In this country the courts are the end of the road. Trump lost all but one election case in court. Meaning he fucking LOST. But he couldn't respect the way we do things in America and went on a crime spree to get the result he desired.No liberal ever reacts to that little factoid mentioned by yours truly in OP
namely that the US Constitution says that it is the state legislatures that have control over election places, laws, rules and procedures, yet governors and others usurped that role in the last election, thereby violating the US Constitution they swore to uphold.
IMO
case freaking closed
The left is saying in effect that Trump (or any president) should not have an interest in trying to prevent the above from happening or doing anything to ameliorate the situation when it does happen-- not only in 2020 but ever again.
What a bunch of sicko, un-American, criminal-minded *&^%$
FASCISTS
And the taxpayers have to fund these creeps
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Smith trying to get Trump convicted before election, says Attorney Jonathan Turley
- Thread starter 1miseryindex
- Start date
- Jan 19, 2010
- 68,900
- 63,764
- 3,605
He never lost an evidentiary election trial... none of them were heard.... but we and millions of Americans know what happened in 2020 and we will not let it happen again...In this country the courts are the end of the road. Trump lost all but one election case in court. Meaning he fucking LOST. But he couldn't respect the way we do things in America and went on a crime spree to get the result he desired.
BS Filter
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2018
- 43,757
- 26,943
- 2,615
The opinion could be to go through appeals.Pay attention. It's settled. The SC will render an opinion.
None of his cases presented any evidence of fraud, heck they didn't even allege massive voting fraud. That whole massive voting fraud thing was for the public - you. In court it was about minor things like drop boxes and the various states allowing for mail in ballots.He never lost an evidentiary election trial... none of them were heard.... but we and millions of Americans know what happened in 2020 and we will not let it happen again...
Appeal to whom? The SC is the highest court in the country.The opinion could be to go through appeals.
BS Filter
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2018
- 43,757
- 26,943
- 2,615
Smith skipped the appellate court.Appeal to whom? The SC is the highest court in the country.
Yup, and the SC is fine with that.Smith skipped the appellate court.
Funny coming from a liberal, your party kicked God out of your party years ago.God has forsaken Donald Trump.
- Jan 19, 2010
- 68,900
- 63,764
- 3,605
No... none of his cases were heard by a judge or jury... they were all denied to move forward... an evidentiary trial is a hearing where evidence can be heard and none of Trump's cases were allowed by the residing courts... that alone is un American to me... you should brush up on the facts before you come here.... and not the MSM facts you have been fed...None of his cases presented any evidence of fraud, heck they didn't even allege massive voting fraud. That whole massive voting fraud thing was for the public - you. In court it was about minor things like drop boxes and the various states allowing for mail in ballots.
We on this message board went over it ad nauseam. Maybe you missed it.No... none of his cases were heard by a judge or jury... they were all denied to move forward... an evidentiary trial is a hearing where evidence can be heard and none of Trump's cases were allowed by the residing courts... that alone is un American to me... you should brush up on the facts before you come here.... and not the MSM facts you have been fed...
SavannahMann
Platinum Member
- Nov 16, 2016
- 14,281
- 6,667
- 365
Supreme Court: Trump must respond to special counsel’s presidential immunity petition before Christmas
The Supreme Court has agreed to expedite this appeal and asked Trump’s lawyers to respond to the motion by next Wednesday December 20www.foxnews.com
This blows me away
But why should it? I should be used to the childish, un-American, demonic, anti-Christ BS of the left.
from site
If the justices get involved, they would have an opportunity to rule for the first time on whether ex-presidents enjoy immunity from prosecution. Justice Department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president.
Elsewhere from site:
Trump lawyers, meanwhile, have said he cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president — a claim that prosecutors have vigorously rejected.
Comment:
It says "Trump cannot be charged for actions that fell within his official duties as president."
isn't it part of a president's duties to uphold the Constitution?
Election laws were violated in the last election, laws written in the US Constitution which states that the state legislators have control over election places, times and procedures. Yet, last time, governors and others usurped the state legislatures.
I really don’t understand the outrage. If Trump’s argument is valid and he is immune to prosecution as President then the cases end. They’re over. Done. Cases would be dismissed in both Washington and Georgia.
So why the outrage about trying to get an answer now if that is the case?
He is right, liberal judges wouldn't hear the cases. Just wait, you're fixing to see. Just look how democrats are treating minorities, compared to illegals.We on this message board went over it ad nauseam. Maybe you missed it.
- Jan 19, 2010
- 68,900
- 63,764
- 3,605
You've only been here 6 months... don't try and tell me what we have gone over... you weren't here...We on this message board went over it ad nauseam. Maybe you missed it.
And who told you that - Trump, the professional victim.He is right, liberal judges wouldn't hear the cases. Just wait, you're fixing to see. Just look how democrats are treating minorities, compared to illegals.
There is not a day going by that the stollen election isn't the topic of one thread or another. You can comb through every case and look for yourself, cause I'm sure as hell ain't gonna do it for you.You've only been here 6 months... don't try and tell me what we have gone over... you weren't here...
- Jan 19, 2010
- 68,900
- 63,764
- 3,605
You have only been here a short while... new members sound kind of dumb to us at first until they catch up...There is not a day going by that the stollen election isn't the topic of one thread or another. You can comb through every case and look for yourself, cause I'm sure as hell ain't gonna do it for you.
You have yet to catch up....
BS Filter
Diamond Member
- Jan 12, 2018
- 43,757
- 26,943
- 2,615
You don't know that.Yup, and the SC is fine with that.
Yes I do. They informed Trump to submit his rebuttal by Dec 20You don't know that.
Catch up on MAGA crackpottery?You have only been here a short while... new members sound kind of dumb to us at first until they catch up...
You have yet to catch up....
- Jan 19, 2010
- 68,900
- 63,764
- 3,605
No but known facts would help... turn off the news you are watching you are being shortchanged....Catch up on MAGA crackpottery?
Similar threads
- Replies
- 76
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 185
- Replies
- 92
- Views
- 3K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 10
- Views
- 25
- Replies
- 0
- Views
- 1
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8218
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 475
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-