Nobody's curious about the $25,000 donation she received from the (now defunct) Trump Foundation?

In 2013, Bondi also received criticism following a campaign donation from Donald Trump. Prior to the donation, Bondi had received at least 22 fraud complaints regarding Trump University. A spokesperson for Bondi announced that her office was considering joining a lawsuit initiated by Eric Schneiderman, the Attorney General of New York, regarding tax fraud potential charges against Trump. Four days later, however, a political action committee established by Bondi to support her re-election, And Justice for All, received a $25,000 donation from the Donald J. Trump Foundation, after which Bondi declined to join the lawsuit against Trump University....

In September 2016, the IRS determined that the donation to Bondi's PAC violated laws against political contributions from nonprofit organizations, and ordered Trump to pay a fine for the contribution.

Make of it what you will.
#8 | Posted by Corky

A bunch of bullchit, if you ask me.

But this is all part of god's plan anyways, right? So WTF you got against god's plan, CORKY?

real men.
Posted by BillJohnson

Provide a definition of "real men." Then provide a definition of "woman" and reflect.

Her being the "border czar" and doing nothing.
#112 | Posted by boaz

What the fnkc was she supposed to do? Be specific.

Americans arent stupid.
#112 | Posted by boaz

You posting that makes YOU stupid.

Swallow it.

Oh, and the American public overwelmingly told the Republicans they wanted something done about the border. You dumb asses just didnt listen.
#19 | Posted by boaz

SOME Republicans AND Biden tried to do something about it. Then Trump ---- on it, refused to even explain what in the bill he was against, which was entirely nothing. The only reason he wanted the bill stopped was to impede a Biden victory on an issue he wanted to politically exploit.

Now be a good Trumper and explain to us why that bill was SO bad it had to be shot down, despite it's ability to improve the situation at the border that YOU folks have declared a crisis over, yet has been the status quo for more than 40 years in the face of prosperity.

#71 | Posted by Maverick

The internet that which allows you to post such a remark would like to have a word with you.

This is not news.

People have been mistaking Starlink sats for UAPs ever since they were first launched. They're quite distinguishable from other objects in the sky that are not currently identifiable. If only because they look like a string of satellites orbiting the Earth, which is what they are.

Sorry Danni, your ilk has been proven wrong so many times about Russia that it has become a joke.
#18 | Posted by fishpaw

Link up, butter cup. Your wishcasting and willful ignorance are on full display.

#21 | Posted by BellRinger

JFC you are so fnkcin' lazy:

#250 | Posted by Robson

That's how the political system works in the US. Hell, Trump (a fnkcin' billionaire) siphoned millions from his supporters to pay his legal bills. Are you just pulling your head out of the sand?

Speaks volumes.

carte blanche.
#56 | Posted by ClownShack

No reason to believe otherwise, IMO.

(BTW auto correct originally changed his last name to Gretzky).
#105 | Posted by BellRinger

Well, he is a Trumper. So...

#101 | Posted by YAV

I'm done betting on any of this chit. Cryptocurrency is a less risky bet.

Why do you people think there's going to be any semblance of a typical confirmation process?

Have you not learned yet? ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED!!?

#11 | Posted by gracieamazed

Ad revenue for the DR is not based on the number of accounts (i.e., the STATS page) but on the number of users logging in who then view and click on ads.

Get some Jack in people's pockets.
#5 | Posted by Effeteposer

How do you think this should have actually played out? What powers does the executive branch have to just inject cold hard cash into voters' pockets?

#75 | Posted by Maverick

Which begs the question: Why are so many people NOW up in arms about illegals? It's been the status quo for more than 40 years. No Republican ACTUALLY wanted to kick them out. Hell, Reagan implemented amnesty. The Bushes ignored the situation as much as any other Democrat (save for B. Hussein according to you).

It was a giant farce. It still is. There is no crisis at the border. I know, it's literally 20 minutes from my house. Same old story, same old boogie man. Same old moral panic that illegals are going to rape and kill you. What's the difference between 40+ years ago and now?

The very platform that you and I are communicating through: social media. We all think differently now than we did back then and a significant influence upon that evolution has been social media.

--says the left / MINORITY party....
#2 | Posted by shrimptacodan

Who are you referring to? Be specific.

Because as the data clearly points out, we have a racial/cultural problem.

This speaks volumes about you. Appreciate your candor.

Provide the data I requested and then we can have a meaningful conversation. Google is your friend. I am not here to spoon feed askholes.
#16 | Posted by deadman

HAHA!

This is awesome.

Please, bring actual data to the discussion.
#12 | Posted by deadman

It's available for you. Your willful ignorance inhibits you from discovering the basic truth.

#8 | Posted by LampLighter

Are you ignoring the likes of the Unskewed Polls guy from 2012? Why are you making ALL the pollsters seem like they're up to snuff?

#7 | Posted by deadman

The FBI crime statistics and other reputable studies show that the vast majority of homicides are intraracial, not interracial as suggested.

According to recent FBI data, about 81% of white victims were killed by white offenders, and 89% of Black victims were killed by Black offenders. These intraracial homicide rates have remained consistent over time, typically ranging between 80-90% for both groups.

The claim about Black-on-white crime rates is not supported by evidence. FBI data from 2019 shows that of white victims, about 17% were killed by Black offenders, not the 81% claimed.

It's also important to note that various socioeconomic factors influence crime statistics and should not be used to make broad generalizations about racial groups or political affiliations. Reputable studies have found that poverty, urbanization, and other social factors are stronger predictors of crime rates than race.

Focusing on factual data from authoritative sources like the FBI and peer-reviewed studies provides a more accurate understanding of crime patterns, without resorting to misleading stereotypes or unfounded political claims.

IOW, your reality does not align with the evidence and data in the real world.

Swallow it.

---- asylum seekers
#4 | Posted by THEBULL

Hahaha! Why?