Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[facilitatorn]

It is just Red breaking in his brown shirt and jackboots and psyching himself up to put real Americans to the torch so he can live in the squalor and fear the trump administration is promising him.

[jmmengel]

Felon goes free on a technicality.

What Felon?

Donald Trump.

And since there will be no trial, what Technicality?

For this, the DoJ policy the prevents prosecuting a sitting President for his crimes. It is a technicality because it sets him free regardless of uilt.or.innocence.

The Jury of voters  preempted this whole disgusting Biden ploy.

Voters are not a jury since they are not sworn in, do not hear all of and only the evidence, do not deliberate as a group and are free to decide who to vote for based on this gs other than guilt or 8nnocence.

And there is precisely zero evidence that the Prosecution of Trump was.ever.a Biden ploy.  Ut you knew both of those things.

Corrupt public officials like Trump have been claiming that being prosecuted for their crimes has been political since the first corrupt politician. Trump is just the first where a large part of the electorate bought that bullshit. But then, he warned us that his followers were mindless sheep with his shoot someone on 5th Avenue remark.

I guess you are that gullible.
Jack Smith was a goon after SCOTUS rapped him with its Presidential Immunity decision.  Instead of waiting for the election a month later he revised  the indictment in a huge brief which the Trial Judge released.

So... doing his job in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

It was full of untested and biased views to the Court and the public as if they were conclusive.That brief was made public on a Wednesday, 34 days before the election.
One last LAWFARE stunt to take the voters mind off inflation, illegal aliens, etc.

Smith had only one hope. That Trump would lose and the case could go on since DOJ does not indict sitting Presidents.

The Voters saw through it all.Baaa Baaa Baaa.  Like the good little MAGA sheep you are.

fify.

LAWFARE IS DEAD.

Lawfare never existed, sheep. It is just Trump deflecting from his crimes.

Trump?
Jack Smith is throwing in the towel.
Smith was doing the bidding of the democrats to destroy  the Trump campaign.
When his disgusting tactics went up against the Constitution he lost, big time.
The  Voters delivered the final blow.

[facilitatorn]

Red Peskov Quisling seems desperately determined to weave a counterfactual narrative to obscure how much he and his colleagues debase themselves each and every single day.

No matter how much you bleat Red, we still see the shit and weeping sores that have replaced anything that could have been recognized as your face.

[Hairy Lime]

Felon goes free on a technicality.

What Felon?

Donald Trump.

And since there will be no trial, what Technicality?

For this, the DoJ policy the prevents prosecuting a sitting President for his crimes. It is a technicality because it sets him free regardless of uilt.or.innocence.

The Jury of voters  preempted this whole disgusting Biden ploy.

Voters are not a jury since they are not sworn in, do not hear all of and only the evidence, do not deliberate as a group and are free to decide who to vote for based on this gs other than guilt or 8nnocence.

And there is precisely zero evidence that the Prosecution of Trump was.ever.a Biden ploy.  Ut you knew both of those things.

Corrupt public officials like Trump have been claiming that being prosecuted for their crimes has been political since the first corrupt politician. Trump is just the first where a large part of the electorate bought that bullshit. But then, he warned us that his followers were mindless sheep with his shoot someone on 5th Avenue remark.

I guess you are that gullible.
Jack Smith was a goon after SCOTUS rapped him with its Presidential Immunity decision.  Instead of waiting for the election a month later he revised  the indictment in a huge brief which the Trial Judge released.

So... doing his job in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

It was full of untested and biased views to the Court and the public as if they were conclusive.That brief was made public on a Wednesday, 34 days before the election.
One last LAWFARE stunt to take the voters mind off inflation, illegal aliens, etc.

Smith had only one hope. That Trump would lose and the case could go on since DOJ does not indict sitting Presidents.

The Voters saw through it all.Baaa Baaa Baaa.  Like the good little MAGA sheep you are.

fify.

LAWFARE IS DEAD.

Lawfare never existed, sheep. It is just Trump deflecting from his crimes.

Trump?
Jack Smith is throwing in the towel.

Jack Smith is abiding by the law and DoJ policy. As he has since his appointment.

Smith was doing the bidding of the democrats to destroy  the Trump campaign.

He was prosecuting Trump for credible claims of serious violations of the law. Which of the allegations against Trump do you feel Biden should be lower to do with impunity? Because if he can illegally act to overturn election results, time is a wasting.

When his disgusting tactics went up against the Constitution he lost, big time. Baaaaa Baaaaa Baaaa. Bleat, bleat bleat.

Yes, the Supreme Court decided to let Trump off on a technicality.

[Hairy Lime]

Start hoarding avocados now.

[jmmengel]

Felon goes free on a technicality.

What Felon?

Donald Trump.

