Indicting Trump is an abuse of power ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us

Tucker Carlson

Indicting Trump is an abuse of power

Make no mistake, this is a turning point for the country.

Published

on

Tucker looks at why Donald Trump might possibly be indicted and questions whether that’s even illegal and punishable at this point. Highlights include:

“The dominant rumor on the internet over the weekend was that Donald Trump will soon be indicted, possibly even handcuffed on camera. Is that true? We can’t say. We do know that Trump is the subject of a grand jury investigation in Manhattan, that’s a city that voted against Donald Trump by almost 80% in the last presidential election. We also know that the grand jury was empaneled by a Soros-funded DA called Alvin Bragg.”

“So we would assume on the basis of that evidence that’s it’s pretty likely Trump does get charged with something at some point, but charged with what? That’s the question that should matter. In a free country, laws are universal. Laws apply to all citizens equally precisely because all citizens are considered equal.”

“Eight years ago as he was running for president, Trump paid a porn actress named Stormy Daniels $130,000. Daniels alleged that she and Trump had at one point had sex. Trump denied that, he still denies it. But in exchange for promising not to repeat that claim in public, Trump through his then attorney Michael Cohen, sent Stormy Daniels a check. Was that legal?.”

“Because there was a campaign in progress at the time, officials at the Federal Election Commission later examined the transaction between Trump and Stormy Daniels. Federal investigators concluded that nothing criminal had taken place, and in fact, settlements like this, whatever you think of them, are common, both among famous people, ‘celebrities’ and in corporate America. The result is usually known as a NDA, a non-disclosure agreement.”

“It didn’t really answer the question. Why are we handcuffing Donald Trump? Liberals don’t seem to care at all as long as it happens, as long as Trump gets handcuffed. But, in fact there’s plenty of evidence that Trump committed no crime in sending money to Stormy Daniels.”

“We don’t have to guess. Consider the case of former North Carolina senator John Edwards. Long after Edwards left office, Barak Obama’s DOJ charged him with federal finance violations. So, the premise of the case against John Edwards was that he had received $1 million in gifts and that he spent that money in ‘hush money’ payments to his mistress with whom he later had a child. Obama’s DOJ argued that the money Edwards sent to his girlfriend amounted to ‘campaign contributions.’ Edwards never reported that money, so Obama’s DOJ tried to send him to prison.”

“Well, in the end, the case fell apart under the weight of its own incoherence. So, Obama’s lawyers argued that any payment that could conceivably help a political candidate politically is by definition a campaign expenditure. There’s no law that says that, by the way, they just made it up. But if you think about it for a second, it doesn’t make sense. If that were true, flip it around. It would mean that candidates could use donor money and also taxpayer money in the form of federal matching funds to pay for any personal expense as long as that expense could conceivably benefit them politically.”

“Not surprisingly, John Edwards was acquitted in that case.”

“What’s interesting is even as Bragg has been single-mindedly focused on Donald Trump and his ‘crimes,’ sending money to a porn star, he has been not only ignoring real crimes, but downgrading felonies to misdemeanors and letting actual violent criminals out of jail as quickly as possible. On his first day in office, first day, Bragg, consistent with the ideas of the man who paid for his campaign, George Soros, issued a memo explaining his office will ‘not seek a corsarial sentence except in cases involving homicides, economic crimes, and a small number of felonies.’”

“Bragg seems to be alleging that Trump violated New York’s Business Record Act by falsely reporting the payout to Stormy Daniels as ‘legal fees.’ Now, if this were true, it would constitute a misdemeanor and the statute of limitations has already run out for that, for the bookkeeping error, assuming it even happened. But Bragg apparently is thinking about charging Trump under a felony version of the Business Records Law, one that punishes businesses for falsifying records as a way to commit another separate crime. That would be the campaign finance violation, which as we mentioned, was not a campaign finance violation, and we know that from the FEC, which policies campaign finance violations. By the way, if it were, that would be a federal crime, not something that Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan DA would be prosecuting.”

“Make no mistake, this is a turning point for the country. Now, the headline here is not that they’re being unfair to Donald Trump again, though of course they are, or even that Trump is the former president of the United States. Who cares? Though, as long as we are indicting retired presidents, where are the charges against George W Bush for invading Iraq under false pretenses and giving permanent normalized trade relations to China, which completely wrecked our economy?”

“What happens if they get away with this? If they use the Justice Department, in full view of everyone, to settle a political score and to keep the White House, just to take a guy out of the race who seems to be doing fairly well? We’ll destroy the justice system, and that’s not a small thing. A functioning justice system has kept this country peaceful for hundreds of years. The purpose of a justice system is to administer justice so that citizens don’t have to do it themselves, you outsource that duty to the government. But what happens when you take that away, when there is no justice system?”

Watch the video below and give us your thoughts in the comments:

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.



 
 
 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.



Tucker Carlson

Tucker: Ep. 73 The Vladimir Putin Interview

Our goal is to stop this war, and we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it.

Published

on

The interview that’s had most of your “legacy media’s” panties in a twist all week has finally happened.

I don’t remember anyone making a fuss when Dan Rather interviewed Saddam Hussein, just sayin’.

Tucker Carlson gets Vladimir Putin’s take on, among other things, the current situation in Ukraine, how it started and possible resolutions, Russia’s relationship with China,the world economy, and a look into the future. Highlights include:

“After 1991 when Russia expected that it would be welcomed into the brotherly family of civilized nations, nothing like this happened. You tricked us. I don’t mean you personally when I say you. Of course I’m talking about the United States. The promise was that NATO would not expand eastward. But it happened five times. There were five waves of expansion. We tolerated all that. We were trying to persuade them. We were saying, please don’t. We are as bourgeois now as you are. We are a market economy and there is no communist party power, let’s negotiate.

