- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:36 pm to beaux duke
quote:
maybe you can explain how those are unrelated
To the topic. It’s Soo simple you maybe you can understand. Maaaaybe.
You see. The op is about Page, Strozk, etc. you still with me?
I posted about Page, Strozk, etc taking the 5th because they trashed the 4th. Still related to the OP. Got it? Still on board?
And then you bring up Eric Trump, who is nowhere in the thread right before YOU post:
quote:
get engaged in a completely different topic because you think you're making a point completely unrelated to the thread topic?
Oh and
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:39 pm to CleverUserName
i have to remind myself there are some really, really dumb people out there who think they're contributing
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Congress failed to include either a criminal or civil statute of limitations when it passed the RICO Act.
I'm certain he will be allowed flexibility since Marlago, Senate spying, etc was a continuation of false allegations by the same people
The fact that Page and Strzok were involved in lawsuits in '24 where they likely lied under oath about their texts and Trumps Russian involvement,Plus, can be seen as a continuance of their RICO involvement. The fact that a settlement authorized by the very people that are now being issued subpoenas can also be seen as payoffs to Page and Strkoz for their 2017 actions
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:43 pm to beaux duke
Annnnd the attempt at a lame insult to try to save face. The circle is complete. Good job!
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:45 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
I'm certain he will be allowed flexibility
RICO has a 5-year SOL. All federal crimes that don't have a specific SOL have a 5-year SOL.
There is no leeway
quote:
since Marlago, Senate spying, etc was a continuation of false allegations by the same people
That doesn't make any sense. MAL and Senate "spying" was a completely different group of people and a completely different Presidency/admin, even.
That's why the Meuller investigation/report was so important. You'll have to allege THAT was part of the criminal conspiracy, too. And, somehow, years later, people who aren't part of THAT continued this conspiracy, which means through basically the entire Trump admin (as November 7, 2020 is 5 years ago), while acting under his guidance.
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:56 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
RICO has a 5-year SOL. All federal crimes that don't have a specific SOL have a 5-year SOL.
There is no leeway
The RICO enterprise to destroy the Trump presidency began in 2016 and hasn't really ended yet. Between the illegitimate regime of Biden, the Obama administration, the Bureaucratic State and their coordination with the Gaslight Media.....it's a RIOC style enterprise. The crimes of the enemies from within have been ongoing for nearly 10 years.
quote:
For a federal criminal RICO case, the statute of limitations is five years from the date of the last act of racketeering, according to whitecollarattorney.net and Weisberg Law. For civil cases, the statute of limitations is four years from the date the injury was or reasonably should have been discovered, notes Dynamis LLP and whitecollarattorney.net.
As I stated in an earlier post, I generally don't respond to your inane and lame posts but I couldn't help myself. ...I've had a couple of beers.
Posted on 11/7/25 at 10:57 pm to beaux duke
It’s a football message board you fricking self indulgent prick.
Posted on 11/7/25 at 11:00 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:
The RICO enterprise to destroy the Trump presidency began in 2016 and hasn't really ended yet.
That's beyond a stretch.
quote:
Between the illegitimate regime of Biden
Has nothing to do with the RICO SOL
quote:
the Obama administration,
Left in January 2017, more than 5 years ago
quote:
the Bureaucratic State and their coordination with the Gaslight Media..
No. That's silly
quote:
As I stated in an earlier post, I generally don't respond to your inane and lame posts
Says the guy who said the silliness above and clearly didn't read my actual posts.
Posted on 11/7/25 at 11:16 pm to beaux duke
quote:
again, feel free to post your (((evidence)))
but you won't
because it doesn't exist
Here's your problem kid. WE don't have to prove anything to YOU. What matters is what happens with that Grand Jury, and if theyre indicted, in court
So you can cry, bitch, moan and groan. What you WILL do is sit tight and watch.
This post was edited on 11/7/25 at 11:18 pm
Posted on 11/7/25 at 11:16 pm to SlowFlowPro
OK = serious question here - I may be unskilled in the practice of law but I am pretty good on common sense logic and definitions of words.
I keep hearing this S.O.L. on Conspiracy crimes, where the S.O.L. resets for any action that furthers - or protects - that conspiracy.
If that is a suitable layman's understanding of S.O.L. wrt conspiracy, I have the following question.
IF someone was knowingly involved in a criminal conspiracy, and on occasion made statements - especially when under oath, or in serious conversation - that specifically protected the secrecy of the conspiracy would that affect the S.O.L. ?? (ie merely protecting past actions)
OR does the disqualifying statement have to be in positive FURTHERANCE of the conspiracy into other people or areas in order to reset the S.O.L. ??
