Jump to content

DOJs chief of public affairs admits the cases against Trump are nonsense, perversion of justice, politically motivated


Recommended Posts

Posted (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 by CdnFox

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
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. 

Posted

If this is true, Merrick Garland, Alvin Bragg and Jack Smith should prosecuted.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
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

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
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.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted (edited)

Tbf, this guy is saying that everything he said he didn't believe and isn't true. Lol!

 

Edited by gatomontes99

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
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.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
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. 

Posted
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.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
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 :)  

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
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.

Posted
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.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
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

Posted
6 minutes ago, robosmith said:

ftfy....

Lmao...you can't even get fify right.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
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

Posted
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?

  • Haha 1

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
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.

 

Posted
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

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

Posted
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?

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
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...

r39fvuc7pmx81.jpg?auto=webp&s=8106f1fd88

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,907
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    derek848
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Doowangle earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Barquentine went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...