West Posted September 5 Report Share Posted September 5 Disgusting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 What's disgusting is that you believe ONE GUY'S TWEET is evidence. It's not even sworn testimony. Duh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 (edited) 9 minutes ago, robosmith said: What's disgusting is that you believe ONE GUY'S TWEET is evidence. It's not even sworn testimony. Duh You're drooling again 15 minutes ago, West said: Disgusting Yeah, I don't think anyone had any doubts about this to begin with. It's not really news. The question is what happens now. Are there consequences to this kind of behavior or not? Edited September 6 by CdnFox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted September 6 Author Report Share Posted September 6 2 minutes ago, CdnFox said: You're drooling again Yeah, I don't think anyone had any doubts about this to begin with. It's not really news. The question is what happens now. Are there consequences to this kind of behavior or not? America is under a communist dictatorship being propped up by a crooked legal system. Free and fair elections are a thing of the past now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrakHoBarbie Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 1 minute ago, West said: Free and fair elections are a thing of the past now. This news is such a relief. Now I don't have to worry that Donald might Win the election. Whew!! Boy, do I feel better. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 If this is true, Merrick Garland, Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith should prosecuted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 2 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: If this is true, Merrick Garland, Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith should prosecuted. They are largely protected legally against such things. If anyone can sue a prosecutor or a judge just because they were wrong we'd have to let all the prisoners and criminals go free to make room for the judges and prosecutors in prison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 1 minute ago, CdnFox said: They are largely protected legally against such things. If anyone can sue a prosecutor or a judge just because they were wrong we'd have to let all the prisoners and criminals go free to make room for the judges and prosecutors in prison Ah, but there are laws against abusing their office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 (edited) Tbf, this guy is saying that everything he said he didn't believe and isn't true. Lol! Edited September 6 by gatomontes99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 54 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Ah, but there are laws against abusing their office. That is an insanely High bar to reach. The only angle I can see that might possibly work would be commenting on how the judge's daughter profited immensely from the court's trial. But even then they might argue he should have recused himself but it's just really really hard to make a case of abuse of power in a case like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted September 6 Author Report Share Posted September 6 47 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Tbf, this guy is saying that everything he said he didn't believe and isn't true. Lol! Look for Garland to target the whistleblower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 29 minutes ago, CdnFox said: That is an insanely High bar to reach. The only angle I can see that might possibly work would be commenting on how the judge's daughter profited immensely from the court's trial. But even then they might argue he should have recused himself but it's just really really hard to make a case of abuse of power in a case like this. Nah, the judge isn't the key. But I guarantee you there are electronic communications that indict these guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 52 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Tbf, this guy is saying that everything he said he didn't believe and isn't true. Lol! Well NOW it's interesting. As we all know, a politician's position can never be counted on until it's officially denied Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 2 hours ago, CdnFox said: You're drooling again lDIOTIC comments like ^this are why you're on IGNORE. 2 hours ago, CdnFox said: Yeah, I don't think.... You're right up to ^this point....the rest that I snipped is DRIVEL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 2 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Well NOW it's interesting. As we all know, a politician's position can never be counted on until it's officially denied Effectively, he said he was just trying to impress a girl. I mean, if you are going to lie, saying you were a horny old man trying to get the girl isnkind of believable. But the stuff he said was pretty technical. It didn't sound like b.s. he sounded pretty sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 2 hours ago, West said: America is under a communist dictatorship being propped up by a crooked legal system. Free and fair elections are a thing of the past now. Just cause YOUR GUY is being charged WITH EVIDENCE IN COURT, does NOT make our legal system "crooked," nor does Trump's ATTEMPTS to overthrow the election HE'S ADMITTED HE LOST (by a whisker), say ANYTHING about "Free and fair elections" being passe. Like your FAILURE to present EVIDENCE, ^these OPINIONS mean NOTHING. 1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said: If this is true, Merrick Garland, Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith should prosecuted. IF you had a brain, you wouldn't jump to false premises. 1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said: Ah, but there are laws against abusing their office. Only against Trump, right? Otherwise they're SOP. Duh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 13 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said: Nah, the judge isn't the key. But I guarantee you IMAGINE there are electronic communications that indict these guys. ftfy.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 6 minutes ago, robosmith said: ftfy.... Lmao...you can't even get fify right. 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted September 6 Author Report Share Posted September 6 20 minutes ago, robosmith said: Just cause YOUR GUY is being charged WITH EVIDENCE IN COURT, does NOT make our legal system "crooked," nor does Trump's ATTEMPTS to overthrow the election HE'S ADMITTED HE LOST (by a whisker), say ANYTHING about "Free and fair elections" being passe. Like your FAILURE to present EVIDENCE, ^these OPINIONS mean NOTHING. IF you had a brain, you wouldn't jump to false premises. Only against Trump, right? Otherwise they're SOP. Duh A high up person in the DOJ admits these court cases are a sham and you continue to be blinded by propaganda and refuse to acknowledge reality. Sad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 1 hour ago, robosmith said: lDIOTIC comments like ^this are why you're on IGNORE. I'm on 'ignore' because you're scared spitless of me. Whereas everyone else just laughs at you i take the time to point out why you're wrong with facts and reason and it upsets you EVERYONE makes fun of you, you would have to ban the entire place if THAT was a good enough reason to ignore people Also the fact you respond to me makes me seriously question whether you understand what 'ignore' means. In any case i don't really need you to respond to make fun of your silly comments - we all get a chuckle from you 1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said: Lmao...you can't even get fify right. Maybe you should ftf him? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 3 hours ago, gatomontes99 said: Lmao...you can't even get fify right. You can't even understand alternatives: "fixed that for you," is far more common than your version. LMAO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 3 hours ago, West said: A high up person in the DOJ admits these court cases are a sham and you continue to be blinded by propaganda and refuse to acknowledge reality. Sad I acknowledge the REALITY it is ONLY one man's OPINION and NOT evidence of any kind. And probably paid for that OPINION by RepubliCONS. AKA, you've been DUPED, as USUAL. The law in NYS is NOT subject to the OPINIONS of the Federal DoJ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 34 minutes ago, robosmith said: You can't even understand alternatives: "fixed that for you," is far more common than your version. LMAO Nobody ever uses that ever anywhere you derranged little troll of a man. Fify is the correct version and the one you've used in the past. You just made a spelling mistake, get over it. Yeash. It's like someone took your soother away 42 minutes ago, robosmith said: I acknowledge the REALITY it is ONLY one man's OPINION and NOT evidence of any kind. And probably paid for that OPINION by RepubliCONS. AKA, you've been DUPED, as USUAL. The law in NYS is NOT subject to the OPINIONS of the Federal DoJ. Well we know that's a lie. The man is a highly qualified professional in a position to know. His opinion is expert and would be admissible in any court of law. So it is indeed evidence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatomontes99 Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 4 hours ago, robosmith said: You can't even understand alternatives: "fixed that for you," is far more common than your version. LMAO Omg...how old are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legato Posted September 6 Report Share Posted September 6 8 hours ago, robosmith said: I acknowledge the REALITY it is ONLY one man's OPINION and NOT evidence of any kind. And probably paid for that OPINION by RepubliCONS. AKA, you've been DUPED, as USUAL. The law in NYS is NOT subject to the OPINIONS of the Federal DoJ. Here's a little help... 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.