Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Oh fuck me.  I don't think the policy precludes continuing a prosecution commenced before taking office.

They need to make him do the corrupt thing.

Garland is way too spineless for that.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

Garland is way too spineless for that.

What a colossal mistake Biden made appointing him AG

Edited by C-Man
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

When do they make their decision?

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-ask-new-york-appeals-court-toss-nearly-500-mln-civil-fraud-judgment-2024-09-26/

 

Members of the five-judge panel on the Appellate Division - the mid-level state appellate court hearing arguments in Trump's appeal - appeared concerned about possible overreach by James.

Two of the judges interrupted Judith Vale, the lawyer arguing for New York, during her opening statement to ask if there were any other examples of the state suing over private business transactions between sophisticated parties under a law aimed at protecting market integrity.

"Every case that you cite involves damage to consumers, damage to the marketplace," Justice David Friedman told Vale.

"We don't have anything like that here," Friedman added, saying that nobody "lost any money."

For the record, that is well within the scope of appellate judge questioning and any lawyer with any appellate experience or knowledge knows that predicting the outcome of the appeal based on questions during oral argument is hazardous at best.

Appellate judges are often the hardest, that is ask the most pointed questions, to the ultimate winner of the appeal.

That said, I have always questioned the soundness of the size of the verdict, but for different reasons than this.  Although this is certainly an argument.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, tx ind said:

Will he get Rudy’s shit overturned?

Yes.  And then he'll keep the Yankees paraphernalia (WS rings) for himself. 

Edited by Underdog
Posted
They were political prosecutions. Nothing more.  The American people agree. Lawfare backfired big time.  

Are they political prosecutions solely on the basis of Donald Trump being a politician with people who opposed him running for office?

Would you say the same is true for other politicians, or is there something unique about Donald Trump and the multitude of criminal acts he has been accused of?

For instance, are the crimes George Santos committed actually political lawfare?
Posted
2 hours ago, Hagbard Celine said:

Your answer indicates there are at least 2 groups of legal enemies.

Those who ran for election on a platform of "getting Trump", and other prosecutors who did not run for election on a platform of "getting Trump".

Which prosecutors fall in to the former category?

@Frank Drebin please continue to engage

which prosecutors of trump crimes ran on a platform of "getting trump"?

Posted

Monica Lewinsky. Benghazi. Hillary's emails. Hunter Biden. Biden crime family. 

The idea that the GOP wouldn't pursue the trial and attempted prosecution of Joe Biden if he had been accused of any one of Trump's alleged crimes (Jan 6, election interference/intimidation, boxes of classified documents stored in a resort bathroom, rape, tax fraud, collusion) with the evidence in front of them is so ridiculous that even Sack is laughing at how full of shit he is.

And, no, they wouldn't move to drop the charges if Biden win re-election. 

The party of law and order sure loves to selectively apply it.

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, C-Man said:

Can somebody refresh my memory on how to unfollow/block someone on this site?

Hover on username, the ignore or unignore (however it's worded) option appears.  If you actually click the username, the ignore option doesn't appear.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Edited for accuracy
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Oh fuck me.  I don't think the policy precludes continuing a prosecution commenced before taking office.

They need to make him do the corrupt thing.


You are so close to getting it

Posted
28 minutes ago, Red Five said:

So if Trump had literally murdered someone on 5th Ave, and was in the process of being prosecuted.... the DOJ would drop that case now? 

Yes.  Well, in 3 months.

  • Like 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Were the attorneys on here okay with Letitia James running for office on a platform of getting Trump?  

She should be disbarred.  
 

You don't think prosecutors should prosecute crimes? There's plenty of evidence, but I know you fascists are allergic to it

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

You don't think prosecutors should prosecute crimes? There's plenty of evidence, but I know you fascists are allergic to it

That case is going to get tossed.  You fascists used courts and corrupt political prosecutors to go after your enemies.  Payback is about to be a motherfucker.  Lawyer up.  It ain’t going to be cheap.  
 

The American people just told you loud and clear what they think of your bullshit.  

