• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

A: This is how you deal with Trump Supporters

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
He might be arguing that the payment benefits
Trump, & is therefore a campaign contribution.
This would be a very tortured argument, but the
rampant hatred encourages such thinking.
Yep, that's pretty much it.
Campaign contribution laws are, necessarily, pretty complex. I don't claim to be anything resembling an authority. But the most plausible explanation I have heard, so far, for why a lawyer took claim for the payment was because if campaign funds were used it was definitely a violation of the law. You can't just use campaign funds for anything.

Maybe it's really nothing. Maybe not. But Trump isn't exactly Mr. Transparent. He has a history of buying his way out of legal problems.
Tom
 

Akivah

Well-Known Member
Yep, that's pretty much it.
Campaign contribution laws are, necessarily, pretty complex. I don't claim to be anything resembling an authority. But the most plausible explanation I have heard, so far, for why a lawyer took claim for the payment was because if campaign funds were used it was definitely a violation of the law. You can't just use campaign funds for anything.

Tom
It's funny. You first say that you don't claim to be anything resembling an authority on these laws. But on your very next sentence, you suddenly know what is plausible and that it is DEFINITELY a violation of the law. All we really know for sure is that you don't like Trump and want him to be criminally guilty of something.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Illegal use of campaign funds is very much against the law, which is why Trump was fined as being in violation of federal law for that and also his Trump University scandal in 2016.
 

IBdaMann

Member
It is clear to me that there is no effective way of responding to people who support Trump, and the insane, destructive desires that Trump represents.
Thus guaranteeing that there is no effective way of responding to you. Well done! Let me be the first congratulate you on gett ing Trump reelected in 2020!

5255.jpg
7jVv68g.jpg
5255.jpg
7jVv68g.jpg
 

IBdaMann

Member
But Trump supporters, as a group, have been attacking the sitting president since the 90s.
There weren't any Trump supporters in the 90's.

Then Bush II blew up the Middle East, trashed the economy, sent the Federal debt into disaster, and started the police state.
The Middle East is still there, Obama started the police state, and the economy and debt situation were trashed by the Democrat-controlled Congress (Bush had no say in any of that).

Trump has been lying since the day he first began his run for office.
Oh yeah, Trump's whole thing about how we could keep our doctors ... and how the emails on his private server were about family matters. Aside from those, do you have any OTHER examples of Trump lying?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Obama started the police state,
Where?

and the economy and debt situation were trashed by the Democrat-controlled Congress (Bush had no say in any of that).
Sorry, but Bush was in charge, so he could have vetoed any proposal. There were actions taken by the Pubs and some Dems in Bush's first term that were terrible economic decisions, and then Bush made it even more of a mess when they let pension investors put people's IRA's and 401-K's iinto the shadow-banking system that collapsed under the weight of a failing housing market that was essentially turned into a casino of sorts with sub-prime loans, adjustable rate loans, and credit/default swaps. Many conservative and Keynesian economists warned the administration that this was way too dangerous but Bush & Co. didn't head their warning.
 
Top