What's new
By:

Donald is about to go through some things...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
SteakNEggs said:
I want to be clear... If Trump wins you are ok with him appointing a Jack Smith of his own and arresting every one of his political opponents?
Click to expand...
Stay on target. It's your contention the Trump administration's appointments Mueller and Durham, as well as every Independent Counsel since 1875, requires the appointment by Congress, despite the fact it is not Congress's purview to enforce the laws of our nation and every related SCOTUS case said they were good on this concept. Do I have your logic correct?

I might also suggest looking up how those appointments are made. They aren't done by the POTUS.
 
SteakNEggs said:
I'm elated. This only helps Trump and once he wins he can appoint a special council to arrest you for slander. Now I think that's wrong but remember 1875 and stuff
Click to expand...
Aight, you're just taking the piss now. He doesn't appoint Special Prosecutors/Independent Counsels. That's the AG. I might also suggest you look up how arrest warrants are issued.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Stay on target. It's your contention the Trump administration's appointments Mueller and Durham, as well as every Independent Counsel since 1875, requires the appointment by Congress, despite the fact it is not Congress's purview to enforce the laws of our nation and every related SCOTUS case said they were good on this concept. Do I have your logic correct?

I might also suggest looking up how those appointments are made. They aren't done by the POTUS.
Click to expand...
Trump didn't appoint Mueller to prosecute himself you dummy. And I even pointed out how it was illegal. Did I not? I've been saying this since the beginning actually.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Aight, you're just taking the piss now. He doesn't appoint Special Prosecutors/Independent Counsels. That's the AG. I might also suggest you look up how arrest warrants are issued.
Click to expand...
Nah, I'll take the judges word for it. Go be angry just don't do anything crazy please
 
What has the hatred of Donald Trump gotten you dipshiits? He might have gone away, but the hatred and constant coverage kept him relevant, political prosecutions, the trials, and indictments made him more popular, and an attempted assassination has pretty much handed trump the election. Dumbass democrats can’t get out of their own way. Everything they touch goes to ****, everything they have tried to do to trump has blown up in their face, yet they still blame trump for all of it. What has all the hatred gotten you idiots over the last 10 years? It’s only made trump more powerful. What purpose does the hatred serve in your life? Are any of you idiots learning any valuable lessons from any of this or does your hatred just keep growing? Dumbasses
 
TheStormofWar said:
Aight, you're just taking the piss now. He doesn't appoint Special Prosecutors/Independent Counsels. That's the AG. I might also suggest you look up how arrest warrants are issued.
Click to expand...
And who appointed Merrick Garland? Please tell me you're not this dense? Garland has been about as far left as one can get.
 
TheStormofWar said:
Aight, you're just taking the piss now. He doesn't appoint Special Prosecutors/Independent Counsels. That's the AG. I might also suggest you look up how arrest warrants are issued.
Click to expand...
Also I don't care if trump were to appoint special prosecutors and go after everyone who ever wronged him.

It would be hilarious to watch all these court cases lacking evidence get to a jury and the defendants remain innocent.

I'm not afraid of the justice system. It's telling that the Republican party is afraid of having evidence presented to a jury. Guilty are always going to more afraid of going to court than innocent.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
SteakNEggs said:
Trump didn't appoint Mueller to prosecute himself you dummy. And I even pointed out how it was illegal. Did I not? I've been saying this since the beginning actually.
Click to expand...
Nah mate, you didn't point anything out. You're one of those people who says "do some learnin'" and calls other people morons when they fact check your "sources" and find them to be flat out wrong. My favorite incident of this type was when some jackinape tried to tell me N95 masks don't work for ****, gave me a source, and didn't bother to check that his "source" was a scientific study that had a big red label on the front it saying the study in question has been discredited because "the science" didn't hold up. It's like Stockton trying to quote some 1990's quality Geocities-level website with half-broken links and "cases" of vaccination deaths where the actual cause was much different, such as drugs abuse, natural causes, and just plain accidents. Ron Paul supporters were particularly notorious for this, which makes me think you would have fit right at home there.

You are the worst kind of "intellectual". You don't debate points, logic, or refutations of your arguments. You simple blunder your way through with the same discredited discourse, saying "you never said this or that" when you damn well know it was said because it was thrown in your face and started to wiggle.

I gave you the historical precedent, case law, constitutional muster and reasoning, and everything else. You want to keep with this mental or physical masturbatory fest, then be my guest. We're done.
 
fishonjazz said:
Also I don't care if trump were to appoint special prosecutors and go after everyone who ever wronged him.

It would be hilarious to watch all these court cases lacking evidence get to a jury and the defendants remain innocent.

I'm not afraid of the justice system. It's telling that the Republican party is afraid of having evidence presented to a jury. Guilty are always going to more afraid of going to court than innocent.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Keep in mind he could show up at your door for your plea bargain and make it right
 
TheStormofWar said:
Nah mate, you didn't point anything out. You're one of those people who says "do some learnin'" and calls other people morons when they fact check your "sources" and find them to be flat out wrong. My favorite incident of this type was when some jackinape tried to tell me N95 masks don't work for ****, gave me a source, and didn't bother to check that his "source" was a scientific study that had a big red label on the front it saying the study in question has been discredited because "the science" didn't hold up. It's like Stockton trying to quote some 1990's quality Geocities-level website with half-broken links and "cases" of vaccination deaths where the actual cause was much different, such as drugs abuse, natural causes, and just plain accidents.

You are the worst kind of "intellectual". You don't debate points, logic, or refutations of your arguments. You simple blunder your way through with the same discredited discourse, saying "you never said this or that" when you damn well know it was said because it was thrown in your face and started to wiggle.

I gave you the historical precedent, case law, constitutional muster and reasoning, and everything else. You want to keep with this mental or physical masturbatory, then be my guest. We're done.
Click to expand...
And I gave you multiple rebuttals that Mueller investigation was unconstitutional. Just like Jack Smith.
 
Nope. I just go to court and do the same things again lol. I went to court already.
Plea in abeyance is still an option today like it was 15 years ago.

I ain't scared
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top