Nationalist Posted July 15 Author Report Share Posted July 15 14 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: No there is a good chance that it will be overturned and the actions this overtly pro-Trump judge don’t prove anything. You mean like Merchan? Lol...you Libbies are so fcked. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: It's the same playbook he used on Bob McDonnell. He's one of the worst abusers of our judicial system in the history of the country. I hope baron Trump sues for them going through his underwear drawer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbie Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 Yeah try that asa regular person. Your Honour, in spite of being caught red handed with $6,000,000 worth of cocaine, the Prosecutor was the Governor's High School buddy Oh sorry then! Case dismissed! You're totally innocent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeaverFever Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 2 hours ago, CdnFox said: So when it's a ruling you like the judge is a wise and unbias person despite political connections and when it's a ruling you don't like the judge is an 'acolyte' and clearly bias. Uh huh The case is pretty much dead. They cut corners and you just can't do that when the case is this high profile and now it's toast. Ever since this Trump- appointed judge was first assigned to the case she has made unusual and controversial rulings in favour of Trump’s team that leave most legal experts scratching their heads and some have been overturned EVEN IF Trump’s defence is somehow correct that Smith is ineligible to proceed with the case, the remedy is not to dismiss the entire case but rather to reassign someone We will see if it’s indeed dead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted July 15 Author Report Share Posted July 15 33 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: Ever since this Trump- appointed judge was first assigned to the case she has made unusual and controversial rulings in favour of Trump’s team that leave most legal experts scratching their heads and some have been overturned EVEN IF Trump’s defence is somehow correct that Smith is ineligible to proceed with the case, the remedy is not to dismiss the entire case but rather to reassign someone We will see if it’s indeed dead Well...the only way for this to proceed at all, would be for Trump to lose the election. Good luck with that. Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 44 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: EVEN IF Trump’s defence is somehow correct that Smith is ineligible to proceed with the case, the remedy is not to dismiss the entire case but rather to reassign someone Of course that is the remedy. You can't say that oops this entire case was created, tried, and prosecuted by an illegally appointed prosecutor and then say, no worries, just put someone else in. The damage is done. Quote LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted July 15 Report Share Posted July 15 2 hours ago, BeaverFever said: Ever since this Trump- appointed judge was first assigned to the case she has made unusual and controversial rulings in favour of Trump’s team that leave most legal experts scratching their heads and some have been overturned Not really true. I get you perceive it that way but it's really not. And this one isn't terribly controversial either, ANd if you think this is a headscratcher you'll have to explain your support for the new york judge in his 'felony accounting' case. Which has never ever been done 😮 Sorry but you can't just flip back and forth like that. I'm not sure if they'll bother appealing this, politically there's issues and legally this isn't even the only issue derailing the case. But if they do then it'll get a hearing and we'll see what they say but I think either way this case has fallen apart. You have to be squeaky clean in cases like this and they just weren't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeaverFever Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: Not really true. I get you perceive it that way but it's really not. And this one isn't terribly controversial either, ANd if you think this is a headscratcher you'll have to explain your support for the new york judge in his 'felony accounting' case. Which has never ever been done 😮 Sorry but you can't just flip back and forth like that. I'm not sure if they'll bother appealing this, politically there's issues and legally this isn't even the only issue derailing the case. But if they do then it'll get a hearing and we'll see what they say but I think either way this case has fallen apart. You have to be squeaky clean in cases like this and they just weren't. Sure I can say judges who behave normally are normally and those who don’t behave normally are abnormal. You think it’s some sort of coincidence she arbitrarily dismissed the case the very next workday after the Trump shooting especially when nobody had expected a decision either way on that day? Legal observers have pointed out that Cannon's ruling would likely be reversed on appeal because for nearly 30 years, special counsels have been appointed by the attorney general. She also made a number of unusual decisions since being assigned to the case in June 2023, having granted a special master at Trump's request (which was later struck down by an appeals court) and delaying dozens of proceedings at Trump’s request. She also issued numerous paperless orders instead of issuing a substantive ruling, which has prevented Smith from going to the appeals court The only reason you think the accounting judge was biased is because you didn’t get what you wanted and his daughter is an outspoken Trump critic but Cannon herself is political…not her daughter Your assertion that Must declare that either every judge in the land is bias or that every judge in the land is unbiased is ridiculous. Some are, some aren’t. Some can overcome their biases and rule fairly, others can’t. Cannon clearly is biased amd working in Trump’s favour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 (edited) 6 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: Sure I can say judges who behave normally are normally and those who don’t behave normally