I am asking Trump supporters to engage in an intellectual exercise.

Only a matter of legal semantics.
He raped her with his fingers but because of the way NY law reads we technically call it sexual assault even though everybody knows that rape is just one form of sexual assault.

I doubt this judge actually cares one way or another about Trump, but even if he was a Trump hater what difference would that make?
What exactly are you trying to say here anyway?
That only Trump loving judges should be allowed to rule on his cases so he would always get rulings in his favor? How would that be justice?
BS. Middle of store says nothing. Not until elections.

Just more Borking but lawfare now
 
Fake new.
He did it. He's liable. Guilty too....but we're not allowed to say that. The TWS woke police will scream bloody murder about that other minor technicality that in civil cases they don't determine "guilt" but only liability.
Again, so what. A minor technicality.
He's still guilty.
No evidence, no witnesses, nothing but the word of a lunatic with a political and financial agenda, tried in a kangaroo court with a corrupt judge and jury.
 
Versus the word of a proven pathological liar.

Care to spell out this supposed "agenda?"

How were this judge and jury "corrupt?"
Specific, credible details of corruption on either part?

The lunatic agenda she had was two fold, political, to help the democrats in interfering with the election, and financial to get rich off of him.

The judge should have thrown the case out considering the absolute lack of evidence, and he hamstrung the defense at every turn.
 
No evidence, no witnesses, nothing but the word of a lunatic with a political and financial agenda, tried in a kangaroo court with a corrupt judge and jury.
Plenty of witnesses, testimony backed by paper evidence, and a judge who does not put up with tantrums of a willful man child.

America is in good hands.
 

Forum List

Back
Top