Edited by Frank Drebin
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 8
Posted
1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

That case is going to get tossed.  You fascists used courts and corrupt political prosecutors to go after your enemies.  Payback is about to be a motherfucker.  Lawyer up.  It ain’t going to be cheap.  

Can you elaborate in clear legal terms? Or are you just grievance and id while at your daughter's tumbling practice too?

  • Haha 2
Posted
Just now, Captainant said:

Can you elaborate in clear legal terms? Or are you just grievance and id while at your daughter's tumbling practice too?

You’ll see.  Don’t need to explain myself.  I don’t owe you shit.  The people did the bidding last night.  You beat political opponents in elections. Not with corrupt and biased judicial systems. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 8
Posted
19 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Were the attorneys on here okay with Letitia James running for office on a platform of getting Trump?  

She should be disbarred.  
 

I am generally against judges and all that running for office anyway. They frequently do this kind of thing.

I mean prosecute Trump if he committed crimes, sure.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

You’ll see.  Don’t need to explain myself.  I don’t owe you shit.  The people did the bidding last night.  You beat political opponents in elections. Not with corrupt and biased judicial systems. 

You can't explain yourself because you have nothing but pure id and hatred in your heart. You completely reject the idea of evenly prosecuting crimes, simply because the defendant puts the people you dislike into camps and collects the identities of their "enemies of the people" to prosecute.

You are a shining emblem of that mindset. Go forth, man of the cloth, and use the state to attack your feared other and enrich yourself. 

You cheer on a russian system of justice that rejects facts and evidence in favor of whomever the ruling class targets

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
8 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

That case is going to get tossed.  You fascists used courts and corrupt political prosecutors to go after your enemies.  Payback is about to be a motherfucker.  Lawyer up.  It ain’t going to be cheap.  
 

The American people just told you loud and clear what they think of your bullshit.  

Now the Democrats are the fascists?  

The difference is in Trump's case there were actual, you know, crimes. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

You’ll see.  Don’t need to explain myself.  I don’t owe you shit.  The people did the bidding last night.  You beat political opponents in elections. Not with corrupt and biased judicial systems. 

I think politicians should be held accountable to the law. Just because you got elected doesn't mean you can do whatever.

Having an elected judiciary naturally makes all that a little fuzzy. But there are downsides to just having everybody an appointee as well I guess.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

That case is going to get tossed.  You fascists used courts and corrupt political prosecutors to go after your enemies.  Payback is about to be a motherfucker.  Lawyer up.  It ain’t going to be cheap.  
 

The American people just told you loud and clear what they think of your bullshit.  

IOKIYAR

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

That case is going to get tossed.  You fascists used courts and corrupt political prosecutors to go after your enemies.  Payback is about to be a motherfucker.  Lawyer up.  It ain’t going to be cheap.  
 

The American people just told you loud and clear what they think of your bullshit.  

Wait? We on this message board are going to be arrested? Seems a bit over the top.

I didn't use any courts. Just to clarify. I do think people who commit crimes should be prosecuted and if there are any Democratic politicians who committed crimes then go arrest them and make them lawyer up. You would probably be doing us a favor.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

You’ll see.  Don’t need to explain myself.  I don’t owe you shit.  The people did the bidding last night.  You beat political opponents in elections. Not with corrupt and biased judicial systems. 

This is lazy trolling, even for you.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
4 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

I think politicians should be held accountable to the law. Just because you got elected doesn't mean you can do whatever.

Having an elected judiciary naturally makes all that a little fuzzy. But there are downsides to just having everybody an appointee as well I guess.

What about an AG who runs for office on “getting” her political enemy?  One in 2017 she called an illegitimate president. That cool?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 4
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

What about an AG who runs for office on “getting” her political enemy?  One in 2017 she called an illegitimate president. That cool?

Sure, she should be held accountable to the law.

Edited by Valmy77
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

What about an AG who runs for office on “getting” her political enemy?  One in 2017 she called an illegitimate president. That cool?

'Member how Donald Trump made his name in politics in the first place?

I 'member.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

'Member how Donald Trump made his name in politics in the first place?

I 'member.

