Little Jimmy Comey indicted... again

[West]

Looks like Jimmy broke more laws. 

May have incited violence/assassination against Donnie

 

 

 

Edited April 28 by West

[Hodad]

This is truly, deeply stupid. 

A majority of the country would like to 86 47. We're all allowed to say it openly and freely. There is neither threat or incitement. There is nothing remotely against the law. This also will go nowhere in a hurry. 

Except that this certainly gives Comey a blank check to sue the administration for malicious prosecution, which he will certainly win. And with any luck, some prosecutors should be disbarred. 

Will be fascinating to see people defend this nakedly corrupt abuse of power.

 

 

[Nationalist]

8 minutes ago, Hodad said:

This is truly, deeply stupid. 

A majority of the country would like to 86 47. We're all allowed to say it openly and freely. There is neither threat or incitement. There is nothing remotely against the law. This also will go nowhere in a hurry. 

Except that this certainly gives Comey a blank check to sue the administration for malicious prosecution, which he will certainly win. And with any luck, some prosecutors should be disbarred. 

Will be fascinating to see people defend this nakedly corrupt abuse of power.

 

 

Errr...the last indictment was killed because of a technicality concerning the state's lawyer, not the charge. By bringing this new charge, all the facts of the WHOLE CASE will be tried.

Enjoy that...

[John Johnston]

Guess Trump and his DOJ are not finished being losers. 

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Errr...the last indictment was killed because of a technicality concerning the state's lawyer, not the charge. By bringing this new charge, all the facts of the WHOLE CASE will be tried.

Enjoy that...

It's a completely different case.

We get it. You hate free speech. You hate taking pictures of free speech on the beach. You've made your fascist aims pretty clear. 

I don't think America will accept them. 

 

[John Stone]

37 minutes ago, John Johnston said:

Guess Trump and his DOJ are not finished being losers. 

........... winning is moot .............. that would be gravy. 

No, it's more of a warning to others ........... a demonstration of his power ........ the weaponization-in-chief directive to the  DOJ, Todd Blanche. 

Todd isn't even confirmed ........ the carpet is still wet from the blow job he gave his boss fer fk's sake. 

Next up is Cash.............. either confirmed in his job thru some patronizing act or (likely) fired. 

[Hodad]

22 minutes ago, John Stone said:

........... winning is moot .............. that would be gravy. 

No, it's more of a warning to others ........... a demonstration of his power ........ the weaponization-in-chief directive to the  DOJ, Todd Blanche. 

Todd isn't even confirmed ........ the carpet is still wet from the blow job he gave his boss fer fk's sake. 

Next up is Cash.............. either confirmed in his job thru some patronizing act or (likely) fired. 

I would expect some serious pushback on this during the confirmation hearing--even from Republicans. There are a lot of the who simply aren't radical and ready enough to ride with Trump to the elimination of free speech. 

[John Johnston]

21 minutes ago, John Stone said:

........... winning is moot .............. that would be gravy. 

No, it's more of a warning to others ........... a demonstration of his power ........ the weaponization-in-chief directive to the  DOJ, Todd Blanche. 

Todd isn't even confirmed ........ the carpet is still wet from the blow job he gave his boss fer fk's sake. 

Next up is Cash.............. either confirmed in his job thru some patronizing act or (likely) fired. 

The Trump Clown Show goes on...

[John Johnston]

A Pedophile protector running the DOJ. America has sure gone down the toilet fast. 

Weasels on Parade. 

[John Stone]

5 minutes ago, Hodad said:

I would expect some serious pushback on this during the confirmation hearing--even from Republicans. There are a lot of the who simply aren't radical and ready enough to ride with Trump to the elimination of free speech. 

................ I'd remind u that it was that clown show that confirmed this jack wagon ......a dangerous clown. (IT)

 

Edited April 28 by John Stone

[gatomontes99]

You can't threaten POTUS. He has had 4 assassination attempts against him. This b.s. has to stop and the best way to stop it is to make an example out of someone. 

[Hodad]

4 minutes ago, John Stone said:

................ I'd remind u that it was that clown show that confirmed this jack wagon ......a dangerous clown. (IT)

 

Science, they don't understand. Free speech, they can grasp. 

 

[Hodad]

3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

You can't threaten POTUS. He has had 4 assassination attempts against him. This b.s. has to stop and the best way to stop it is to make an example out of someone. 

It is asinine to characterize that as a threat. It's not.

And as soon as some of you snowflakes tried to characterize it that way, Comey was very gracious and took down the post, noted his surprise at such a mischaracterization and disavowed violence. Nobody anywhere actually thinks that Comey threatened the POTUS. Todd Blanche doesn't actually think it. You don't actually think it. A jury certainly isn't going to think it. 

You can pretend. You can defend this nakedly malicious, corrupt prosecution if you want, but it is what it is. And it's going nowhere. 

[gatomontes99]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

It is asinine to characterize that as a threat. It's not.

But it is because enough of you nut jobs keep making runs at him. 

[Hodad]

34 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

But it is because enough of you nut jobs keep making runs at him. 

Doesn't change the nature of Comey's speech. 

And "you nutjobs" include a registered Republican, a Trump supporter angry about Trump's position on Ukraine, and the latest, who appears to have no party affiliation. 

I assume that anybody who tries to assassinate the president is a nutjobs. Maybe you should leave it there, seeing as your attempt to smear the other party isn't working out. 

[gatomontes99]

Just now, Hodad said:

Doesn't change the nature of Comey's speech. 

When the nature of the speech can be reasonably interpreted to infer violence, it is not free speech. 

