutely abusing the DOJ and certainly doing his share of lawfare. And, he and his family are corrupt as heck when it comes to profiting off of being in office. However, I don't really care for determining if it's "next level" or not - I think it's all bad, no matter how much he and his family are doing it now versus how bad Biden's family did, and so on.

We agree on the timing of the January 6 case. My perception is that they tried to handle the documents behind closed doors but trump not only refused to cooperate, he obstructed attempts to retrieve the documents so the DoJ resorted to a subpoena.

trump pulls a lot of crap and then plays the victim when it blows up in his face. Nothing is ever his fault. I've asked before and I'll ask again - can anyone give me examples of trump voluntarily admitting to a mistake and/or apologizing for the impact of his words or actions? Has he ever taken personal responsibility when something important has gone wrong?

TDS 88 still doesn’t understand why the Democrats lost the election

what they did to Trump was unprecedented, it actually started back in 2015, and clearly a case of get Trump at any cost

But that’s OK because the voters could see it, the Democrats took it way too far and paid the price on Election Day

[UNI88]

Let's get an unbiased opinion - where does Ganny stand on the question of whether the federal indictments of trump were justified or "lawfare"?

There is a lot more evidence that bondi is acting on trump's orders then there was that garland or smith were acting on biden's. This is another MAQA effort to whitewash history in their favor.

You asked Fed, which were only 2 of the 6 cases, but he said:
-the NY cases were clearly lawfare (were 3, 1 criminal, 2 Civil).
-of the 2 Fed, only J6 not lawfare, but politically timed. I would call politically timed counting as lawfare.

The GA case was tossed against Trump, and the 18 others indicted too, because it, too, was lawfare. Fatty Willis was removed from the case and then fined for violating GA‘s open records law.

The timing was extremely poor but the fundamentals of the January 6 case were not lawfare.
I explained why I thought the documents case wasn't handled behind closed doors and thus wasn't lawfare.

The GA case was bungled badly by local prosecutors and probably should have been part of the January 6 / election interference (attempt to Steal the 2020 election) case.

The difference between the biden administration's and trump regime's influence over the DoJ is YUGE. garland and smith weren't reporting directly to the White House, bondi is responding to trump like a marionette on strings. trump has taken the weaponization of the DoJ to a level unprecedented in my lifetime.

[GannonFan]

You asked Fed, which were only 2 of the 6 cases, but he said:
-the NY cases were clearly lawfare (were 3, 1 criminal, 2 Civil).
-of the 2 Fed, only J6 not lawfare, but politically timed. I would call politically timed counting as lawfare.

The GA case was tossed against Trump, and the 18 others indicted too, because it, too, was lawfare. Fatty Willis was removed from the case and then fined for violating GA‘s open records law.

The timing was extremely poor but the fundamentals of the January 6 case were not lawfare.
I explained why I thought the documents case wasn't handled behind closed doors and thus wasn't lawfare.

The GA case was bungled badly by local prosecutors and probably should have been part of the January 6 / election interference (attempt to Steal the 2020 election) case.

The difference between the biden administration's and trump regime's influence over the DoJ is YUGE. garland and smith weren't reporting directly to the White House, bondi is responding to trump like a marionette on strings. trump has taken the weaponization of the DoJ to a level unprecedented in my lifetime.

Thing is, the J6 case should've been brought in late 2021. It didn't gain real steam until near the end of 2023 and then into 2024. Why? Because the Dems wanted Trump in the 2024 election and then they wanted him hobbled by the case. That's lawfare, plain and simple, and it backfired massively. And I'm not excusing Republicans here - they should've gone along with the vote to remove Trump in the second impeachment and he should've been barred from running again, but they chickened out. There's an amazing paucity of noble statesmen(people) in our government today.

The GA case was always weak - all they had to go on was a phone call that, while embarrassing, never rose to the level of criminal.

