|
|
Post by SixOfTheRichest on Nov 22, 2024 6:28:27 GMT
Ohhhh! How terrible. Is Trump is the only one in the corridors of power that has done something like that? Based on what statute makes it a crime? Is that a joke? Are you thick? Read your constitution sometime. Oops, can't read? That explains things. First Trump had to go through a grand jury, which could not have indicted him without a specific statute in law with evidence. Then a jury trial (or just a judge, depending on the state), where, against the same statute, evidence had to be presented beyond doubt. They were all paid off to indict Trump over bogus charges. The weaponization of the justice system to keep him down. It failed you hairyassedgit.
Trump will be exonerated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orlando City Cat on Nov 22, 2024 6:29:19 GMT
Hey Meathead, how's the weather down in Australia?
|
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Nov 22, 2024 6:31:36 GMT
Ohhhh! How terrible. Is Trump is the only one in the corridors of power that has done something like that? Based on what statute makes it a crime? Is that a joke? Are you thick? Read your constitution sometime. Oops, can't read? That explains things. First Trump had to go through a grand jury, which could not have indicted him without a specific statute in law with evidence. Then a jury trial (or just a judge, depending on the state), where, against the same statute, evidence had to be presented beyond doubt. Nothing you just said was correct. 1. There was no evidence. 2. The statute for the predicate crime was never specified. 3. The judge told the jury they could find Trump guilty of a crime non-unanimously, and without specifying what the predicate crime was. This bogus case for non-crimes will absolutely be overturned on appeal. |
|
|
|
Post by Hairynosedwombat on Nov 22, 2024 12:15:17 GMT
Is that a joke? Are you thick? Read your constitution sometime. Oops, can't read? That explains things. First Trump had to go through a grand jury, which could not have indicted him without a specific statute in law with evidence. Then a jury trial (or just a judge, depending on the state), where, against the same statute, evidence had to be presented beyond doubt. Nothing you just said was correct. 1. There was no evidence. 2. The statute for the predicate crime was never specified. 3. The judge told the jury they could find Trump guilty of a crime non-unanimously, and without specifying what the predicate crime was. This bogus case for non-crimes will absolutely be overturned on appeal. You are so fucking thick. Maybe Trump had no money so had to use a public defender. Any real lawyer could get any court case thrown out within minutes if no statute, predicate crime and no evidence. |
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Nov 22, 2024 16:08:37 GMT
Nothing you just said was correct. 1. There was no evidence. 2. The statute for the predicate crime was never specified. 3. The judge told the jury they could find Trump guilty of a crime non-unanimously, and without specifying what the predicate crime was. This bogus case for non-crimes will absolutely be overturned on appeal. You are so fucking thick. Maybe Trump had no money so had to use a public defender. Any real lawyer could get any court case thrown out within minutes if no statute, predicate crime and no evidence. It doesn't matter how good your lawyers are when the judge is a partisan hack running an illegitimate kangaroo court and trying to interfere with an election. He had to cover his mouth when the verdict was being read because he was smiling so widely. These bogus charges are guaranteed to be overturned on appeal. It's a case with literally no evidence, and no crime. |
|
|
|
Post by brokedickdog on Nov 22, 2024 18:25:00 GMT
You are so fucking thick. Maybe Trump had no money so had to use a public defender. Any real lawyer could get any court case thrown out within minutes if no statute, predicate crime and no evidence. It doesn't matter how good your lawyers are when the judge is a partisan hack running an illegitimate kangaroo court and trying to interfere with an election. He had to cover his mouth when the verdict was being read because he was smiling so widely. These bogus charges are guaranteed to be overturned on appeal. It's a case with literally no evidence, and no crime. Hairynosedwombat is Australian and hates Trump. He does not understand that this was lawfare and election interference. "These bogus charges are guaranteed to be overturned on appeal. It's a case with literally no evidence, and no crime." Absolutely! MAGA |
|
