Homan reportedly was recorded accepting $50K, but investigation shut down

[TimHauck 3,210]

3 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

Just so I am clear...

You want an answer from me, in the homan thread, about Lisa Cook because you think that Lisa Cook having her lawyer put something out there is a denial, but Tom Homan saying it himself is not a denial. 

I mean that is really weird dude.

"Hi, please answer my question that is off topic to this thread because I made inconsistent statements and I really want to try and make a gotcha that is a big leap," said Tim. 

Fact: Homan denied doing anything illegal.

Fact: Homan did not deny accepting a bag of cash in a Cava bag.

Fact: Cook (through her lawyer, not sure why that matters, even Strike would agree) denied committing mortgage fraud

Fact: Cook did not deny taking out two mortgages that were for primary residences (and I never denied she did either). 

Not sure what your gotcha attempt is.

[jonnyutah 508]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

Fact: Homan denied doing anything illegal.

Fact: Homan did not deny accepting a bag of cash in a Cava bag.

Fact: Cook (through her lawyer, not sure why that matters, even Strike would agree) denied committing mortgage fraud

Fact: Cook did not deny taking out two mortgages that were for primary residences (and I never denied she did either). 

Not sure what your gotcha attempt is.

Lol.

This is how everybody knows you are not a serious person. 

 

[TimHauck 3,210]

6 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

Lol.

This is how everybody knows you are not a serious person. 

 

This is a weird semantic argument to make.  As Strike would say:

On 8/29/2025 at 11:45 AM, Strike said:

You understand that when her lawyers put something in a court pleasing that they are speaking for their client, don't you?

 

[TimHauck 3,210]

 

 

[jonnyutah 508]

12 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

This is a weird semantic argument to make.  As Strike would say:

On 8/29/2025 at 8:45 AM, Strike said:

You understand that when her lawyers put something in a court pleasing that they are speaking for their client, don't you?

"In court documents submitted Wednesday, Rivera's lawyer said that he is here legally and asked that the government not be allowed to say he is here illegally"

This is from the lawyer for the guy that killed Mollie Tibbetts. He made this statement based on the employer saying that Rivera had provided them with paperwork showing legal status. 

Lawyers lie all the time in court documents.

That is why a lawyer putting something out there isn't as good as the actual person going public. 

The lawyer can later just ammend the filing and say he was given incorrect information from the employer drop off the case, or any other number of things.

This isnt a semantic argument. This is literally the crux of your whole tangent here. 

You are trying to say Tom Homan going on TV and actually speaking and saying he did nothing illegal is less of a denial than a line you found in a legal filing.  

If you were saying the two situations are same, you might have a point. But you arent saying that. You have said Lisa Cook denied the allegations and you are saying Tom Homan hasnt. 

[TimHauck 3,210]

34 minutes ago, jonnyutah said:

If you were saying the two situations are same, you might have a point. But you arent saying that. You have said Lisa Cook denied the allegations and you are saying Tom Homan hasnt. 

Yes that is what I’m saying, read my post above about what they did and didn’t deny. The “crux of the argument” depends on what exactly you’re calling “the allegation.”

[Tree of Knowledge 2,064]

Why is this thread still going?  It has been DEBUNKED.  
 

 

[seafoam1 3,328]

3 minutes ago, Tree of Knowledge said:

Why is this thread still going?  It has been DEBUNKED.  
 

 

Timhack can never let anything go. I guess he's so sick of losing he's trying to outlast everyone and calling himself victor when no one is paying attention.  

[Mike Honcho 5,385]

Honestly, I don't even think in the Trump WH that $50,000 dollars in a shopping bag is enough to even be considered a bribe.  

[seafoam1 3,328]

1 hour ago, Mike Honcho said:

Honestly, I don't even think in the Trump WH that $50,000 dollars in a shopping bag is enough to even be considered a bribe.  

Poor honcho. More money than he's seen in a lifetime of making home movies for a living. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,892]

Liberals who have turned a blind eye to Biden, Pelosi and Granholms obvious theft are now up in arms. Too funny.  