 

2 minutes ago, Hodad said:

And "you nutjobs" include a registered Republican, a Trump supporter angry about Trump's position on Ukraine, and the latest, who appears to have no party affiliation. 

They are still reacting to the left's characterizations of Trump, making them lwnjs in my book.

 

4 minutes ago, Hodad said:

I assume that anybody who tries to assassinate the president is a nutjobs. Maybe you should leave it there, seeing as your attempt to smear the other party isn't working out.

It isn't a smear when it is true... Not true... Correction. The key and only policy of the left at this moment. 

[Hodad]

36 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

When the nature of the speech can be reasonably interpreted to infer violence, it is not free speech. 

 

They are still reacting to the left's characterizations of Trump, making them lwnjs in my book.

 

It isn't a smear when it is true... Not true... Correction. The key and only policy of the left at this moment. 

That's the problem, it can't be reasonably interpreted as a threat. One would have to be entirely unreasonable.

It's restaurant slang. That's how the world understands it, even if it's being used referentially in another context. 

You don't believe it was a threat.

There obviously won't be a conviction, but still, you are going to argue that the government should try to put a man in prison for something you don't even believe he's guilty of. 

Think about how gross that is? How morally bankrupt. How dishonest. How sold-your-soul to a would-be dictator that is. Jeebus, that's messed up.

Edited April 29 by Hodad

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, Hodad said:

It's a completely different case.

We get it. You hate free speech. You hate taking pictures of free speech on the beach. You've made your fascist aims pretty clear. 

I don't think America will accept them. 

 

Libbie...you have no right to argue for free speech.

Enjoy the trial.

[Hodad]

22 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Libbie...you have no right to argue for free speech.

Enjoy the trial.

Lol. You don't seem to know anything about rights. 

 

There won't be a trial. 90% chance this case will be dismissed. On account of the only actual case here being the eventual case for vindictive prosecution.

Edited April 29 by Hodad

[gatomontes99]

20 minutes ago, Hodad said:

That's the problem, it can't be reasonably interpreted as a threat. One would have to be entirely unreasonable.

But your side is totally unreasonable. That is why it is so dangerous. 

 

22 minutes ago, Hodad said:

It's restaurant slang. That's how the world understands it, even if it's being used referentially in another context. 

86" is the standard length of a grave. For the side that is so darn worried about the precision of preferred pronouns, you sure are fast and loose with the death slings. 

 

24 minutes ago, Hodad said:

There obviously won't be a conviction, but still, you are going to argue that the government should try to put a man in prison for something you don't even believe he's guilty of. 

We don't know that. He may or may not be convicted. But he is indicted and it still stands that your side is bat fücking shit crazy. 

[Hodad]

3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

. 

 

86" is the standard length of a grave. For the side that is so darn worried about the precision of preferred pronouns, you sure are fast and loose with the death slings. 

 

 

Lol. No, it's not. Get off of Twitter. 

Quote

We don't know that. He may or may not be convicted. But he is indicted and it still stands that your side is bat fücking shit crazy. 

And it still stands that you're completely dishonest and are taking the position that it's an appropriate use of the justice system to put political opponents in prison for crimes which you don't even believe were committed. Gross.

[Nationalist]

7 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Lol. You don't seem to know anything about rights. 

 

There won't be a trial. 90% chance this case will be dismissed. On account of the only actual case here being the eventual case for vindictive prosecution.

You dont seem to know anything about hypocrisy. 

[gatomontes99]

5 hours ago, Hodad said:

It is asinine to characterize that as a threat. It's not.

And as soon as some of you snowflakes tried to characterize it that way, Comey was very gracious and took down the post, noted his surprise at such a mischaracterization and disavowed violence. Nobody anywhere actually thinks that Comey threatened the POTUS. Todd Blanche doesn't actually think it. You don't actually think it. A jury certainly isn't going to think it. 

You can pretend. You can defend this nakedly malicious, corrupt prosecution if you want, but it is what it is. And it's going nowhere. 

At least he didn't say "march peacefully and patriotically." 

Y'all, Comey especially, made the process is the punishment a thing. Don't like it, don't start it. 

[West]

Leftists are really crying foul here. This after telling us for five years that Trump incited "insurrection" by suggesting that people "fight" a rigged election. 

Meanwhile Lil Jimmy can make veiled threats against a sitting president and they are fine with it.

[robosmith]

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Errr...the last indictment was killed because of a technicality concerning the state's lawyer, not the charge. By bringing this new charge, all the facts of the WHOLE CASE will be tried.

Enjoy that...

Fortunately for Comey, you have ZERO legal expertise but still pretend you do.

The meaning of "86" is far too ambiguous to PROVE INTENT of VIOLENCE.

Do you have the courage of your convictions to take my bet on this charge ending in a conviction?  LMAO

You chickened out last time fortunately for you. 

Quote

To "86" (eighty-six) something or someone means to get rid of, discard, cancel, or refuse service, particularly in restaurant, bar, or general service settings. It acts as a verb ("let’s 86 that idea") or a noun to indicate an item is out of stock, often originating from 1930s soda fountain or Prohibition-era slang. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Usage Examples

• Restaurants/Bars: "We have to 86 the salmon" (run out of it) or "Go ahead and 86 that customer" (refuse service/eject them).
• General Use: "Let's 86 that plan" (cancel it) or "I'm going to 86 this old couch" (get rid of it).
• Historical/Alternative: Refers to a "no" or "nix" to an order, or, in more extreme contexts, to eliminate/kill. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Synonyms

• Get rid of
• Discard/Cancel
• Refuse/Deny
• Eliminate/Remove
• Throw out/Eject [1, 2, 3, 4]