are abnormal. Really. Which 'democrat' judges would you say are abnormal or bias then? 6 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: You think it’s some sort of coincidence she arbitrarily dismissed the case the very next workday after the Trump shooting especially when nobody had expected a decision either way on that day? I think people expected a decision. Are you suggesting that nobody had asked her to rule on that or something? I'm sure that the left leaning media outlets will have any number of legal experts saying "oh this will get overturned" - to be honest given their track record over the last 8 years i wouldn't get my hopes up. Hell the media trotted out plenty who said it was fine if trump was kept off the ballots in several states. We saw that ruling. In any case this is over. Trump will be president again now, and this all goes away. And after the crap the dems pulled with other cases that were far less legit than this one i daresay that by the time he leaves office he'll make sure none of them are in a position to pull that crap again, so this will be the least of their worries Edited July 16 by CdnFox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 11 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: No. Lies that Trump said people will die if he's not elected. Lies that said Trump will be a dictator. Lies that said Trump wants to be Hitler. Lies that said Trump is working for Russia. Lies that said Trump will ban abortions. Lies that said Trump will enslave blacks. Those are the lies that led to the assassination attempt. Lies that you repeat as if they are facts. Lies that you live and breath. Those lies are insidious, inflammatory and disgraceful. Just cause you don't hear what Trump says on FOS LIES does not mean he didn't say them. Duh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 11 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: No. There's virtually no chance it wins appeal. Says who? You? Where did you get your law degree? Trump U? LMAO Cannon has already been leashed twice; three strikes and she's out. The case can be re-filed in at least 2 other districts in which judges have ALREADY ruled the special prosecutor law is legal. 11 hours ago, Nationalist said: You mean like Merchan? Lol...you Libbies are so fcked. You are so wrong, as usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 8 hours ago, Nationalist said: Well...the only way for this to proceed at all, would be for Trump to lose the election. Good luck with that. Even if Trump wins, there are still 3 months to try the case. Duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted July 16 Author Report Share Posted July 16 5 hours ago, robosmith said: Even if Trump wins, there are still 3 months to try the case. Duh. Lol... 1 Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 6 hours ago, robosmith said: Just cause you don't hear what Trump says on FOS LIES does not mean he didn't say them. Duh No. I've heard them, in full context, because I'm not taking MSNBC's word for it. So I dont believe the lies you spew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 6 hours ago, robosmith said: Says who? You? Where did you get your law degree? Trump U? LMAO Cannon has already been leashed twice; three strikes and she's out. The case can be re-filed in at least 2 other districts in which judges have ALREADY ruled the special prosecutor law is legal. You are so wrong, as usual. You are literally making the case for judge shopping because you couldn't get your way. The case can't be brought in other, more friendly, districts or it would have. Jack Smith lost because the SCOTUS said he's not legally appointed. There is no court that can over turn that other than the SCOTUS. It is over. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 (edited) 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: You are literally making the case for judge shopping because you couldn't get your way. The case can't be brought in other, more friendly, districts or it would have. Jack Smith lost because the SCOTUS said he's not legally appointed. There is no court that can over turn that other than the SCOTUS. It is over. YOU'RE LYING. The SCOTUS said NO SUCH THING. Thomas mentioned the possibility in HIS DISSENT. MANY cases have CONFIRMED that special counsels are completely LEGAL. The Washington Post Judge Cannon brushes aside decades of special counsel rulings 12 hours ago Bloomberg.com Trump Judge’s Ruling on Special Counsel Veers From Recent Cases 6 hours ago Edited July 16 by robosmith Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 2 hours ago, robosmith said: Thomas mentioned the possibility in HIS DISSENT. I think he was using SCOTUS as a generalized term here... seeing that Clarence Thomas is part of SCOTUS. Are you a liar because you got it wrong that it was not "HIS DISSENT?" It was in a concurring opinion. Quote LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted July 16 Report Share Posted July 16 3 hours ago, robosmith said: YOU'RE LYING. The SCOTUS said NO SUCH THING. Thomas mentioned the possibility in HIS DISSENT. MANY cases have CONFIRMED that special counsels are completely LEGAL. The Washington Post Judge Cannon brushes aside decades of special counsel rulings 12 hours ago Bloomberg.com Trump Judge’s Ruling on Special Counsel Veers From Recent Cases 6 hours ago Ok, Thomas mentions it in a conquering opinion. That means the SCOTUS supports it. If appeal made it to SCOTUS, they'll stand by that concurrent opinion. It is over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeaverFever Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 23 hours ago, CdnFox said: Really. Which 'democrat' judges would you say are abnormal or bias then? Given how the US works I‘m sure there yave been plenty who have discretely done favours for Democrat associates. But as usual Republicans take everything and dial it up to 11 out of 10 and brazenly commit their graft in broad daylight. 