“The events in the Middle East, in Iraq, we were building relations with the United States in a very soft, prudent, cautious manner. I repeatedly raised the issue that the United States should not support separatism or terrorism in the North Caucasus, but they continued to do it anyway. And political support, information support, financial support, even military support came from the United States and its satellites for terrorist groups in the Caucasus. I once raised this issue with my colleague, also the president of the United States. He says it’s impossible, do you have proof? I said yes, I was prepared for this conversation, and I gave him that proof. He looked at it, and you know what he said? I apologize, but that’s what happened. I’ll quote, “Well, I’m gonna kick their ass.” We waited and waited for some response…The CIA replied, “We have been working with the opposition in Russia. We believe that this is the thing to do and we will on doing it.”

“…In 2008, the doors of NATO were opened for Ukraine. In 2014, there was a coup. They started persecuting those who did not accept the coup, and it was indeed a coup. They created a threat to Crimea, which we had to take under our protection. They launched the war in Donbas in 2014 with the use of aircraft and artillery against civilians. This is when it all started… They launched a large scale military operation, then another one. When they failed, they started to prepare the next one. All this against the background of military development of this territory and opening of NATO’s doors. How could we not express concern over what was happening?”

“Our goal is to stop this war, and we did not start this war in 2022. This is an attempt to stop it… No, we haven’t achieved our aims yet because one of them is de-nazification. This means the prohibition of all kinds of neo-Nazi movements. This is one of the problems that we discussed during the negotiation process, which ended in Istanbul early this year…and it was not our initiative, because we were told, by the Europeans in particular, that it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents.”

“Further on, the president of Ukraine issued a decree prohibiting negotiations with us. Let him cancel that decree, and that’s it. We have never refused negotiations, indeed. We hear all the time, is Russia ready? Yes. We have not refused. It was them who publicly refused. Well, let him cancel his decree and enter into negotiations. We have never refused.”

Check out the interview for yourself and give us your thoughts in the comments.

Continue Reading

Tucker Carlson

Tucker: Fossil Fuels in Space?

The IPCC and all these so-called scientists from NASA, NOAA, and all of them are not doing their due diligence.

Published

on

If fossil fuels come from fossils, why is there oil and natural gas on other planets? Tucker interviews Dr. Willie Soon on the climate, sun activity, and the current state of science. Highlights include:

“In the United States, we often refer to our main sources of energy as ‘fossil fuels’. Oil, natural gas, coal, they’re ‘fossil fuels’ because they come form fossils, ancient organic material, forests, jungles, plankton, dinosaurs. Held under the ground for millennia, they transform into oil, gas and coal. Everybody thinks that’s true. On the other hand, there’s evidence that maybe it’s not the whole story. If that’s where fossil fuels come from, if that’s how hydrocarbons are made, then how come they’re found so deep under the oceans and at the top of the Earth? How come one of Saturn’s moons, according to scientists, has more oil and natural gas than Earth? Were there dinosaurs and planktons and forests at one point on one of Saturn’s moons? Probably not. So, if all hydrocarbons aren’t from fossils, where are they from and why isn’t this commonly known, and what are the implications of it, and what does it tell us about our modern climate change policy?”

“It’s the sun, actually, that does a lot of this. The glacial, like, this period called Little Ice Age from about 1300 to 1900, you know, very cool, and then there’s a bit of a warm period from 880 to about 1200, you know, it was warm. I mean, you can grow wine in England, right? And now you cannot grow wine, right? /Things like that. I mean, Greenland was green back then, but now it’s full of glaciers, ice is coming in, so what are you talking about exactly?”

“There’s another effect that is very, very important. It’s basically because the sun, the earth is forced to go around the sun, and then the orbit changes ever so slightly because of perturbation from all the other planets… Jupiter, Saturn, and even Venus, and Mars, they are actually controlling what we do. And the moon as well is very important. But that other factors [sic], the orbits plus the changes of the sun by itself, between how bright, how dim it is. These two factors can explain just about everything that we know.”

“This year, just two months ago, we published two more papers, convincingly show that even the thermometer data that they show you is not what it is. It’s actually not measuring ‘climate’, it’s measuring urban heat and island changes…If you go to the inner part of the big city…You go to inner cities, much warmer than outside because of concrete retaining all the heat, or you change all the surfaces, the surface becomes impervious, which means there’s no breathing, no water going in and out… What we show is that it’s not a phenomenon just on local signs. You average over this, you can see the effect all over the northern hemisphere.. And they tell you this is global temperature.”

“The IPCC and all these so-called scientists from NASA, NOAA, and all of them are not doing their due diligence. They are putting you…very bad quality data products. Not only that, they hide it. Some of them it’s so difficult to get the data.”

You can find the links below and leave us your thoughts in the comments:

Continue Reading

 

Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Sites We Like

Jesus, Master of Influence

Chris Widener, speaker and best selling author of The Art of Influence, teaches that Jesus is the master of influence. In sixteen sessions you will learn from one of the most influential communicators how the life and teachings of Jesus Christ is the best model for how to become an effective influence that can change people’s thoughts, beliefs and actions.

LEARN MORE

Our Newsletter

Become a PolitiCrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Trending