Elections Trump Indicted On 91 Counts

[fingercuffs]

How long will that take? Who will be AG if SCOTUS turns over the decision in appeal?



Who said "dismissed?" And did you look at the date the oral arguments begin?

How did you feel about Bill Barr?

 

[Fergelmince]

How did you feel about Bill Barr?

Your message to reaction score ratio is too low for me to interact with you. Holler at me when the ratio improves.

 

[fingercuffs]

Your message to reaction score ratio is too low for me to interact with you. Holler at me when the ratio improves.

Most feel the same way.

 

[DoctorTaco]

LOL, a judge's decision is not conspiracy

Did the judge decide he was innocent?

 

[DoctorTaco]

Who said "dismissed?"

 

[jk7707]

Your message to reaction score ratio is too low for me to interact with you. Holler at me when the ratio improves.

The dick tuck of all dick tucks.

 

[Fergelmince]

Did the judge decide he was innocent?

That question is glaringly communist. In what country do you live?

 

[DoctorTaco]

That question is glaringly communist. In what country do you live?

Good one

 

[Jack Reacheround]

Did the judge decide he was innocent?

Pretty much. But she decided that way before the trial because he had appointed her.
In any sane legal system she would have had to recuse herself from hearing this case due to conflict of interest.

Then, one of our Supreme Court justices, who are just political actors dressed as judges, signaled in one of his decisions “Hey, if you want to dismiss that case for Trump, we’ll have your back when it gets appealed and ultimately lands on our docket.”

So she did what she had been trying to do from the beginning - gave Trump a pass.

Special counsels are standard in cases involving sensitive materials. There never has been anything unconstitutional about appointing them. But one judge just threw out decades of legal precedence. And there will be no consequences because everyone has gone insane.

 

[Fergelmince]

Good one

"Gud wun. Me no understand kahnsatuhtooshun"

 

[DoctorTaco]

Special counsels are standard in cases involving sensitive materials. There never has been anything unconstitutional about appointing them. But one judge just threw out decades of legal precedence. And there will be no consequences because everyone has gone insane.

 

[Andy Capp]

you love to see it

You do? You think it's a good thing to get away with treasonous crimes? No wonder you like to associate yourself with the smell of cheese.

 

[Andy Capp]

Oh, how the mighty have (literally) fallen...

It's funny because it's Rudy but he clearly just got too close to the edge of the red carpet and there is a drop off there. It probably wouldn't have mattered much if he were drunk or sober either.

 

[Andy Capp]

"Gud wun. Me no understand kahnsatuhtooshun"

We've noticed. It's ok, little pissbelt.

 

[dittohead84]

Did they jail the bad orange man yet?

 

[curryjunkie]

Good one

sherdogs equivalent of shitting your pants and proudly telling mommy, when they dont have a serious argument, its time to act retarded..

 

[DoctorTaco]

sherdogs equivalent of shitting your pants and proudly telling mommy, when they dont have a serious argument, its time to act retarded..

Strange to see a guy with such an old account acting like he does, but it’s probably his form of entertainment

 

[PEB]

Did Elon unintendedly show us how much of a percent of a billionaires wealth Trump's looking for in a kickbacks after he becomes Ruler.

I saw this on Bloomberg that after Trump's shooting Elon stated he was giving 45 million a month to Trump's grassroots get out the vote supporters group. He's where it gets funny that just happens to be . 5 percent of Elon's total wealth he would have spent on Trump comes on Nov 5th or 140 million dollars or .5 percent of Elon's total net worth around 270 to 280 billion? So mob terms that is around what they get in terms of a cut from local businesses except on a national scale lol.

 

[Fergelmince]

 

[CatchnShoot]

Inaccurate as always. Don't you get tired of being lied to? Or perhaps you are intentionally spreading misfinformation?

Jack Smith HAS filed an appeal of "Judge" Canon, not to C. Thomas, but to the 11th circuit.

@ the 11th circuit a random panel of 3 judges will decide on it.
After Smith has it overturned (and hopefully has Canon removed for gross ineptitude/evidence of bias), and depending on that decision, & whether or not a stay is in place, the loser there will appeal to have it heard en banque (the entire 11th circuit), or Scotus.


Clarence Thomas oversees the 11th circuit, but he will have zero influence over the 11th circuit appeal.

Also, the use of a Shadow Docket, whereby C. Thomas could abrogate (*) a Scotus hearing would be incredibly inappropriate, and I don't believe Scotus will even hear the case if it were any other defendant, but I do believe that they would want a full panel to evaluate in this "special" case
.
One of the primary roles of the overseeing justice is filtering out cases eligible to be heard before the Supreme Court...any "Power" they have is very limited.

The one way C. Thomas COULD affect the outcome would be refusing to hear an appeal from Jack Smith should he not prevail @ the 11th circuit. This is very unlikely to happen, as precedent (*) is quite clear.

Do better.


* My editor @Andy Capp informs me that I can't spell.