Comments by "" (@JohnDoe-ew3xt) on "NBC News" channel.

  1. there isn't going to be a criminal indictment.. that would mean equal representation of prosecution and defense... and that's not going to happen. and democrats are going to get hammered for this in november. americans are tired of watching democrats weaponize government recourses to go after trump. and that's without an indictment. if democrats actually indict a former president, they will pay at the ballot box for decades to come... this is a lose lose situation for democrats.
    1
  2. we will never know... with trump, t's an armed swat team serving a search warrant. with biden, it's "the honor system".... what a joke
    1
  3. every businessman in america could be audited for this, and how many do you think will exactly match an appraisal conducted by people who hate him/her?? I'm guessing 0. this is so pathetic....
    1
  4.  @teecee8888  "Every public business in the US is independently audited annually and written up if discrepancies found are material. That’s why we have public accounting audit firms." good grief.. where do you people get this stuff from?? where do these "public accounting audit firms" get the authority to open and audit private citizens private business books/accounts?? can you explain that to a dullard such as myself? trumps businesses are PRIVATE BUSINESSES! not "public businesses"...
    1
  5.  @Klaatu-Barada-Nikto-1951  yea,,, ok lol if you support this nonsense, just because of your hatred of trump, you are no independent.... besides, telling me that you're an independent in 2025, when we have two parties trying to move the country in polar opposite directions is nothing to brag about.... obviously confused... and this nonsense is not healthy for your republic. grow up.
    1
  6.  @rse4379  so misled and misguided..... its sad to think that most of these people are ameicans..
    1
  7.  @mjg3444  "Background checks would be a start." the "some" I was referring to were the ones that suggested would be restricted from obtaining firearms. but I will go down this alternate rabbit hole with you if you want... I assume this is an example of "some" "gun retractations". where in the united states can you purchase a firearm without passing a federal background check? (when was the last time you purchased a firearm?)
    1
  8.  @mjg3444  so these weapons were purchased through private sales?
    1
  9.  @mjg3444  so these weapons were purchased through private sales?
    1
  10.  @TMGR  google wont allow me to explain... search for FEC fines, 2016 presidential campaign. someone was fine for calling payments lawyer expenses, when it was for something else - an "opposition research report"
    1
  11.  @TMGR  candidate and national campaign committee both fined by the FEC
    1
  12.  @TMGR  but of course, that was "D"ifferent, so........
    1
  13.  @TMGR  that's all I'm allowed to explain on this platform, please, look it up.. education is the key.......
    1
  14.  @TMGR  how about the 2008 campaign? why no criminal charges?
    1
  15.  @TMGR  "Please be more specific. You're being very vague. What candidate? What committee?" details of that are not allowed on this platform. search 2016 campaign violations fines, you will find cnn articles no less.... but you wont do that...... hmmmm
    1
  16.  @TMGR  agreed, the censorship is out of control at this point, but anyway... please, let me know what you think about what you find
    1
  17.  @TMGR  I would mention the year 2008 as well..... learn about that campaign too while you ae educating yourself.
    1
  18.  @TMGR  "If so then the main difference is that they agreed to just pay the fine and move on." the FEC offered trump to pay a fine and walk away, and he chose to be criminally prosecuted instead??? is THAT what you believe????????????? 🤦‍♂
    1
  19.  @TMGR  "If so then the main difference is that they agreed to just pay the fine and move on" yea... "THEY" took a very different approach with a man named donald.. didn't "THEY".....????
    1
  20.  @TMGR  "THEY" seem to treat donald very "D"ifferently, don't "THEY".......
    1
  21.  @TMGR  do you believe our justice system in biased?
    1
  22.  @TMGR  how about in the way classified documents cased are prosecuted.. or NOT?? no bias there either?
    1
  23.  @TMGR  "Again, it was for different reasons" how on earth was the dossier situation "different"???? tried to conceal the payments as legal fees, yes?
    1
  24.  @TMGR  tried to conceal payment for information that would influence the election, yes??