And as for the differences, sure, the fact that Trump is technically using the DOJ is a difference. However, it's a small one. Prosecutors kept leaving the Biden DOJ, which were rare moves normally, to then go pursue these cases at the state level. And Smith's separation from the DOJ was somewhat performative as it was just shielded by a special prosecutor tag. Biden's administrative was just not as openly brazen as compared to what Trump's doing. But both have been unprecedented intrusions of politics and political machinations into the judicial system specifically to target political opponents. Trying to defend one or the other is a hallmark of our "stupid times".

[UNI88]

The timing was extremely poor but the fundamentals of the January 6 case were not lawfare.
I explained why I thought the documents case wasn't handled behind closed doors and thus wasn't lawfare.

The GA case was bungled badly by local prosecutors and probably should have been part of the January 6 / election interference (attempt to Steal the 2020 election) case.

The difference between the biden administration's and trump regime's influence over the DoJ is YUGE. garland and smith weren't reporting directly to the White House, bondi is responding to trump like a marionette on strings. trump has taken the weaponization of the DoJ to a level unprecedented in my lifetime.

Thing is, the J6 case should've been brought in late 2021. It didn't gain real steam until near the end of 2023 and then into 2024. Why? Because the Dems wanted Trump in the 2024 election and then they wanted him hobbled by the case. That's lawfare, plain and simple, and it backfired massively. And I'm not excusing Republicans here - they should've gone along with the vote to remove Trump in the second impeachment and he should've been barred from running again, but they chickened out. There's an amazing paucity of noble statesmen(people) in our government today.

The GA case was always weak - all they had to go on was a phone call that, while embarrassing, never rose to the level of criminal.

And as for the differences, sure, the fact that Trump is technically using the DOJ is a difference. However, it's a small one. Prosecutors kept leaving the Biden DOJ, which were rare moves normally, to then go pursue these cases at the state level. And Smith's separation from the DOJ was somewhat performative as it was just shielded by a special prosecutor tag. Biden's administrative was just not as openly brazen as compared to what Trump's doing. But both have been unprecedented intrusions of politics and political machinations into the judicial system specifically to target political opponents. Trying to defend one or the other is a hallmark of our "stupid times".

Do you have proof that the timing of the January 6 was intentional or are you speculating?

• The DoJ began investigating January 6 almost immediately after it happened.
• Jack Smith was appointed in November, 2022 (22 months later) when trump declared his candidacy.
• Because President biden was a likely opponent a special counsel was needed.
• It took roughly 31 months from January 6 to the filing of the indictments.
• Is that unusually long for a complex federal conspiracy investigation involving a former president, novel constitutional issues, executive privilege fights, and thousands of witnesses?
• You might be overestimating how fast the DoJ moves on large, complex cases.

None of this changes the reality that those indictments were justified even if the timing might have been wonky.

IMO you're oversimplifying the Georgia case. Like I've stated previously the case was bungled and likely should have been part of Smith's January 6 case but there was more to the it than just a phone call. There were charges of making false statements about election fraud (to Georgia legislative committees, state officials and other government officials) and the fraudulent electors.

Stating that "the fact that Trump is technically using the DOJ is a difference" is oversimplifying things. There are Lie Social posts by trump directing bondi to go after comey, schiff, and letitia james. And let's not overlook the DoJ forcing out career prosecutors who refused to pursue these cases.



I'm not defending what biden did with the DoJ, I'm stating that trump has taken it to another level. You add in his regime's lawfare against law firms, universities, etc. and I don't think that's debateable.

[BDKJMU]

Thing is, the J6 case should've been brought in late 2021. It didn't gain real steam until near the end of 2023 and then into 2024. Why? Because the Dems wanted Trump in the 2024 election and then they wanted him hobbled by the case. That's lawfare, plain and simple, and it backfired massively. And I'm not excusing Republicans here - they should've gone along with the vote to remove Trump in the second impeachment and he should've been barred from running again, but they chickened out. There's an amazing paucity of noble statesmen(people) in our government today.

The GA case was always weak - all they had to go on was a phone call that, while embarrassing, never rose to the level of criminal.

And as for the differences, sure, the fact that Trump is technically using the DOJ is a difference. However, it's a small one. Prosecutors kept leaving the Biden DOJ, which were rare moves normally, to then go pursue these cases at the state level. And Smith's separation from the DOJ was somewhat performative as it was just shielded by a special prosecutor tag. Biden's administrative was just not as openly brazen as compared to what Trump's doing. But both have been unprecedented intrusions of politics and political machinations into the judicial system specifically to target political opponents. Trying to defend one or the other is a hallmark of our "stupid times".

Do you have proof that the timing of the January 6 was intentional or are you speculating?

• The DoJ began investigating January 6 almost immediately after it happened.
• Jack Smith was appointed in November, 2022 (22 months later) when trump declared his candidacy.
• Because President biden was a likely opponent a special counsel was needed.
• It took roughly 31 months from January 6 to the filing of the indictments.
• Is that unusually long for a complex federal conspiracy investigation involving a former president, novel constitutional issues, executive privilege fights, and thousands of witnesses?
• You might be overestimating how fast the DoJ moves on large, complex cases.

None of this changes the reality that those indictments were justified even if the timing might have been wonky.

IMO you're oversimplifying the Georgia case. Like I've stated previously the case was bungled and likely should have been part of Smith's January 6 case but there was more to the it than just a phone call. There were charges of making false statements about election fraud (to Georgia legislative committees, state officials and other government officials) and the fraudulent electors.

Stating that "the fact that Trump is technically using the DOJ is a difference" is oversimplifying things. There are Lie Social posts by trump directing bondi to go after comey, schiff, and letitia james. And let's not overlook the DoJ forcing out career prosecutors who refused to pursue these cases.



I'm not defending what biden did with the DoJ, I'm stating that trump has taken it to another level. You add in his regime's lawfare against law firms, universities, etc. and I don't think that's debateable.

Good. Letitia James literally openly campaigned on ‘Getting Donald Trump‘ and obtained a massive civil judgement against him for doing something virtually every major real estate developer in the country does. Of course the judgement was tossed.

[UNI88]

Do you have proof that the timing of the January 6 was intentional or are you speculating?

• The DoJ began investigating January 6 almost immediately after it happened.
• Jack Smith was appointed in November, 2022 (22 months later) when trump declared his candidacy.
• Because President biden was a likely opponent a special counsel was needed.
• It took roughly 31 months from January 6 to the filing of the indictments.
• Is that unusually long for a complex federal conspiracy investigation involving a former president, novel constitutional issues, executive privilege fights, and thousands of witnesses?
• You might be overestimating how fast the DoJ moves on large, complex cases.

None of this changes the reality that those indictments were justified even if the timing might have been wonky.

IMO you're oversimplifying the Georgia case. Like I've stated previously the case was bungled and likely should have been part of Smith's January 6 case but there was more to the it than just a phone call. There were charges of making false statements about election fraud (to Georgia legislative committees, state officials and other government officials) and the fraudulent electors.

Stating that "the fact that Trump is technically using the DOJ is a difference" is oversimplifying things. There are Lie Social posts by trump directing bondi to go after comey, schiff, and letitia james. And let's not overlook the DoJ forcing out career prosecutors who refused to pursue these cases.



I'm not defending what biden did with the DoJ, I'm stating that trump has taken it to another level. You add in his regime's lawfare against law firms, universities, etc. and I don't think that's debateable.

Good. Letitia James literally openly campaigned on ‘Getting Donald Trump‘ and obtained a massive civil judgement against him for doing something virtually every major real estate developer in the country does. Of course the judgement was tossed.

And trump's DoJ went after james, schiff, etc. over something that members of the trump regime have also done.