[League Champion 1,926]

6 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Fact: Homan denied doing anything illegal.

Fact: Homan did not deny accepting a bag of cash in a Cava bag.

Fact: Cook (through her lawyer, not sure why that matters, even Strike would agree) denied committing mortgage fraud

Fact: Cook did not deny taking out two mortgages that were for primary residences (and I never denied she did either). 

Not sure what your gotcha attempt is.

You got him this time 

[Fnord 2,447]

23 hours ago, jonnyutah said:

So kindly show me some posts from last year or the year before (as i mentioned in the range of dates). 

I mean i did notice your post isnt a denial...

 

Posts about what?

I'm not your research assistant. You're the one making claims. Back them up. 

I'll point out that there is still not a single acknowledgment from any of the righties that this even might have been crooked. They've become so inured with justifying this admin's daily failings and racketeering that it's all just background noise now. They will not defend the freedom of the American populace. They will roll over like cowardly lap dogs accepting belly rubs from their master in return for feeling good about being told they're "right." 

[Fnord 2,447]

16 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Liberals who have turned a blind eye to Biden, Pelosi and Granholms obvious theft are now up in arms. Too funny.  

ev·i·dence

/ˈevəd(ə)n(t)s/

noun

1. the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,892]

44 minutes ago, Fnord said:

ev·i·dence

/ˈevəd(ə)n(t)s/

noun

1. the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Granholm didn’t lie to Congress? Also, you’re another one that doesn’t have the difference between evidence and proof. There is plenty of evidence against all of them. 

[Fnord 2,447]

9 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Granholm didn’t lie to Congress? Also, you’re another one that doesn’t have the difference between evidence and proof. There is plenty of evidence against all of them. 

Did Joe Biden go on twitter to talk about his son needing to pay him "China money?"

Did Donald Trump say, repeatedly, that he wanted Kimmel fired, and other enemies targeted? Did he fire a prosecutor that he appointed because that prosecutor could not find enough EVIDENCE to charge Letitia James? Then replace him with his own personal lawyer that has no experience as a prosecutor? Is he openly shaking down universities and corporations that have opposed him in the past?

Don't tell me I don't know the difference. You're willingly refusing to see it. Keep the bag over your head, it improves your face.

[squistion 2,409]

SMH. It looks like they have no intention of prosecuting this or asking Homan to step down.

 

[Ron_Artest 2,022]

Of course not.  This is right out of Putin's playbook.

[TimHauck 3,210]

12 minutes ago, squistion said:

SMH. It looks like they have no intention of prosecuting this or asking Homan to step down.

 

They said that pretty much immediately when the story broke….

[edjr 6,796]

Still waiting to find out who left the booger sugar at the white house during biden's reign. Anyone?

[squistion 2,409]

1 minute ago, edjr said:

Still waiting to find out who left the booger sugar at the white house during biden's reign. Anyone?

It was an area open to the public, so it could have been anyone. 

[TimHauck 3,210]

Some legal analysis:

TL/DR: what he did probably wasn’t illegal at the time, but it could have become illegal if he later acted on any alleged promises.  Even outside of bribery allegations, if he did actually take the money, he needs to declare it on his tax returns or else it’s tax evasion.

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,892]

Just give him a preemptive pardon.  Works for the Biden regime. 

[thegeneral 3,468]

On 9/23/2025 at 2:01 PM, Hardcore troubadour said:

Liberals who have turned a blind eye to Biden, Pelosi and Granholms obvious theft are now up in arms. Too funny.  

Hardcore Whatabouter doing his thing!

[Fnord 2,447]

1 hour ago, edjr said:

Still waiting to find out who left the booger sugar at the white house during biden's reign. Anyone?

I have reached out to the WH several times but they refuse to give it back. WTF?

[Ron_Artest 2,022]

Bondi refuses to answer any questions about this or even acknowledge it happened.  What a disgrace.