ADVERTISEMENT

We have a verdict -- Guilty on ALL counts

It wouldn’t be the same argument with Mueller since Mueller didn’t have the power, or try to, bring charges. That’s the gravamen of that Reason article.

Calabresse hearing making the same argument as to Mueller--arguing that the appointment was unlawful
 
Why don't you blame the prosecutors for taking so long to file the charges?

It's hard to have an informed opinion on whether or not Garland and/or Smith acted too slowly or deliberately since they were radio silent the entire time. Once the indictments came and we've seen the proceedings play out in the open, there's at least something to go on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
It's the most maddening thing about those shows. But damn, Law & Order was good back in the day.

I watched a couple of the new "original" Law & Order episodes recently. Is it just me, or are the courtroom proceedings depicted today (which are really bad) worse than they were back in the old Sam Waterson days? I kept saying "Oh for fvck's sake" while watching; didn't remember them being so silly years ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
But why would the judge put it out if they hadn't verified the authenticity? People say stuff like this on Twitter and Facebook all the time.
This was posted on the court's page, they are investigating. There is a person known to make inflammatory posts on that page. There is concern it was them.
 
But why would the judge put it out if they hadn't verified the authenticity? People say stuff like this on Twitter and Facebook all the time.

Maybe because they are just being overly cautious and they don't want that to be part of an appeal
 
This was posted on the court's page, they are investigating. There is a person known to make inflammatory posts on that page. There is concern it was them.
conversely, it has been reported that there had been enough investigation that found that this was creditable enough to advise the Judge; Merchan of Trump guilt, that this wasn't just a simple wipe it away finding.
Since the MSM is totally controlled by the DNC (this is not intended to be inflammatory, it's simply fact) there is nothing that anyone of use can trust at this point. That is a true mark of creating a seed bed for fascism. Also not inflammatory, fact. If you want to connect dots, that's your pejorative. No matter how easy they are to connect.
 
conversely, it has been reported that there had been enough investigation that found that this was creditable enough to advise the Judge; Merchan of Trump guilt, that this wasn't just a simple wipe it away finding.
Since the MSM is totally controlled by the DNC (this is not intended to be inflammatory, it's simply fact) there is nothing that anyone of use can trust at this point. That is a true mark of creating a seed bed for fascism. Also not inflammatory, fact. If you want to connect dots, that's your pejorative. No matter how easy they are to connect.
Of course there should be an investigation. EVEN if they were 99% sure it was fake it needs checked out. I fully support that. Facebook means there is an account and name tied to it, is that person a relative of a juror. This should not be impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
But why would the judge put it out if they hadn't verified the authenticity? People say stuff like this on Twitter and Facebook all the time.
peo
Wait, what, there was juror misconduct from the dems??? Say it ain't so! Not from the dem party ohhhh hell no. Whaaaaat? BS. Tell me the winner of Miss Maryland was a man and I'll eat my hat! Ohhhh dayum.



people like bowlmania who live to see trump in prison sure why but it wont happen the dems are not that dumb polls did not change and they needed them to change to try the commie lockup. They can certainly still try it and i would tell them too it wont play well.
 
peo

people like bowlmania who live to see trump in prison sure why but it wont happen the dems are not that dumb polls did not change and they needed them to change to try the commie lockup. They can certainly still try it and i would tell them too it wont play well.

BDS!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: DDE-6-20-23
Wait, what, there was juror misconduct from the dems??? Say it ain't so! Not from the dem party ohhhh hell no. Whaaaaat? BS. Tell me the winner of Miss Maryland was a man and I'll eat my hat! Ohhhh dayum.



This is the judge who isn't prejudiced even though his daughter raised $100 million for the Democrat Party.

But Alito should be thrown off the SC because his wife gave $2500 to Republican candidates and flew an upside down flag.

Seems fair.
 
Careful with that kind of talk and topic...You know the maddening dem world that never makes sense. That gets you threatened and or banned. ;)
Why do ignorant people on the subject assume that Epstein's compadres were primarily Dems? How many Dems do you think are members of MAL, like Epstein?

And let's look at the 2007 plea deal, which allowed Epstein to plead guilty to local chages in FL ( solicit /prostitution of a minor) rather than Federal charges. The Non-prosecution Agreement resulted in Epstein serving 13 months on work-release when Federal charges carried a possible life sentence...

Shall we examine the timeline? Who was POTUS and in control of the DOJ in 2007? Who was the Prosecutor that allowed Epstein to plead?

That would be Alex Acosta. Heard that name before? Labor Secretary under Trump, and crony of DeSantis...

See any Dems refernced in this story? Even the 2020 DOJ investigation that concluded that Acosta was guilty of making a poor choice, but not "misconduct" was Trump's DOJ. So maybe take the whitewash "exoneration" of Acosta with a grain of sand...


A refresher on why Trump was so reluctant to commit to releasing the Epstein list when he was asked about it during his embarrassingly insipid interview on Fox and Fiends last Sun

 
This is the judge who isn't prejudiced even though his daughter raised $100 million for the Democrat Party.

But Alito should be thrown off the SC because his wife gave $2500 to Republican candidates and flew an upside down flag.

Seems fair.
Well to no one's surprise you DDe and other gullible folks fell for the prank of a "shitposter" trying to stir up trouble and make stupid people look stupid...

How come me (and millions of others) were educated about this BS yesterday (Fri)? And yet here you are promoting an already debunked story on Sat, a day late? Dude you need better sources than morons like "Phil Holloway Esq"...

 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory
Well to no one's surprise you DDe and other gullible folks fell for the prank of a "shitposter" trying to stir up trouble and make stupid people look stupid...