23 hours ago, CdnFox said: I think people expected a decision. Are you suggesting that nobody had asked her to rule on that or something? Usually they clearly state when they will render the decision they don’t just surprise people. You honestly think it’s a coincidence when did this on the very first weekday after the assassination attempt with no heads up? 23 hours ago, CdnFox said: I'm sure that the left leaning media outlets will have any number of legal experts saying "oh this will get overturned" - to be honest given their track record over the last 8 years i wouldn't get my hopes up. Hell the media trotted out plenty who said it was fine if trump was kept off the ballots in several states. We saw that ruling. I’m sure you think there’s nothing unusual about openly and blatantly partisan Republican judges overturning decades of established legal precedent time and again in a series of highly controversial rulings drawn across party lines, always in favour of a Republican candidate while every non-Republican legal expert expresses doubt and surprise……Sure they’re just a bunch of honest guys with no biases whatsoever. Nothing to see here! 12 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Jack Smith lost because the SCOTUS said he's not legally appointed. There is no court that can over turn that other than the SCOTUS. It is over. No it hasn’t gone to SCOTUS. Cannon is a circuit judge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 37 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: No it hasn’t gone to SCOTUS. Cannon is a circuit judge. Try to keep up. Cannon's ruling was based on a concurring opinion to the immunity issue. It stated the Jack Smith appointment didn't follow proper procedure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeaverFever Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 (edited) 19 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Try to keep up. Cannon's ruling was based on a concurring opinion to the immunity issue. It stated the Jack Smith appointment didn't follow proper procedure. Cannon’s ruling can be appealed, period. That’s just a fact and the Department of Justice has already said it will appeal Given that SCOTUS is also Republican controlled and has already demonstrated that they are a weapon of the Republican Party, SCOTUS will probably find an excuse to side with Trump But before then there’s an appeals court that will hear the case PS she didn’t sayJack Smith’s particular appointment didn’t follow proper procedure. She said no Special Counsel has authority which is kind of funny because they’ve been used for decades including in Hunter Biden’s recent and up upcoming trials. Ironically Biden attempted to make similar arguments Trump just did to get his cases dismissed but BOTH Democrat judges in Delaware and California were having none of it. Again just shows how the Dems are operating with integrity while the Republicans blatantly cheat at every turn. Edited July 17 by BeaverFever 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 7 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Ok, Thomas mentions it in a conquering opinion. That means the SCOTUS supports it. If appeal made it to SCOTUS, they'll stand by that concurrent opinion. It is over. Thomas is routinely an outlier so you have NO REASON to believe ^this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 2 hours ago, BeaverFever said: Given how the US works I‘m sure there yave been plenty who have discretely done favours for Democrat associates. But as usual Republicans take everything and dial it up to 11 out of 10 and brazenly commit their graft in broad daylight. So. Republican judges are all bad and terrible and democrats MAY in theory have done something somewhere You see what i mean. I think you see things with rose coloured glasses a bit, Quote Usually they clearly state when they will render the decision they don’t just surprise people. You honestly think it’s a coincidence when did this on the very first weekday after the assassination attempt with no heads up? It's actually entirely common for a judge to release an opinion without prior notice in cases where they are asking for interim relief like this. That actually happens all the time. If she were ruling on a court case (as in guilty not guilty) then that's a different story but when we're talking about interim such as a stay or injunction or something most of the time there's no announcement, as soon as they're ready they go. Now who knows - perhaps she was nearly done and decided to finish up and get it out the door or something but it's not like doing this way would do much for them. It won't change the appeal process, it won't change their recourse etc etc. There's no reason whatsoever to believe the ruling would have been different if trump hadn't been shot, nothing would change other than it tends to bury the news story a bit. But seeing as it's a legal victory for trump i'm not sure why they'd want to bury it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cougar Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 (edited) On 7/15/2024 at 10:13 AM, gatomontes99 said: There was no coup. You still are repeating lies that led to an assassination attempt. There was no coup! (or if there was it wasn't him instigating it?) He did not cheat on taxes! He did not hide and unlawfully keep classified docs! He did not f* Stormy D. and endorse grabbing women by the p* in public. He was not convicted of34 criminal charges! Give us a break! Out of 400,000,000 Americans this is the slimy slug you vote for ???? Just allowing him to still run shows the USA IS A BANANA republic! Edited July 17 by cougar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted July 17 Report Share Posted July 17 46 minutes ago, cougar said: There was no coup! (or if there was it wasn't him instigating it?) He did not cheat on taxes! He did not hide and unlawfully keep classified docs! He did not f* Stormy D. and endorse grabbing women by the p* in public. He was not convicted of34 criminal charges! Give us a break! Out of 400,000,000 Americans this is the slimy slug you vote for ???? Just allowing him to still run shows the USA IS A BANANA republic! So you don't respect the nomination process, you don't respect democracy, everyone is guilty of anything you suspect them of and and if anyone chooses differently than you do then it's a 'banana republic'. Sigh. And people wonder why the US might choose someone like trump over ANYONE on the left. Yeah it's a mystery. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.