Judge tosses Trump suit v. United States over the raid

[The5thHorseman]

False. She didn’t “argue” her ruling. She made her ruling. And it absolutely did make sense. It found equitable jurisdiction based on the incredibly unique nature of a case involving the immediately prior President of the United States.

Yes, the appellate court shot that down. That doesn’t mean that their rational was necessarily correct. But because they are a higher court, their interpretation did necessarily prevail.

False dichotomy. She may even have been perfectly correct. That’s how case law gets made.

There is no doubt that you are a hack, however.

It found equitable jurisdiction based on the incredibly unique nature of a case involving the immediately prior President of the United States

"Incredibly unique"

"Immediately prior"

There is no doubt that you are a hack, however.

False dichotomy. She may even have been perfectly correct.

On the strength of the exceptions you listed above?

“The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so.”

I doubt it.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Why did she need to be forced? A competent judge would have done their duty based on the law, not because they're afraid of disbarment or impeachment.

It's the Walkback of Shame...

 

[BackAgain]

"Incredibly unique"

"Immediately prior"




On the strength of the exceptions you listed above?

“The law is clear. We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigations after the execution of the warrant. Nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so.”

I doubt it.

It is normal practice to credit your sources. Your source is the appellate court ruling.

We already established that they disagreed with the lower court. So your ignorant post adds exactly nothing to this conversation. Your posts rarely add anything of value.

 

[BackAgain]

It's the Walkback of Shame...

There was no forcing. She ruled. They overruled. She complied. Happens all the time. It’s the nature of appellate decisions. Sometimes they affirm and sometimes they don’t.

 

[The5thHorseman]

It is normal practice to credit your sources. Your source is the appellate court ruling.

We already established that they disagreed with the lower court. So your ignorant post adds exactly nothing to this conversation. Your posts rarely add anything of value.

That's obvious from looking at it.

It wasn't just that they "disagreed", they rejected her improvisation unanimously and emphatically.

You can buff that turd all you want, but that's a spanking

 

[BackAgain]

That's obvious from looking at it.

It wasn't just that they "disagreed", they rejected her improvisation unanimously and emphatically.

So what?

You can buff that turd all you want, but that's a spanking

No. It’s not. And your effort to spin doesn’t work because you simply don’t know Wtf you’re bleating about.

 

[The5thHorseman]

So what?

No. It’s not. And your effort to spin doesn’t work because you simply don’t know Wtf you’re bleating about.

The fuck I don't.

 

[BackAgain]

The fuck I don't.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Not that there's a chance you'll answer..

Where did you stand on the dismissal of Michael Flynn's case?

 

[BackAgain]

Not that there's a chance you'll answer..

Where did you stand on the dismissal of Michael Flynn's case?

Lol. This ^ coming from the pussy who can’t defend his own assertions and goes so far as to refuse to even try.

Go start a thread instead of constantly going off topic. If your thread is of any interest, maybe I’ll step in.

Meanwhile, this thread is about how the judge allegedly in the tank for Trump adhered to the ruling calling for the case’s dismissal.

 

[Porthos]

Judge Cannon Forced to Toss Trump’s Special Master Bid

Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case Monday morning.

www.thedailybeast.com

But but but, I had been assured by our liberals that the judge was horrible and in the bag for Trump.

She is in the bag. Did her job, obstruct justice for as long as you can.
b y k that.

 

[beagle9]

Judge Cannon Forced to Toss Trump’s Special Master Bid

Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the case Monday morning.

www.thedailybeast.com

But but but, I had been assured by our liberals that the judge was horrible and in the bag for Trump.

All that aside, Trump just can't catch a break with these knucklehead's. He'll have to leave it up to the house judiciary committee to get the investigation going against Hunter and the big guy, otherwise if there's any hope left in totally vindicating the himself. I hope the nation doesn't let Trump fall, because the choice of it being Biden and company over Trump is NOT a better alternative.

 

[BackAgain]

She is in the bag. Did her job, obstruct justice for as long as you can.
b y k that.

You’re an uninformed but dishonest idiot. And we can all know that by reading bullshit posts like the above-quoted meadow paddy.

 

[The5thHorseman]

Lol. This ^ coming from the pussy who can’t defend his own assertions and goes so far as to refuse to even try.

Go start a thread instead of constantly going off topic. If your thread is of any interest, maybe I’ll step in.

Meanwhile, this thread is about how the judge allegedly in the tank for Trump adhered to the ruling calling for the case’s dismissal.

Bluster on. I smell the fake.

Cannon's demise was predicted from the moment her decision was originally released, for the reasons cited in the rebuke.

Two Grifty appointees and one from Scrub...all members of the Federalist Society.

 

[Delldude]

I'm coming in to this thread late, but in case no one told you, she was ORDERED TO drop the case by the Appeals court...12th curcuit, i believe?

Big win when the SM was over, back to square one............DUH

 

[beagle9]

Nope. I like the law. I also think most jurists work hard to follow the law. Trump's problem is that he doesn't believe in the law. He thinks everyone is a crook.

He thinks right. After all the con artist poser's he's been fighting for the last 6+ years, he's got dam good experience with recognizing the crooks.

 

[The5thHorseman]

He thinks right. After all the con artist poser's he's been fighting for the last 6+ years, he's got dam good experience with recognizing the crooks.

Then why so reluctant to speak out.....under oath?

 

[surada]

He thinks right. After all the con artist poser's he's been fighting for the last 6+ years, he's got dam good experience with recognizing the crooks.

Do you recognize the crooks?

House Democrats introduce legislation to bar Trump from office under 14th Amendment

A group of 40 House Democrats, led by Rep. David Cicilline (R.I.), introduced legislation on Thursday to bar former President Trump from holding future federal office under the 14th Amendment. Sect…

thehill.com

 

[beagle9]

Then why so reluctant to speak out.....under oath?

I don't know, why don't you ask any high profile citizen why they are reluctant to speak out in a kangaroo court ?? That's what representing lawyers that are paid huge big buck's are for. He's not hiding, he's just being a wise former President, and a wise CEO.

 

[beagle9]

Do you recognize the crooks?

House Democrats introduce legislation to bar Trump from office under 14th Amendment

A group of 40 House Democrats, led by Rep. David Cicilline (R.I.), introduced legislation on Thursday to bar former President Trump from holding future federal office under the 14th Amendment. Sect…

thehill.com

Everything they are attempting to do in order to stop Trump from running, just goes to show that they are terrified at being revealed in the ways that Elon Musk has been revealing them recently.