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
2 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Welp, classified docs case gone too.  Oh well.  I, for one, welcome our new overlords.  Sucks for immigrants and women though.

fuck em.  they voted for this. 

Posted
25 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Welp, classified docs case gone too.  Oh well.  I, for one, welcome our new overlords.  Sucks for immigrants and women though.

that was going to happen once Trump won. Were they going to prosecute Trump for having documents that he shouldn't have in 2022 but has 100% access to the files in Jan 2025? not to mention that Trump could once again (first time?) declare those documents as unclassified and therefore there would be ridiculous to prosecute him.

As always, the problem was slow prosecution and a judge who did everything to slow it down. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
47 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Welp, classified docs case gone too.  Oh well.  I, for one, welcome our new overlords.  Sucks for immigrants and women though.

As to Trump, only.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Name a criminal law you think he's broken on connection with the prosecution.  Go head.  Just one.

And even if he had, he's got  . . . sing it with me now . . . . IM MUN NITY!  IM MUN NITY! Big, powerful, huge IM MUN NITY!

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Name a criminal law you think he's broken on connection with the prosecution.  Go head.  Just one.

He crossed trump. Simple as that.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

spacer.png

Man, guy took a huge demotion to go after Trump and after 3 years, walks away with nothing but his pecker in his hand.

 

November 2022 to November 2024 is three years now?

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Name a criminal law you think he's broken on connection with the prosecution.  Go head.  Just one.

Don't know.  But RICO is as broad as hell when the feds decide they want it to be and use their full powers to investigate.  So is wire fraud.  So is mail fraud.  I have seen some estimates that the average person commits three felonies a day.

Edited by Frank Drebin
  • Fuck You 2
Posted (edited)

This whole sad saga has me thinking about why preservers of the status quo are unalterably opposed to what might be learned from an examination of CRT. The scholarly framework holds that racism goes far beyond just individually held prejudices, and that it is in fact a systemic race and class phenomenon woven into the laws and institutions of this nation. Those who craft the laws and define the parameters in which institutions exist and operate, do so to ensure that results redound to their benefit. 
No poor or minority person in this country could ever get away with what Trump is on the verge of getting away with, and that’s because laws and institutions generally don’t exist to help them.

Edited by Satchel
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 5
Posted
23 minutes ago, freyguy said:

Wonderful waste of effort.  Either a big pussy move, or never had much against him in the first place.  What a world...

He had to drop it.  DOJ policy is no prosecutions against sitting presidents, and in two months, Trump will be a sitting president.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

Democrats would have been way better off had they just stuck with a more reasonable message regarding the 2020 election drama and other Trump stuff. If they’d have kept it to simply re-iterating that Trump is claiming fraud with no tangible proof…and showing how that fits his unpredictable and narcissistic personality, it would resonated with more people. Instead, like democrats these days do, they went off the deep-end with the hysterics about “democracy is at stake!” , “Trump will be a dictator!”, “He wants to overthrow the government!” , “Reeeeeee!!!”

Normal, reasonable people just roll their eyes at that stuff.  But this board is full of reeeeeeeeeee!!

  • Fuck You 6
Posted
26 minutes ago, Frank Drebin said:

 “He wants to overthrow the government!” , “Reeeeeee!!!”

Normal, reasonable people just roll their eyes at that stuff.  But this board is full of reeeeeeeeeee!!

Interesting. Not sure how anyone can view the actions of Trump and his admin between 11/6/20 - 1/6/21 and NOT come to the conclusion that he was trying to illegally install himself as the president, but you've had 4 years to rationalize that one, so whatever you gotta do, I guess.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

 

If it really was such a slam dunk case, why didn’t they file it years ago?

It’s almost like they wanted this trial to occur as close to the election as possible. Maybe, just maybe it was all about optics pre-election and never about an actual conviction.

  • Fuck You 3
Posted

Curious as to whether Jack Smith or Garland could decide to release all of the records to the public or at least the House and Senate so that their evidence is available for historic purposes. Or they can leave them behind for Pam Bondi to shred.

With the charges dropped does the presiding judge still have control of the case? If Smith/Garland released the evidence, would they be breaking any laws? I'm assuming they would redact any classified info.

Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

He had to drop it.  DOJ policy is no prosecutions against sitting presidents, and in two months, Trump will be a sitting president.

He doesn't have to drop it. Trump isn't president today. He should've kept prosecuting and made Trump fire him and order the prosecutions to be shut down once he took office. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
Just now, wildcat09 said:

He should've kept prosecuting and made Trump fire him and order the prosecutions to be shut down once he took office. 

