Not finding evidence is now a reason to get fired?

[Luckyone]

Comey Admits He Was Wrong​

Dec 18, 2019

View attachment 1167599

Thinking people knew he should have been indicted five years ago pal.

Wow, he admitted to being wrong when he was wrong. Has Trump EVER admitted he was wrong about anything?

 

[Luckyone]

Ignorance of the law is not a defense, and her being the AG is just not a defense.

Are you talking about Trump?

 

[MisterBeale]

Wow, he admitted to being wrong when he was wrong. Has Trump EVER admit he was wrong about anything?

Are you talking about Trump?

 

[Meister]

Are you talking about Trump?

You might want to go back and figure out which thread you're in.
No, I'm not talking about Trump. You seem to be though.

 

[Luckyone]

Now bring up what the evidence the DOJ has on James. It's there, but, I don't jump through your hoops.

Post #26

 

[Meister]

Post #26

That's not evidence, that's her excuse

 

[justoffal]

That, or he was just playing liberal politics.

He was ignoring evidence not having a hard time finding it. It's there.

 

[MisterBeale]

That's not evidence, that's her excuse

It might be evidence, if she actually linked us to those who make said claims. Instead, we are given, "I believe," and she followed that with claiming not to have seen evidence to the contrary. . . which I just posted and sent the banker into fits of deflection.

 

[Luckyone]

That's not evidence, that's her excuse

Excuse is YOUR word. Legally, what she supplied is evidence that the accusations were incorrect. Has that evidence (excuse in your words) been proven to be false?

Are you a judge (legally appointed), where you can make such determinations?

 

[Meister]

Excuse is YOUR word. Legally, what she supplied is evidence that the accusations were incorrect. Has that evidence (excuse in your words) been proven to be false?

Are you a judge (legally appointed), where you can make such determinations?

You seem to be the judge.
Again ignorance of the law or "made a mistake" is not going to cut it.
Her lawyer is being slick with their "story", A "niece" huh?

carry on, son.

 

[MisterBeale]

Excuse is YOUR word. Legally, what she supplied is evidence that the accusations were incorrect. Has that evidence (excuse in your words) been proven to be false?

Are you a judge (legally appointed), where you can make such determinations?

Where? It was just her say so.

There was no link to said evidence.

 

[justoffal]

You seem to be the judge.
Again ignorance of the law or "made a mistake" is not going to cut it.
Her lawyer is being slick with their "story", A "niece" huh?

carry on, son.

Yeah but Fanni Willis said she was married to her father!

 

[Luckyone]

You seem to be the judge.
Again ignorance of the law or "made a mistake" is not going to cut it.
Her lawyer is being slick with their "story", A "niece" huh?

carry on, son.

Lawyer being "slick". Wow, you mean quoting the law and following it, is "slick - in a negative way"?

It is not going to "cut it"?

again, are you an official judge to where you can say it with such certainty, that it will be proven wrong?

and if so, will Trump fire his prosecutor and the presiding judge for not proving his contention (and yours) that she is guilty?

 

[Meister]

Lawyer being "slick". Wow, you mean quoting the law and following it, is "slick - in a negative way"?

It is not going to "cut it"?

again, are you an official judge to where you can say it with such certainty, that it will be proven wrong?

and if so, will Trump fire his prosecutor and the presiding judge for not proving his contention (and yours) that she is guilty?

First, lawyers play the their story loose and fast and maybe not factual.
I am saying that let the court pf law figure this out and not your opinion.
You need to ask Trump what he will do, not me. I think he's just pursuing
the truth through the courts, and not your public opinion.

 

[konradv]

You can call it whatever you want. You and your ilk just aren't
use to seeing your side getting their butts kicked.
By the way, there is proof against James....just sayin'

Funny how a Republican prosecutor who has the evidence couldn’t find proof, but random MAGA’s without access can!

 

[justoffal]

Funny how a Republican prosecutor who has the evidence couldn’t find proof, but random MAGA’s without access can!

His peers gave him up....
He was dragging his feet ...
That's his right

He should have said openly....I don't want this case.

We will hear more about this

Jo

 

[Blisterfinger]

That is your OPINION, isn't it?

Has she been PROVEN guilty? Does she have the right to be "innocent until proven guilty"?

Calm down lucky, you're going to blow a vein

 

[Blisterfinger]

One big difference, so much of the proof against Trump is his own words and actions. James never has stated anything that would prove her guilty of anything.

For example, when Trump is called a liar, it does not have to be proven in court. He proves it daily in front of everyone that is listening.

Your video is ridiculous LOL. Stupid

 

[Luckyone]

First, lawyers play the their story loose and fast and maybe not factual.
I am saying that let the court pf law figure this out and not your opinion.
You need to ask Trump what he will do, not me. I think he's just pursuing
the truth through the courts, and not your public opinion.

BS, Seiberr did NOT find enough reasons to take it to court!

Are you saying that everyone that is accused by someone else, should be taken to court to prove his innocence? That going through the process of finding VALID reasons to take someone to court and then getting the approval of a grand jury, in order to formally accuse them, should be ignored.

If that is the case, I can accuse you of whatever I want, and you will have to go to court to prove your innocence, right?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The “duty” of a prosecutor isn’t to get revenge on the presidents political enemies.

Lol, they were trying to come up with all types of lies on trump when O and biden were in. Please.