DOJ Wins Appeal At 11th Circuit Over Trump Judges Controversial Ruling

[otto105]

And? If you think I’m a poster who only posts for one “side” and avoids factual evidence to determine to keep it a clean argument, you are wrong, again. The topic is how the Steele dossier originated. Your “start date” was with public sharing that had nothing to do with how it originated and months afterwards.

My start date was when it was financed. Which is when any project gets started.

 

[ClaireH]

Wow, another conservative claiming victim status.

Interesting take little Otto. Fact: Multiple Lame stream media outlets have been vocalizing their “announcement” of, “oh look, another Trump appointed judge goes against Trump”. Even they don’t recognize the implication of their announcement/implication that loyal SC members would only vote the way they would think the president who nominated them want them to- good grief.

You are anti-Trump clearly, but your assessment of that post indicating “victim status” when the poster gave an opinion that is backed by evidence that can clearly be seen and/or heard firsthand?

Informed readers know what’s up: LSM does it’s thing with supporting all measures, good and bad, coming from self-labeled leftists and affiliates. LSM, as well as White House staff under Biden with a committee working long hours- 6 months- for the term ultra MAGA lol- LSM attempts at slams that are not even slams but indicate that Trump was a fair president.

Due to your previous post I have to ask: do you think US presidents should strictly use their political bias to make the determination upon which person is best fit for a US Supreme Court position? Your assessment of the previous post indicates in the affirmative, but I’m sure you will say otherwise.

 

[otto105]

Interesting take little Otto. Fact: Multiple Lame stream media outlets have been vocalizing their “announcement” of, “oh look, another Trump appointed judge goes against Trump”. Even they don’t recognize the implication of their announcement/implication that loyal SC members would only vote the way they would think the president who nominated them want them to- good grief.

You are anti-Trump clearly, but your assessment of that post indicating “victim status” when the poster gave an opinion that is backed by evidence that can clearly be seen and/or heard firsthand?

Informed readers know what’s up: LSM does it’s thing with supporting all measures, good and bad, coming from self-labeled leftists and affiliates. LSM, as well as White House staff under Biden with a committee working long hours- 6 months- for the term ultra MAGA lol- LSM attempts at slams that are not even slams but indicate that Trump was a fair president.

Due to your previous post I have to ask: do you think US presidents should strictly use their political bias to make the determination upon which person is best fit for a US Supreme Court position? Your assessment of the previous post indicates in the affirmative, but I’m sure you will say otherwise.

Okay little sara palin, you're a grown adult and shouldn't use terms like "lame stream media".

It undermines any creditability.

As for pointing at judges for bias, I would advise you look at the former 1-term president and how he views the loyalty of the ones that he nominated.

 

[Oldestyle]

No, no it's not false.

Conservative Website First Funded Anti-Trump Research by Firm That Later Produced Dossier (Published 2017)

Fusion GPS was hired to do candidate research on Trump by I believe Jeb Bush, Otto but once Bush dropped out of the race, Hillary Clinton then hired Fusion GPS to run a smear campaign against Trump. It was the Clinton Campaign and the DNC that paid for the "dossiers" that Richard Steele made up! Probably the sleaziest political dirty trick I've seen in my life time! That's on Clinton and the Democrats!

 

[Stann]

Wrong. You are arguing and you don’t know what the duck you’re talking about.

Cases have absolutely gotten dismissed. But there haven’t been evidentiary hearings precisely because the cases got dismissed prior to such hearings.

Whatever, you still don't win, trump never had any evidence to prove his false cases. He should have been charged for wasting the Court's time.

 

[Oldestyle]

My start date was when it was financed. Which is when any project gets started.

That's the same lie that you on the left used to cover up "Fast & Furious, Otto! You claimed it was just a continuation of a program that the Bush Administration began when in reality the Bush Administration stopped the program because they found they couldn't track guns going across the border. Barack Obama and Eric Holder started the program back up again after it had been shelved. Then they tried to claim that it was a "Bush program" when the whole thing blew up in their faces with the murder of Border Patrol agent Terry!

 

[Stann]

Fusion GPS was hired to do candidate research on Trump by I believe Jeb Bush, Otto but once Bush dropped out of the race, Hillary Clinton then hired Fusion GPS to run a smear campaign against Trump. It was the Clinton Campaign and the DNC that paid for the "dossiers" that Richard Steele made up! Probably the sleaziest political dirty trick I've seen in my life time! That's on Clinton and the Democrats!

Didn't Trump's smear campaign destroy Hillary's chance to win a sweeping victory over him. She did win the popular vote, unfortunately he got the electoral vote. That's probably something that should be investigated since he is now actively promoting bias in the electoral college. Perhaps you did it back then and nobody noticed.