Thank you for admitting that the trump DoJ is engaging in lawfare against his opponents,

[BDKJMU]

Good. Letitia James literally openly campaigned on ‘Getting Donald Trump‘ and obtained a massive civil judgement against him for doing something virtually every major real estate developer in the country does. Of course the judgement was tossed.

And trump's DoJ went after james, schiff, etc. over something that members of the trump regime have also done.

Thank you for admitting that the trump DoJ is engaging in lawfare against his opponents,

Comey (leaked memos) and Schiff (Trump Russia Collusion HOAX, Shampeachment 1) both went after Trump. What‘s good for the goose is good for the gander.

[UNI88]

And trump's DoJ went after james, schiff, etc. over something that members of the trump regime have also done.

Thank you for admitting that the trump DoJ is engaging in lawfare against his opponents,

Comey (leaked memos) and Schiff (Trump Russia Collusion HOAX, Shampeachment 1) both went after Trump. What‘s good for the goose is good for the gander.

comey also gave trump an assist with the clinton email announcement.

You keep saying "Russia Collusion HOAX" like posting it repeatedly will make it true. Try as you, trump and other MAQA yahoos might, you don't get to whitewash history.

[GannonFan]

Comey (leaked memos) and Schiff (Trump Russia Collusion HOAX, Shampeachment 1) both went after Trump. What‘s good for the goose is good for the gander.

comey also gave trump an assist with the clinton email announcement.

You keep saying "Russia Collusion HOAX" like posting it repeatedly will make it true. Try as you, trump and other MAQA yahoos might, you don't get to whitewash history.

But you also just don't get to say part of the story (well, of course you can do whatever you want, but it would still just be part of the story). Did some of Trump's campaign people talk to people in Russia? Yes, absolutely. But did some of Clinton's campaign people also talk to people in Russia? Also yes, absolutely. Heck, the Steele Dossier was funded eventually by Dem money and was essentially written by the Russians and is still used today (you even used the golden shower reference earlier). Politics today sucks. The people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck. 2028 can't get here fast enough.

[UNI88]

comey also gave trump an assist with the clinton email announcement.

You keep saying "Russia Collusion HOAX" like posting it repeatedly will make it true. Try as you, trump and other MAQA yahoos might, you don't get to whitewash history.

But you also just don't get to say part of the story (well, of course you can do whatever you want, but it would still just be part of the story). Did some of Trump's campaign people talk to people in Russia? Yes, absolutely. But did some of Clinton's campaign people also talk to people in Russia? Also yes, absolutely. Heck, the Steele Dossier was funded eventually by Dem money and was essentially written by the Russians and is still used today (you even used the golden shower reference earlier). Politics today sucks. The people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck. 2028 can't get here fast enough.

Did the trump 2016 campaign likely benefit from russian efforts? Yes. The information hacked from Democratic servers and released on Wikileaks and the social media misinformation campaign (Internet Research Agency and others) indirectly benefited trump. Calling it a Hoax is a dishonest attempt to whitewash history.

Are clinton supporters on here denying her campaign's connections to russia and calling claims of collusion a hoax? No, they're not. A better comparison for clinton would be if her supporters had called the issues with her Email Server and Benghazi Hoaxes and some did try to call Benghazi a hoax. Using MAQA/trump logic, she wasn't convicted therefore she is completely absolved. Sorry, she isn't and neither is trump.

I'm tired of the trump/MAQA double standard and attempts to whitewash/rewrite history.

I agree that the "people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck." I don't think 2028 will be the end of it though. It's going to take awhile to clean up the mess created by trump, biden and clinton.

[GannonFan]

But you also just don't get to say part of the story (well, of course you can do whatever you want, but it would still just be part of the story). Did some of Trump's campaign people talk to people in Russia? Yes, absolutely. But did some of Clinton's campaign people also talk to people in Russia? Also yes, absolutely. Heck, the Steele Dossier was funded eventually by Dem money and was essentially written by the Russians and is still used today (you even used the golden shower reference earlier). Politics today sucks. The people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck. 2028 can't get here fast enough.

