What's new
By:

Donald is about to go through some things...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 365
  • Start date Start date
fishonjazz said:
So that means if I'm ever subpoenaed for anything I don't have to do anything. Nice to know. The precedent has been set.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The FBI literally plants evidence, when you're not fake ignoring me I discussed with you and you ignored it, I pushed for you to acknowledge it and you didn't for obvious reasons.

Next second your accusing Trump of wanting to arrest political opponents while you openly advocate for illegal arresting of political opponents.

I'm sorry fish, your inability to be honest is why I hound you. You're either for arresting political opponents, which you are and openly advocate unless it's Biden, or you're not. Me personally I am 100% against it.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that in trump criminal cases its never about evidence proving him guilty or not guilty.
It's about how it's being held in a blue state! It's a corrupt judge! It's a prosecutor who didn't get the case in the proper way!
Never about the actual evidence or the crime. Trump and his attorneys know he is guilty on these cases so they complain about things unrelated to the actual cases and evidence.


Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
TheStormofWar said:
Huh? Your assassin was a registered Republican and Cannon dismissed the case for something that has been precedent since 1875. What the **** are you even talking about?
Click to expand...
Spin incoming in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1......

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
 
TheStormofWar said:
Huh? Your assassin was a registered Republican and Cannon dismissed the case for something that has been precedent since 1875. What the **** are you even talking about?
Click to expand...
Be angry bruh... Do you even know why the case was postponed in the first place? Because Jack Smith admitted the the FBI tampered with the evidence. They also admit that some of the folders in the picture were not even at Mar a Lago and they staged it.
 
SteakNEggs said:
Be angry bruh... Do you even know why the case was postponed in the first place? Because Jack Smith admitted the the FBI tampered with the evidence. They also admit that some of the folders in the picture were not even at Mar a Lago and they staged it.
Click to expand...
You don't even know why the case was dismissed, do you?
 
TheStormofWar said:
You don't even know why the case was dismissed, do you?
Click to expand...
True or false?
The Appointments Clause says, "Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States be appointed by the President subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, although Congress may vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments." Smith, however, was never confirmed by the Senate.
 
fishonjazz said:
Spin incoming in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1......

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
True or false? We can't have Presidents illegally hiring special prosecutors to arrest other political candidates. It takes Congress.

True or false fish?

The Appointments Clause says, "Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States be appointed by the President subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, although Congress may vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments." Smith, however, was never confirmed by the Senate.
 
SteakNEggs said:
Let's also address how it's congresses job to anoint a prosecutor, not Biden.
Click to expand...
So 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 bat*** logic correct?
 
TheStormofWar said:
So 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 bat*** logic correct?
Click to expand...
True or false
The Appointments Clause says, "Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States be appointed by the President subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, although Congress may vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments." Smith, however, was never confirmed by the Senate.
 
SteakNEggs said:
True or false
The Appointments Clause says, "Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States be appointed by the President subject to the advice and consent of the Senate, although Congress may vest the appointment of inferior officers in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments." Smith, however, was never confirmed by the Senate.
Click to expand...
Sorry Beavis, you don't get off that easy. I ask again: 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 bat*** logic correct?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top