Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums
8 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
It Won't Be Long (Original Post)
._.
May 2024
OP
Good faith question here. If they conclude the prosecution is correct about one check, one invoice, one fraudulent
Comfortably_Numb
May 2024
#4
LakeArenal
(29,949 posts)1. 🤞🏼🇺🇸🤞🏼🇺🇸🤞🏼🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
BlueKota
(5,351 posts)2. Hoping with all my life.
Scrivener7
(59,524 posts)3. My stomach hurts. They have to convict!
My Republic hurts. They have to convict!
Comfortably_Numb
(4,188 posts)4. Good faith question here. If they conclude the prosecution is correct about one check, one invoice, one fraudulent
entry, intended to influence the election, how can they NOT reach the same conclusion about all of the other checks, invoices, entries?
Ms. Toad
(38,643 posts)7. They could easily treat the checks signed by Trump
Differently from those not signed by Trump.
Comfortably_Numb
(4,188 posts)8. Mmmmm... hadn't thought of that distinction.
usedtobedemgurl
(2,050 posts)5. I think he will be found guilty.
I contend the reason the jury wanted to stay late yesterday, is they knew he was guilty as sin and wanted to get to the end. Not sure it is all of the jury but I felt good when they arranged for an extension of babysitting services to stay late yesterday.