Are clinton supporters on here denying her campaign's connections to russia and calling claims of collusion a hoax? No, they're not. A better comparison for clinton would be if her supporters had called the issues with her Email Server and Benghazi Hoaxes and some did try to call Benghazi a hoax. Using MAQA/trump logic, she wasn't convicted therefore she is completely absolved. Sorry, she isn't and neither is trump.

Well, truth be told, I don't know if there are any Clinton supporters on here. And even the Clinton supporters that do exist have largely stayed mum on the details of her campaign and the interactions it had with various Russian sources.

[BDKJMU]

But you also just don't get to say part of the story (well, of course you can do whatever you want, but it would still just be part of the story). Did some of Trump's campaign people talk to people in Russia? Yes, absolutely. But did some of Clinton's campaign people also talk to people in Russia? Also yes, absolutely. Heck, the Steele Dossier was funded eventually by Dem money and was essentially written by the Russians and is still used today (you even used the golden shower reference earlier). Politics today sucks. The people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck. 2028 can't get here fast enough.

Did the trump 2016 campaign likely benefit from russian efforts? Yes. The information hacked from Democratic servers and released on Wikileaks and the social media misinformation campaign (Internet Research Agency and others) indirectly benefited trump. Calling it a Hoax is a dishonest attempt to whitewash history.

Are clinton supporters on here denying her campaign's connections to russia and calling claims of collusion a hoax? No, they're not. A better comparison for clinton would be if her supporters had called the issues with her Email Server and Benghazi Hoaxes and some did try to call Benghazi a hoax. Using MAQA/trump logic, she wasn't convicted therefore she is completely absolved. Sorry, she isn't and neither is trump.

I'm tired of the trump/MAQA double standard and attempts to whitewash/rewrite history.

I agree that the "people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck." I don't think 2028 will be the end of it though. It's going to take awhile to clean up the mess created by trump, biden and clinton.

Did the Clinton 2016 campaign likely benefit from Russian efforts? Yes.

[UNI88]

Did the trump 2016 campaign likely benefit from russian efforts? Yes. The information hacked from Democratic servers and released on Wikileaks and the social media misinformation campaign (Internet Research Agency and others) indirectly benefited trump. Calling it a Hoax is a dishonest attempt to whitewash history.

Are clinton supporters on here denying her campaign's connections to russia and calling claims of collusion a hoax? No, they're not. A better comparison for clinton would be if her supporters had called the issues with her Email Server and Benghazi Hoaxes and some did try to call Benghazi a hoax. Using MAQA/trump logic, she wasn't convicted therefore she is completely absolved. Sorry, she isn't and neither is trump.

I'm tired of the trump/MAQA double standard and attempts to whitewash/rewrite history.

I agree that the "people in politics, to too much of a degree, suck." I don't think 2028 will be the end of it though. It's going to take awhile to clean up the mess created by trump, biden and clinton.

Did the Clinton 2016 campaign likely benefit from Russian efforts? Yes.

How did clinton's 2016 campaign benefit overall (your claimed benefits minus the negative impact of server leaks and social media misinformation)?

[Caribbean Hen]

Nick Shirley is a young American Hero

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/nic ... 38740.html


YouTuber and independent journalist Nick Shirley went viral Monday for his response to California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office on social media after it mocked his efforts to expose alleged fraud by daycare centers receiving millions of dollars of government funding.

Newsom's office mocked Shirley by posting a photo of a man carrying several cameras at a daycare and asking a teacher, "Hey, can I see your kids?"

Shirley did not hold back in his response.

"You do realize I’m trying to help America eliminate fraud and waste right?" he said in a reply to the post Monday night. "No need to try and make me look like the bad guy for exposing fraud. People are over it. Start working for the people and not against them."