Suit looks like it's been watermarked by ShutterStock.Nope. I do a different kinda of hustle.
this gotta be a joke.
RustyShackleford
i know you didn’t seriously call me the devil. 
People should look up the nonsense Ted Kennedy did in 1980 to mess with Jimmy Carter, and weaken him, when Reagan and the conservative right were knocking at the door
this gotta be a joke.
It’s not over until you guys box it out
Sometimes? Dude has been a clown for too long. When Republicans and Trump were ruining everything this clown was talking about “corporate Dems”
Yes.
There are plenty of low-info states, but most of them don’t have the wealth to stand up even a fake school. And only Florida is blessed with ignorance, wealth, and grift.
I did not have sneaker-related tax-loss harvesting on my bingo card.
Methodical Management
The law isn’t about making that income taxable. It always was. The law makes it so Venmo has to issue 1099’s and send copies to the IRS. It’s precisely about “lying”.
I May have screwed up the multi quote, that might have been Washed King.
I expect he’ll be censured and then he’ll act like what should be an extremely shameful assessment of his character as both a senator and an American is a badge of honor.
Fixed in the original, apologies.
their little socialist bubble where there have no worries at the airport in MN.
The Soviet Union supported Mandela and the ANC during their fight against apartheid. Of course, they'd be trumpists.I work with a lot of South Africans at one of my jobs. like white rancher South Africans, they're all hella trumped out and socialism is the boogey man.
wanna know the best part, they live in a perfect socialist bubble. union/government job. the job handles it all from their retirement to their food half the time.
I ask them, you ever miss South Africa? a lot of them do but they say they'd never go back because this job is everything to them.
First of all I wouldn’t get your hopes up at any point. Not even if anyone ends up getting indicted.
not unless the government enforce it like they did to individuals suspected of conspiracy of terrorism. individuals got sent to Guantanamo for far less hint of suspicion of terrorism or conspiracy. the only way to enforce accountability is to keep these conspirators out of the political scene and not be held under public scrutiny but rather forced confinement without the interference of courts or political committees. they could put them behind bars from the start and it always puzzled me the necessity to have them charged like a regular crime or civil suit. the perpetrators shouldn't be entitled to have the same protection under the U.S. constitution when they conspired to bring down that very same institution that made it. I must say that they became very lenient of a crime which punishment is punishable by death. it's not even a debate but a matter of enforcement.First of all I wouldn’t get your hopes up at any point. Not even if anyone ends up getting indicted.
This recording doesn’t provide a clear link from Cruz to the “fake elector” scheme, which is reportedly being investigated as a criminal conspiracy by both Special Counsel Jack Smith and Fulton County (Georgia) DA Fanni Willis.
What Cruz said here largely aligns with what he said publicly on the same or next day after this recorded call took place. His ‘bureaucratic coup’ idea appears to be a completely different scheme than the Fake Electors plot.
I’m no lawyer of course but from what I can tell, there is at least some ancient historical precedent for the actions Cruz suggested. It’s not a completely bull**** fabrication, just mostly.
What I’m saying is that unlike the Fake Electors scheme, Cruz’ plan doesn’t explicitly radiate illegality. The Fake Electors scheme, even without knowing any further details, immediately sounds like a criminal conspiracy.
Unless there’s a lot more to this Cruz plan that we don’t know, to me this recording would be a point of interest at most for the Special Counsel.
However, if Cruz’ plan incorporates the Fake Elector scheme somehow, he would certainly be at risk of a conspiracy charge.
For a conspiracy indictment, you only need to prove 4 elements.
1. There must be some form of an agreement (written, verbal or even implied from the conduct) between 2 or more persons to work together towards an illegal goal.
2. The person(s) knew the goal was illegal
3. The person(s) was a party to/member of that agreement
4. The person took an “overt step in furtherance of the conspiracy”
The “overt step” is very broad. Think of it as any action taken that relates to the goal.
This is in large part why conspiracy cases are relatively easy to prove.
The “agreement” element is also quite broad. You don’t need an explicit written or verbal agreement, you still meet that element by arguing the agreement is implied. If the conspirators behave in a way that makes it clear they’re working together in furtherance of an illegal goal, the “agreement” is implied.
I’m a huge nerd when it comes to US law, criminal investigations, … and follow all these cases very closely.