    1
  25.  @TMGR  tried to hide payment of things that would affect the election, by calling them "legal fees", correct?
    1
  26.  @TMGR  "Hillary broke an FEC law and got the punishment for that one. Donnie broke an FEC law and is getting punished for it now." yes, but.... one was asked to pay a fine. while one is going to go to prison!! I'll ask again, any bias you see there..?
    1
  27.  @TMGR  but why such different punishments for the same crime? both tried to cover up payments - one to conceal and one to exposes - information they believed would affect an election, by calling those payments "legal fees". is this NOT true????
    1
  28.  @TMGR  "She got asked to pay a fine or risk a bigger punishment." and trump...??? CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED!
    1
  29.  @TMGR  not to mention, here we are wasting our time talking about election law, when election violation is NOT in the indictment!
    1
  30.  @TMGR  "Donnie is getting it worse because of what the money was used for." to conceal payments for information that would affect an election, right??? and the other candidate paid for what??? oh yea, information that would affect an election...... but you are right... that was "D"ifferent....
    1
  31.  @TMGR  ok... well let me ask you this then... Would somebody who concealed payments to hide information they believed would influence an election get the same punishment as someone who concealed payments for producing information they believed would influence an election?
    1
  32.  @TMGR  "However, they DID find that Donnie was trying to have Pootin interfere lol." who found that???? why no charges for donnie for that????
    1
  33.  @TMGR  "If it was all made up then Hillary should've gotten the same punishment." there were not one, but TWO special councils that concluded it was all made up.... there was NEVER evidence that warranted pulling fisa warrants! there was no evidence of "collusion".... what a strange alternate reality you live in...
    1
  34.  @TMGR  it was the mueller report, which found nothing, to which the durham report was then launched to investigate the muller report, and no... I dont want to keep this going, this is OBVIOUSLY a waste of my time. you will NEVER see the "D"ifference.. have a nice day.
    1
  35.  @TMGR  trump team took no heat for the durham report... I think you are confused.. from abc no less... After 4-year probe, Durham report slams FBI for actions in 2016 Russia investigation
    1
  36.  @TMGR  trumps never going to become president, right? right????
    1
  37.  @TMGR  no.. no he won't, we'll stop it!
    1
  38.  @TMGR  and they are STILL trying to stop him...
    1
  39.  @TMGR  "I believe that a Russian foreign minister also said that they have been in contact with Donnie." and of course you side with the russians..... 🤦‍♂
    1
  40.  @TMGR  I actually feel sorry for you..
    1
  41.  @TMGR  you've schooled nobody =on anything... same crime, you insist is somehow "D"ifferent... that's it. but you can't explain the "D"ifference...
    1
  42.  @TMGR  both concealed payments regarding information to influence an election. REALITY!
    1
  43.  @TMGR  one fined... one facing prison.. REALITY!
    1
  44.  @TMGR  what are you schooling me on again???
    1
  45.  @TMGR  "Lol seems like my examples didn't click with you." you're stuck in your examples... I'm looking at REALITY!
    1
  46.  @TMGR  "Remember I asked if somebody who stole a candy bar would get the same punishment as someone who stole a car." yes, you are making up your little "examples" of VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY DIFFEENT situations! why??? because you cant discuss REALITY!
    1
  47.  @TMGR  "I'm giving you an example for you to connect it to reality." why not simply stick with reality?? did both candidates conceal payments, labeling them as "legal fees"? yes or no?
    1
  48.  @TMGR  were these payment actually related to information the candidates thought would influence the election? yes or no?
    1
  49.  @TMGR  "I can't stick with just reality " yes, I see that... if you don't have abstract examples.. you have nothing.
    1
  50.  @TMGR  "One was to sweep a story that could affect their chances under the rug and the other was to show that someone is trying to get another country to interfere." but not a single human being was charged for trying to get another country to interfere in a us federal election. DO YOU KNOW WHY??????
    1