Yeah sure, Donald Trump both ran for office on locking his opponent up and later called his successor an illegitimate president.

But he wasn't an AG, only the President of the United States, so I guess that is ok.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Were the attorneys on here okay with Letitia James running for office on a platform of getting Trump?  

She should be disbarred.  
 

 

i don’t see her canceling the nyc / state felonies 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Valmy77 said:

Yeah sure, Donald Trump both ran for office on locking his opponent up and later called his successor an illegitimate president.

But he wasn't an AG, only the President of the United States, so I guess that is ok.

I was thinking even further back than that when he was running around accusing Obama of being illegitimate because he wasn't born in the United States.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
4 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Sure, if she did anything illegal.

Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.  

y’all got to call him a felon while he ran for president.  That’s all you got.  He just kicked your team’s ass yesterday and has a mandate.  

Just now, tx 3 putt said:

 

i don’t see her canceling the nyc / state felonies 

The appellate courts will.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Frank Drebin said:

Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.  

y’all got to call him a felon while he ran for president.  That’s all you got.  He just kicked your team’s ass yesterday and has a mandate.  

Ok, everybody is a criminal? That's what you are going with?

And yes I am aware my team got its ass kicked. 

Posted
Just now, Frank Drebin said:

Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.  

y’all got to call him a felon while he ran for president.  That’s all you got.  He just kicked your team’s ass yesterday and has a mandate.  

So what, you want to see people in cages in court Russia style? Because it sounds like you don't really care about the law and only care about prosecuting grievance. 

There are actual crimes with facts documented. Fuck you for ignoring that you fucking lying sack of shit. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
Just now, Valmy77 said:

Ok, everybody is a criminal? That's what you are going with?

And yes I am aware my team got its ass kicked. 

Yes. When they go to those lengths, anyone can be a criminal.  I’m sure Jack Smith if indicted in Amarillo or Midland for just about anything would be convicted.  We may well find out.  Payback is going to be a bitch.  

  • Fuck You 9
Posted
2 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.  

y’all got to call him a felon while he ran for president.  That’s all you got.  He just kicked your team’s ass yesterday and has a mandate.  

The appellate courts will.  

 

state appellate courts 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

Not trolling at all. The voters soundly rejected democrat lawfare.  

Uh huh. Stop. You know every word of this is true.

2 hours ago, aggie08 said:

Monica Lewinsky. Benghazi. Hillary's emails. Hunter Biden. Biden crime family. 

The idea that the GOP wouldn't pursue the trial and attempted prosecution of Joe Biden if he had been accused of any one of Trump's alleged crimes (Jan 6, election interference/intimidation, boxes of classified documents stored in a resort bathroom, rape, tax fraud, collusion) with the evidence in front of them is so ridiculous that even Sack is laughing at how full of shit he is.

And, no, they wouldn't move to drop the charges if Biden won re-election. 

The party of law and order sure loves to selectively apply it.

 

You would have been the legal system's biggest cheerleader had they had literally any real dirt on ol' Joe. 

It's cool though. It's not like anyone takes them seriously when they claim that no one is above the law.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Captainant said:

So what, you want to see people in cages in court Russia style? Because it sounds like you don't really care about the law and only care about prosecuting grievance. 

There are actual crimes with facts documented. Fuck you for ignoring that you fucking lying sack of shit. 

The American voters disagree with you. And don’t believe he committed any crimes.  

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted
Just now, Frank Drebin said:

Yes. When they go to those lengths, anyone can be a criminal.  I’m sure Jack Smith if indicted in Amarillo or Midland for just about anything would be convicted.  We may well find out.  Payback is going to be a bitch.  

Absolutely incredible display of fascism. I'm glad you're finally being honest with us. 

Just now, Frank Drebin said:

The American voters disagree with you. And don’t believe he committed any crimes.  

So you're saying feels > reals? If enough people believe something, it makes the facts not exist? 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 minute ago, Frank Drebin said:

The American voters disagree with you. And don’t believe he committed any crimes.  

Oh, that's how the legal system works now? Cool. I'm sure you'll be consistent in that application.

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...