 

[Oldestyle]

Didn't Trump's smear campaign destroy Hillary's chance to win a sweeping victory over him. She did win the popular vote, unfortunately he got the electoral vote. That's probably something that should be investigated since he is now actively promoting bias in the electoral college. Perhaps you did it back then and nobody noticed.

Do you understand what a "smear" is, Stann? Clinton and Fusion GPS created false "dossiers" that they released right before the election to make Trump look bad! That's a smear.
Trump simply pointed out that Clinton lied about running the State Department through two servers that she'd hidden at her home. That's NOT a smear...that was the truth!

 

[ClaireH]

Okay little sara palin, you're a grown adult and shouldn't use terms like "lame stream media".

It undermines any creditability.

As for pointing at judges for bias, I would advise you look at the former 1-term president and how he views the loyalty of the ones that he nominated.

Well little Otto, you earned 2 points using the phrase little sarah palin, but never a fan of Sarah P so 1 point deducted -still in the good using little lol

Are you saying SP originally came up with that phrase? If so, my hat is off to her!

Stop with your circular argument in your last paragraph. No US president should be nominating a SC candidate based strictly on political bias who isn’t going qualified for the job

 

[Stann]

Do you understand what a "smear" is, Stann? Clinton and Fusion GPS created false "dossiers" that they released right before the election to make Trump look bad! That's a smear.
Trump simply pointed out that Clinton lied about running the State Department through two servers that she'd hidden at her home. That's NOT a smear...that was the truth!

She was cleared of all wrongdoing. That was a smear campaign
" Lock her up ! " That was the theme of the smear campaign.

 

[Oldestyle]

She was cleared of all wrongdoing. That was a smear campaign
" Lock her up ! " That was the theme of the smear campaign.

The DOJ refused to bring charges against Hillary but James Comey was quite clear that she had broken the law, Stann! The fact that happened a short time after Bill Clinton had the secret meeting on the tarmac with Loretta Lynch has a palpable stench!

 

[otto105]

Well little Otto, you earned 2 points using the phrase little sarah palin, but never a fan of Sarah P so 1 point deducted -still in the good using little lol

Are you saying SP originally came up with that phrase? If so, my hat is off to her!

Stop with your circular argument in your last paragraph. No US president should be nominating a SC candidate based strictly on political bias who isn’t going qualified for the job

Sure, the former 1-term president nominated several judges labeled unqualified because they would be loyal to political considerations.

 

[Leo123]

Trump was blackmailed into his SC nominations by the Federalist Society, a purely ideological partisan group. The court's credibility rating among Americans has never been lower, at least in my lifetime. It's a purely political entity that doesn't give a damn about the Constitution.

And Democrats are blackmailed by the NAACP as evidenced by the SCOTUS nominee who couldn't say what a woman is.

 

[Stann]

The DOJ refused to bring charges against Hillary but James Comey was quite clear that she had broken the law, Stann! The fact that happened a short time after Bill Clinton had the secret meeting on the tarmac with Loretta Lynch has a palpable stench!

So based on one man's opinion you've convicted Hillary. Good for you, you should probably move to Russia that's how Justice works in Russia.

 

[Augustine_]

And Democrats are blackmailed by the NAACP as evidenced by the SCOTUS nominee who couldn't say what a woman is.

They compete with dozens of other interests. The GOP wouldn't allow such dissent.

 

[Oldestyle]

So based on one man's opinion you've convicted Hillary. Good for you, you should probably move to Russia that's how Justice works in Russia.

James Comey was the Director of the FBI, Stann and was speaking in that capacity for the entire Department of Justice.
Do you want to claim that Clinton DIDN'T break the law? Do you really want to go down that road, Stann?

 

[otto105]

James Comey was the Director of the FBI, Stann and was speaking in that capacity for the entire Department of Justice.
Do you want to claim that Clinton DIDN'T break the law? Do you really want to go down that road, Stann?

What law did she break?

 

[Oldestyle]

Sure, the former 1-term president nominated several judges labeled unqualified because they would be loyal to political considerations.

You on the left always claim that Justices nominated by GOP Presidents are "extreme" and yet if you look at the Justices nominated by both sides? None of the Democratic nominees are moderates. Many of the GOP nominees turn out to be just that! Yet you STILL want to claim that they are "unqualified"?

 

[Stann]

They compete with dozens of other interests. The GOP wouldn't allow such dissent.

Not much is true, the GOP is a totalitarian regime.

 

[Oldestyle]

What law did she break?

Well let's start with her lies to Congressional investigators that she'd turned over all materials related to the deaths in Benghazi, Otto!