I keep hearing this S.O.L. on Conspiracy crimes, where the S.O.L. resets for any action that furthers - or protects - that conspiracy.
If that is a suitable layman's understanding of S.O.L. wrt conspiracy, I have the following question.
IF someone was knowingly involved in a criminal conspiracy, and on occasion made statements - especially when under oath, or in serious conversation - that specifically protected the secrecy of the conspiracy would that affect the S.O.L. ?? (ie merely protecting past actions)
OR does the disqualifying statement have to be in positive FURTHERANCE of the conspiracy into other people or areas in order to reset the S.O.L. ??
Posted on 11/7/25 at 11:54 pm to ChineseBandit58
quote:
OK = serious question here - I may be unskilled in the practice of law but I am pretty good on common sense logic and definitions of words.
I keep hearing this S.O.L. on Conspiracy crimes, where the S.O.L. resets for any action that furthers - or protects - that conspiracy.
If that is a suitable layman's understanding of S.O.L. wrt conspiracy, I have the following question.
IF someone was knowingly involved in a criminal conspiracy, and on occasion made statements - especially when under oath, or in serious conversation - that specifically protected the secrecy of the conspiracy would that affect the S.O.L. ?? (ie merely protecting past actions)
OR does the disqualifying statement have to be in positive FURTHERANCE of the conspiracy into other people or areas in order to reset the S.O.L. ??
First off, you know better than to engage with SloMoFo because common sense and logic is foreign to SloMofo..
Posted on 11/8/25 at 12:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
There is no leeway
How many RICO cases have you been directly involved in at the federal level?
quote:
Criminal RICO
To violate RICO, a person must engage in a pattern of racketeering activity connected to an enterprise. The law defines 35 offenses as constituting racketeering, including gambling, murder, kidnapping, arson, drug dealing, bribery. Significantly, mail and wire fraud are included on the list. These crimes are known as "predicate" offenses. To charge under RICO, at least two predicate crimes within 10 years must have been committed through the enterprise.
Note that an enterprise is required. This might be a crime family, a street gang or a drug cartel. But it may also be a corporation, a political party, or a managed care company.
So, if the DIM party is the enterprise, then all "corrupted" acts against Trump (Brenna/Clapper oped in August) would fall within that 10 year window, correct? And thus allow a RICO case well within the 5 year window?
Posted on 11/8/25 at 12:11 am to RobbBobb
quote:
Criminal RICO
To violate RICO, a person must engage in a pattern of racketeering activity connected to an enterprise. The law defines 35 offenses as constituting racketeering, including gambling, murder, kidnapping, arson, drug dealing, bribery. Significantly, mail and wire fraud are included on the list. These crimes are known as "predicate" offenses. To charge under RICO, at least two predicate crimes within 10 years must have been committed through the enterprise.
Note that an enterprise is required. This might be a crime family, a street gang or a drug cartel. But it may also be a corporation, a political party, or a managed care company.
So, if the DIM party is the enterprise, then all "corrupted" acts against Trump (Brenna/Clapper oped in August) would fall within that 10 year window, correct? And thus allow a RICO case well within the 5 year window?
SloMoFO knows the DC Uniparty, the Dims, the Bureaucratic State and the Gaslight Media have been coordinating for the past ten years to destroy Trump/MAGA/America First. SloMoFo wants to save Dimocrazy!
Posted on 11/8/25 at 12:37 am to antibarner
quote:
Here's your problem kid. WE don't have to prove anything to YOU. What matters is what happens with that Grand Jury, and if theyre indicted, in court
So you can cry, bitch, moan and groan. What you WILL do is sit tight and watch.
so why are you commenting here?
you aren't part of a team, a movement, or anything similar. there is no we vs you. this has to be the dumbest "understanding" and i use that term loosely of politics
Posted on 11/8/25 at 3:12 am to hawgfaninc
In a just world, all three of them would rot in jail for the next 20 years.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 3:23 am to SlowFlowPro
Rico has a 5 year SOL not from the crime but from the last crime known to be committed as part of the conspiracy.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 3:36 am to SlowFlowPro
They screwed up when they raided Mar-A-Largo.
Now Florida courts have jurisdiction
Now Florida courts have jurisdiction
Posted on 11/8/25 at 3:49 am to CleverUserName
I feel your pain CleverUserName.
Never fails. Juicy topic, 2 pages of somewhat fair discussions, followed by 4 or 5 pages of derailment by the retards and usual bloviating suspects.
Never fails. Juicy topic, 2 pages of somewhat fair discussions, followed by 4 or 5 pages of derailment by the retards and usual bloviating suspects.
Posted on 11/8/25 at 5:28 am to Victor R Franko
Page 6 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News