And since there will be no trial, what Technicality?

For this, the DoJ policy the prevents prosecuting a sitting President for his crimes. It is a technicality because it sets him free regardless of uilt.or.innocence.

The Jury of voters  preempted this whole disgusting Biden ploy.

Voters are not a jury since they are not sworn in, do not hear all of and only the evidence, do not deliberate as a group and are free to decide who to vote for based on this gs other than guilt or 8nnocence.

And there is precisely zero evidence that the Prosecution of Trump was.ever.a Biden ploy.  Ut you knew both of those things.

Corrupt public officials like Trump have been claiming that being prosecuted for their crimes has been political since the first corrupt politician. Trump is just the first where a large part of the electorate bought that bullshit. But then, he warned us that his followers were mindless sheep with his shoot someone on 5th Avenue remark.

I guess you are that gullible.
Jack Smith was a goon after SCOTUS rapped him with its Presidential Immunity decision.  Instead of waiting for the election a month later he revised  the indictment in a huge brief which the Trial Judge released.

So... doing his job in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

It was full of untested and biased views to the Court and the public as if they were conclusive.That brief was made public on a Wednesday, 34 days before the election.
One last LAWFARE stunt to take the voters mind off inflation, illegal aliens, etc.

Smith had only one hope. That Trump would lose and the case could go on since DOJ does not indict sitting Presidents.

The Voters saw through it all.Baaa Baaa Baaa.  Like the good little MAGA sheep you are.

fify.

LAWFARE IS DEAD.

Lawfare never existed, sheep. It is just Trump deflecting from his crimes.

Trump?
Jack Smith is throwing in the towel.

Jack Smith is abiding by the law and DoJ policy. As he has since his appointment.

Smith was doing the bidding of the democrats to destroy  the Trump campaign.

He was prosecuting Trump for credible claims of serious violations of the law. Which of the allegations against Trump do you feel Biden should be lower to do with impunity? Because if he can illegally act to overturn election results, time is a wasting.

When his disgusting tactics went up against the Constitution he lost, big time. Baaaaa Baaaaa Baaaa. Bleat, bleat bleat.

Yes, the Supreme Court decided to let Trump off on a technicality.

ROFL!
The voters elected Trump and Jack Smith was left with no case.
He had no choice but to throw in the towel full of holes which would have happened anyway.

[Hairy Lime]

Felon goes free on a technicality.

What Felon?

Donald Trump.

And since there will be no trial, what Technicality?

For this, the DoJ policy the prevents prosecuting a sitting President for his crimes. It is a technicality because it sets him free regardless of uilt.or.innocence.

The Jury of voters  preempted this whole disgusting Biden ploy.

Voters are not a jury since they are not sworn in, do not hear all of and only the evidence, do not deliberate as a group and are free to decide who to vote for based on this gs other than guilt or 8nnocence.

And there is precisely zero evidence that the Prosecution of Trump was.ever.a Biden ploy.  Ut you knew both of those things.

Corrupt public officials like Trump have been claiming that being prosecuted for their crimes has been political since the first corrupt politician. Trump is just the first where a large part of the electorate bought that bullshit. But then, he warned us that his followers were mindless sheep with his shoot someone on 5th Avenue remark.

I guess you are that gullible.
Jack Smith was a goon after SCOTUS rapped him with its Presidential Immunity decision.  Instead of waiting for the election a month later he revised  the indictment in a huge brief which the Trial Judge released.

So... doing his job in light of the Supreme Court ruling.

It was full of untested and biased views to the Court and the public as if they were conclusive.That brief was made public on a Wednesday, 34 days before the election.
One last LAWFARE stunt to take the voters mind off inflation, illegal aliens, etc.

Smith had only one hope. That Trump would lose and the case could go on since DOJ does not indict sitting Presidents.

The Voters saw through it all.Baaa Baaa Baaa.  Like the good little MAGA sheep you are.

fify.

LAWFARE IS DEAD.

Lawfare never existed, sheep. It is just Trump deflecting from his crimes.

Trump?
Jack Smith is throwing in the towel.

Jack Smith is abiding by the law and DoJ policy. As he has since his appointment.

Smith was doing the bidding of the democrats to destroy  the Trump campaign.

He was prosecuting Trump for credible claims of serious violations of the law. Which of the allegations against Trump do you feel Biden should be lower to do with impunity? Because if he can illegally act to overturn election results, time is a wasting.

When his disgusting tactics went up against the Constitution he lost, big time. Baaaaa Baaaaa Baaaa. Bleat, bleat bleat.

Yes, the Supreme Court decided to let Trump off on a technicality.

ROFL!
The voters elected Trump and Jack Smith was left with no case.
He had no choice but to throw in the towel full of holes which would have happened anyway.Baaaa Baaaa Baaaa. Bleat, Bleat Bleat.

