| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Still-Waters
Joined: 21 Nov 2023
Posts: 135
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 12:47 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| mac wrote: |
But he is the kind of guy that gets Bard's panty's wet. |
I know this is confusing for those aligned with the CGP (child groomer party) and those incapable of defining what a woman is, and that women do NOT have penises, but Bard's panty's don't get wet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17752
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 09, 2024 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Still-Waters wrote: | | mac wrote: |
But he is the kind of guy that gets Bard's panty's wet. |
I know this is confusing for those aligned with the CGP (child groomer party) and those incapable of defining what a woman is, and that women do NOT have penises, but Bard's panty's don't get wet. |
If anyone would know... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coachg
Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3553
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2024 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | | Still-Waters wrote: | | mac wrote: |
But he is the kind of guy that gets Bard's panty's wet. |
I know this is confusing for those aligned with the CGP (child groomer party) and those incapable of defining what a woman is, and that women do NOT have penises, but Bard's panty's don't get wet. |
If anyone would know... |
Coachg |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9123
Location: at a computer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993
Posts: 9300
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2024 9:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
How so?”
Turley said, “Well, the more cases against Trump, the less justice we receive as a people. You know, the opponents of Trump would have been far better off with just one case, the Mar-a-Lago case. That’s based on real law, real precedent, and one can disagree with the interpretations. But it’s not a reach in the sense of this case.”
He continued, “This case is, creating something, it’s creating a criminal code just for Trump. You know, you have a misdemeanor whose time has expired, the statute limitations ran out, and it was revived in this rather curious way. He’s effectively arguing that Trump was filing false business records through his counsel to hide a federal crime. But it isn’t a federal crime, this wasn’t a campaign contribution. None of that appears to matter, and that’s why a lot of us are looking at this and recoiling. This is not how the law is supposed to be.”
Turley added, “New Yorkers appear to like it this way. They elected James, who ran on bagging Trump for anything, didn’t even mention what. And they now are lionizing this district attorney who’s putting together what many of us consider to be an absurd indictment.” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14893
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 16, 2024 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MalibuGuru wrote: | How so?”
Turley said, “Well, the more cases against Trump, the less justice we receive as a people. You know, the opponents of Trump would have been far better off with just one case, the Mar-a-Lago case. That’s based on real law, real precedent, and one can disagree with the interpretations. But it’s not a reach in the sense of this case.”
He continued, “This case is, creating something, it’s creating a criminal code just for Trump. You know, you have a misdemeanor whose time has expired, the statute limitations ran out, and it was revived in this rather curious way. He’s effectively arguing that Trump was filing false business records through his counsel to hide a federal crime. But it isn’t a federal crime, this wasn’t a campaign contribution. None of that appears to matter, and that’s why a lot of us are looking at this and recoiling. This is not how the law is supposed to be.”
Turley added, “New Yorkers appear to like it this way. They elected James, who ran on bagging Trump for anything, didn’t even mention what. And they now are lionizing this district attorney who’s putting together what many of us consider to be an absurd indictment.” |
Did you hear about trumps appointed republican prosecutor in charge of Southern District of NY. He wrote a book after he was forced out by trump-barr. As he noted the cohen indictment he was forced by trump-barr to change from 30 pages to about 12? can not remember and remove trumps name in all cases as he had it to person number 1.
Then Barr directly told him to modify Cohens conviction to let him off.
and much more like ordering him to indict certain democrats with no evidence. When he would not reverse Cohens conviction and then not charge dems with no grand jury indictments Barr lied and had in-justice department say he resigned, he did not. So he was later officially fired.
Now the NY state trial, well from what i read it is a simple case. He did pay off and not claim it is equated as a tax fraud and campaign fraud. It was as Cohen said, and plead guilty too. Now we have David Pecker with a second case doing the same thing for trump. And Peckers media even then making false articles about Clinton and so on that are seen at nearly all people standing in line at at grocery stores attacking her. That is how much he was willing to do for trump.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/more-than-mere-media-bias-how-new-york-prosecutors-see-trump-s-scheme-with-the-national-enquirer-209054789666 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
