Jump to content

The downfall of Lindsay Graham


Pancho

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

Judge Judy No GIF by Agent M Loves Gifs
 

 

I gotta tell you, Lindsey isn't looking too healthy these days. Puffier face, lidded eyes, greasy skin. Like homeboy has been drinking pretty heavily or weighed down by a lot of stress, or both. I wonder why he might not be sleeping well at night?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

 

The special grand jury in Fulton County investigating the 2020 presidential election in Georgia recommended indictments against Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and former GOP Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler of Georgia. None of them were indicted by Fani Willis. I wonder if Lindsey sang and was given immunity in return.  

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/fulton-county-special-grand-jury-report/index.html

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

The special grand jury in Fulton County investigating the 2020 presidential election in Georgia recommended indictments against Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and former GOP Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler of Georgia. None of them were indicted by Fani Willis. I wonder if Lindsey sang and was given immunity in return.  

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/fulton-county-special-grand-jury-report/index.html

i'm kind of amazed he kept up his fake bulldog bullshit given how close he is to the gallows himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

If the grand jury recommended it, why the fuck wasn't he indicted?

 

Speech and debate clause is some powerful shit.

And, I'm thinking that the special purpose grand jury was just an investigative tool and not much more.  Willis dgaf what they actually said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Speech and debate clause is some powerful shit.

And, I'm thinking that the special purpose grand jury was just an investigative tool and not much more.  Willis dgaf what they actually said.

 

After actually reading a NYT the article during lunch, I see there is speculation the prosecutors thought the case against Lindsay and the two ex-Georgia senators wasn't as strong.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
After actually reading a NYT the article during lunch, I see there is speculation the prosecutors thought the case against Lindsay and the two ex-Georgia senators wasn't as strong.
 
 

Makes sense.
AND, implicating members of the federal legislative branch may well have come close to implicating the “they were performing duties of their federal office” removal argument.
Sometimes, especially if you intend to try all defendants together, you don’t want to taint your strong case against everyone else with your weak case against a few. That could cause the jury to have doubts about your WHOLE case.
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

After actually reading a NYT the article during lunch, I see there is speculation the prosecutors thought the case against Lindsay and the two ex-Georgia senators wasn't as strong.

 

 

There is a political element as well. Going after Trump toadies is one thing, coming after United States Senators, let alone powerful United States Senators, is not something you should do unless you have them dead to rights on somethings the slowest of slow child’s would see is criminal.

 This would elevate the GOP political screed about a Weaponized Democratic Plot to take out respected GOP politicians to a level nobody needs to see.    Even people on the fence who will wait to see what that asshole Trump did might be turned to the dark side because they thought it unfair to go after a United States Senator.   

TL;DR   I should’ve said that indicting Lindsay would gain very little in convicting Trump, but could cause serious unnecessary removal troubles in the case - and would provoke a widespread negative political response. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

If the law is to be open if you operate on the thruway, then CFA should have not opened locations on it- and if there is an application process should have been declined by the NY authority after asking about Sundays. 
 

why wasn’t this properly adjudicated at that juncture?  Or was it, and it’s just the general public raising this issue for their convenience?

though I do wonder if they have a freedom of religion defense since it’s well established that they are closed Sundays for religious observance reasons.  

Edited by Pato del Muerto
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the law is to be open if you operate on the thruway, then CFA should have not opened locations on it- and if there is an application process should have been declined by the NY authority after asking about Sundays. 
 
why wasn’t this properly adjudicated at that juncture?  Or was it, and it’s just the general public raising this issue for their convenience?
though I do wonder if they have a freedom of religion defense since it’s well established that they are closed Sundays for religious observance reasons.  

SAT International went through this a couple of years ago. If I have to be there on a Sunday, your fast food for 6 year old white kids better damn well be available.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bullneck said:

Good thing there isn't anything important or critical going on in the world.  Otherwise he wouldn't be thinking about what's going on in another state beside S.C. concerning a company not based in S.C.

 

 

“Fuck you, you trumpist whore” is now added to my lexicon. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...


×
×
  • Create New...