While it would be interesting to see the extent to which fomenting insurrection from the Oval Office is protected by the technicality created by the Supreme Court, the documents case would have proceeded as soon as actually qualified judges reversed the lower court's rogue decision, in line with every other court to consider the appointment issue. And ended in a conviction since the SCOTUS created technicality would be of limited application to primarily post presidency conduct.

[jmmengel]

SCOTUS technicality?
You mean the CONSTITUTION?

[Hairy Lime]

No, the Court created evidentiary exclusionary rule. You know, like they did for the 4th and 5th Amendment, creating a rule that bars prosecution or limits evidence for issues not related to guilt or innocence. A technicality that allows the guilty to escape punishment.

[Hairy Lime]

Of course they will. Why is Trump so intent on destroying the economy of a state that voted for him? Cross border trade is a huge part of Arizona's economy, and that idiot RedDick helped elect wants to fuck us.

Mexico Suggests It Would Impose Its Own Tariffs To Retaliate Against Trump Tariffs
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mexico-suggests-impose-tariffs-retaliate-against-trump-tariffs_n_674606b8e4b0ce46e4173bf7

[jmmengel]

No, the Court created evidentiary exclusionary rule. You know, like they did for the 4th and 5th Amendment, creating a rule that bars prosecution or limits evidence for issues not related to guilt or innocence. A technicality that allows the guilty to escape punishment.

You are delusional.
The office of Legal Counsel decided in 2000 that dismissing charges only to recharge later could create a significant statute of limitations issue.
Since PRESIDENTIAL  term is four years long and the statute of limitations calls for charges to be filed within five years of the alleged crime, most pre-presidency criminal acts would be shielded from prosecution .
Now a Court might solve this problem by pausing or suspending  the statute of limitations.
But the OLC also emphasized  there is no assurance that a court could or would do so, particularly when the American public had elected the president despite the charges against him.
Which just happened.

[LarryBnDC]

No, the Court created evidentiary exclusionary rule. You know, like they did for the 4th and 5th Amendment, creating a rule that bars prosecution or limits evidence for issues not related to guilt or innocence. A technicality that allows the guilty to escape punishment.

You are delusional.
The office of Legal Counsel decided in 2000 that dismissing charges only to recharge later could create a significant statute of limitations issue.
Since PRESIDENTIAL  term is four years long and the statute of limitations calls for charges to be filed within five years of the alleged crime, most pre-presidency criminal acts would be shielded from prosecution .
Now a Court might solve this problem by pausing or suspending  the statute of limitations.
But the OLC also emphasized  there is no assurance that a court could or would do so, particularly when the American public had elected the president despite the charges against him.
Which just happened.

Look up what without prejudice means.

[jmmengel]

No, the Court created evidentiary exclusionary rule. You know, like they did for the 4th and 5th Amendment, creating a rule that bars prosecution or limits evidence for issues not related to guilt or innocence. A technicality that allows the guilty to escape punishment.

You are delusional.
The office of Legal Counsel decided in 2000 that dismissing charges only to recharge later could create a significant statute of limitations issue.
Since PRESIDENTIAL  term is four years long and the statute of limitations calls for charges to be filed within five years of the alleged crime, most pre-presidency criminal acts would be shielded from prosecution .
Now a Court might solve this problem by pausing or suspending  the statute of limitations.
But the OLC also emphasized  there is no assurance that a court could or would do so, particularly when the American public had elected the president despite the charges against him.
Which just happened.

Look up what without prejudice means.

I know what prejudice means. What is your point, if any?

[LarryBnDC]

No, the Court created evidentiary exclusionary rule. You know, like they did for the 4th and 5th Amendment, creating a rule that bars prosecution or limits evidence for issues not related to guilt or innocence. A technicality that allows the guilty to escape punishment.

You are delusional.
The office of Legal Counsel decided in 2000 that dismissing charges only to recharge later could create a significant statute of limitations issue.
Since PRESIDENTIAL  term is four years long and the statute of limitations calls for charges to be filed within five years of the alleged crime, most pre-presidency criminal acts would be shielded from prosecution .
Now a Court might solve this problem by pausing or suspending  the statute of limitations.
But the OLC also emphasized  there is no assurance that a court could or would do so, particularly when the American public had elected the president despite the charges against him.
Which just happened.

Look up what without prejudice means.

I know what prejudice means. What is your point, if any?

If you dont get it, you dont get it.

[Oilcandide]

Not just avocados (surely one of the less hoardable foods known)

A lot of toilet paper fibers are from Canadian boreal forest trees. 

Serving American anuses for fifty years!

Silver lining would be more recycled fiber, maybe.  Unless the Rump admin puts Yellowstone in the crosshairs.