No.  He has followed DOJ policy.  He is obligated to keep doing so.  The policy is that sitting presidents are not prosecuted.  And as an officer of the court, he has an obligation to the court and its docket to treat cases in an orderly fashion.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Curious as to whether Jack Smith or Garland could decide to release all of the records to the public or at least the House and Senate so that their evidence is available for historic purposes. Or they can leave them behind for Pam Bondi to shred.

With the charges dropped does the presiding judge still have control of the case? If Smith/Garland released the evidence, would they be breaking any laws? I'm assuming they would redact any classified info.

Biden can declassify. He’s above the law for 2 months.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Foosters said:

Imagine Obama and Holder pulling the below in 2012 had Romney eked out a win. You'd have been calling for the public hanging of all involved. You know it. I know it. Everyone here knows it.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.260.0.pdf

You either think the election was stolen and are too stupid to continue engaging with, or you approve of the above "lawfare" because it helps your side, and can be dismissed as a partisan troll. 

Pretty sure the first couple boxes have been checked and we can jump right to this.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
No.  He has followed DOJ policy.  He is obligated to keep doing so.  The policy is that sitting presidents are not prosecuted.  And as an officer of the court, he has an obligation to the court and its docket to treat cases in an orderly fashion.

Today I learned that a president-elect is considered “sitting” based on a memo…
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, Party_Taco said:


Today I learned that a president-elect is considered “sitting” based on a memo…

No, he's not.  But he WILL be, in less than 60 days.  And if you know that you are required to dismiss your case (per DOJ policy) in less than 60 days, you tell the court that.  That's what an officer of the court practicing in Federal Court is supposed to do.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

It sure seems like a poster posting some 8chan school-shooter "REEEEEEEEEEE" shit should be grounds for a ban.  

plus he's the biggest fucking asshole on this site by a LOT. even posters that generally support his same 'team' think he's a hateful hypocritical dickhead.

he's the Ted Cruz of surly. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

No, he's not.  But he WILL be, in less than 60 days.  And if you know that you are required to dismiss your case (per DOJ policy) in less than 60 days, you tell the court that.  That's what an officer of the court practicing in Federal Court is supposed to do.

Besides, wtf would be accomplished in 60 more days? They would just stall with more bullshit. It's taken two years just to get this far, and Trump has barely been in a court room for anything other than his New York felonies.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted

Pity people like Johnny. Just think how morally bankrupt Donald fucking Trump has made them over the past 9 years. 

Liz fucking Cheney isn't conservative enough.

Mark Miley and John McCain are traitors to this country.

Why can't you store the highest classification of documents in the bathroom of a golf resort?

Laws that affect our team don't really matter.

"Drain the swamp!"...unless it's billionaires buying off judges and filling out a cabinet with pay-to-play unqualified fucks and Fox News talking heads.

Just no back bone, no principles.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 4
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

No, he's not.  But he WILL be, in less than 60 days.  And if you know that you are required to dismiss your case (per DOJ policy) in less than 60 days, you tell the court that.  That's what an officer of the court practicing in Federal Court is supposed to do.

It's more square-dealing than Trump deserves and in that sense, I guess, debatable.  But strictly from a lawyer perspective, it's the right thing to do.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
36 minutes ago, safe sex said:

Besides, wtf would be accomplished in 60 more days? They would just stall with more bullshit. It's taken two years just to get this far, and Trump has barely been in a court room for anything other than his New York felonies.

Yeah, that's kind of what it boils down to.  This is a waste of the court's time, if no one elses.  And courts are actually a fairly scarce public resource.

Posted
2 hours ago, GenXer said:

Biden can declassify. He’s above the law for 2 months.

Court records aren't classified.  The decision to keep them sealed or public lies with the judge.

HOWEVER, evidence only gets filed in the court record in bits and pieces (small ones at that) until trial, at which time it all becomes public.

One kind of amusing thing, though, Smith had to put in most of his trial evidence in the motion to avoid immunity.  And that is already public record. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-the-newly-released-evidence-in-the-jan-6-case-against-trump

In one sense, that sucks for the prosecution, because they have to reveal nearly the entirety of their "hand" before trial.  But the defendant already has most of all of that evidence, in the usual case.

On the other hand, all that inculpatory evidence is revealed to the public before the defendant has any opportunity to rebut it.  In this particular case, that's delightful.  As if anyone read it.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

And courts are actually a fairly scarce public resource.

This needs to be fixed. The court system should be as funded for its current and future needs as much as the DoD is. 

  • Hook 'Em 1


×
×
  • Create New...