How come me (and millions of others) were educated about this BS yesterday (Fri)? And yet here you are promoting an already debunked story on Sat, a day late? Dude you need better sources than morons like "Phil Holloway Esq"...

Hey, dumbass, I never posted about the 'shitposter' or his claim that he knew the verdict beforehand.

But, by all means, avoid the points in my post.
 
Wait, what, there was juror misconduct from the dems??? Say it ain't so! Not from the dem party ohhhh hell no. Whaaaaat? BS. Tell me the winner of Miss Maryland was a man and I'll eat my hat! Ohhhh dayum.



Like dbm, you’re posting dumb posts of Trumpster Twitter Twits. It was nothing more than (another) internet troll tryin to stir up some crap about the trial. Dbm has claimed the trial would be thrown out something like 25 times and was wrong every time.

 
Charges? No, not political.

They ****ed up on the plea agreement, which was political. Now they're trying to bend over backwards to make it appear non-political, even though the trial is in Delaware.

Personally, I think Hunter should plead guilty, pay a fine, and move on to the next trial, which is more serious. But I understand he's pleaded not guilty
Not sure which "more serious" crime you're referring to? I haven't really followed this case very closely, because I don't really care. It was just an attempt to tarnish Biden from the start, and hasn't really worked out very well...

I do think the idea that a drug user is not allowed to own a firearm presents an ethical dilemma for the NRA. Just last year a man in OK who was originally sentenced to 4 yrs under the same law, had his sentenced overturned on appeal. The judge ruled it was unconstitutional (based on SCOTUS precedent) which is of course the same position as the NRA.

So now the NRA find themselves confronted by the spectre of a person (who they likely consider a sworn enemy) being sentenced under the same law that they worked so hard to get overturned... Ironic, huh?

I don't know if Biden would pardon Hunter or not. But he likely won't have to, thanks to the current gun loving SCOTUS and all of the NRA efforts to get the law declaring firearms possession by drug users unconstitutional...





Wrong. The jurors were known. If you're ok doxing SC justices, you should be fine with any jury being doxed.

Both should be protected from threats, but it appears only the jurors have that protection.
.
If we've learned nothing else from the Alito story it's that SCOTUS has 24 hr security details assigned and posted to their homes. So I'm not sure what you're whing about?

Btw, how come the murder of a retired Federal judge BEFORE the SCOTUS doxing that's got you all hot and bothered, didn't elicit the same gnashing of teeth from you and the right wing media you get your talking points from?

Guessing this wasn't a headline,or even covered by Fox. Even though it happened a week before Kavanugh was merely threatened... A little consistency please..

A man was arrested near Kavananaugh's home with zip ties and a gun on June 8 2022, and it made front page news in mainstream as well as wingnut media. IIRC the man had left wing ties and had previously voted for Bernie, but don't quote me on that...

The right wing on this board went apoleptic . There was a thread slamming Schumer for being at fault, due to the fact that Schumer had warned Kvanaugh and Gorsuch that they would "reap the whirlwind" in a speech on the SCOTUS steps following the vote on the LA restrict abortion law. That was on March 4, 2020 when Schumer was minority leader. Schumer apologized for his verbage the next day...

Nevertheless, when the guy was arrested near Kavanaugh's house on June 8, 2022 nearly 2 years later, the MAGA talking point was it was Schumer's fault. But a week prior to that arrest on May 27 2022, a man broke into the house of a retired Co Judge in WI and after tieing the Judge with zip ties proceeded to summarily execute him with a shot to the head. Not a word on this board, likely as I said before because it didn't make right wing media...

But this was not just some isolated targeted attack. The killer Douglas Uhde was a pro-gun, anti Government Trump supporter with miltia connections. He also was carrying a hit list that included WI Gov Tony Evers, Minroity leader McConnell, and MI Gov Gretchen Whitmer, all people known for being thorns in Trump's side. Coincidentally enough this was the summer prior to the 2022 midterms and both Evers and Whitmer were facing MAGA challengers in heated campaigns...

Am I blaming Trump? No, but if you're going to blame Schumer for what he said 2 years earlier and claim it inspired the threat to Kavanaugh, consistency would demand that Trump was granted equal responsibility for the targeting of his enemies by someone inspired by Trump's current (at the time) rhetoric. Trump was particularly vitrolic in attacking Whitmer and effusivlt praising her MAGA opponent Tudor Dixon.

The McConnell connection could be the fact that a friend told investigators that Uhde had been living at his parent's home in KY...But most MAGA supporters view Mitch as anti-Trump traitor anyway...
 
Yup. And they further ruled that if Trump had:
A) Applied that to the entire state and not just to two districts and...
B) Made this argument before the election and not afterward...
then his case would have had merit.

Here is the link to the ruling specific to Trump's WI Supreme Court case.
Link

"We conclude the Campaign is not entitled to the relief it seeks. The challenge to the indefinitely confined voter ballots is meritless on its face, and the other three categories of ballots challenged fail under the doctrine of laches."

So, one more time, with feeling...

There is no ruling from the Wisconsin Supreme Court that states that Trump won the 2020 election.
"Made this argument before the election and not afterward"...

Isn't it funny how all of Trump's challenges came after the very same rules were applied in the respective state's primaries by both parties? Apparently the MAGA fans had no problem with the rules when they were winning state primaries. But somehow when the (same) rules proved less advantageous for MAGA candidates running in the general election, now suddenly it's unfair...

Also strange how Trump whined about absentee.mail in ballots in states like MI and PA, but the GOP had no problem allowing universal mail in ballots in Indiana... GOP Governor, GOP gerrymandered Legislatures...
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT