Now we see what the judges do. Trump wins in court.

[Clipper]

It may not be the only thing keeping him from being tried. It may instead very well be that the SCOTUS decision is also forever going to keep it barred from being tried.

But to have this shit hanging over the President’s head until 2029 is disgraceful.

Do you think the poor thing we'll be able to cope? Maybe Wiles can hold his hand thru those tough days ahead on the back nine.

Melania will be in Florida, far from the stench.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Smith is going to resign before the criminal subhuman Trump is sworn in, denying the ape the chance to jizz himself like he did on J6.

Trump OWNED Smith...just like he owned Fat Fanny and will end up owning Bragg and Tish. All of them tried to use lawfare against him and he's walking away unscathed. Admit it, Clipper...you messed your drawers when Trump was "convicted" thinking it would cost him the election...which means he OWNS you just as much as the others!

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Smith dropped the charges because he didn't want to be there when Trump took office since firing Jack Smith would have been Trump's very first act as President. I'm pretty sure Trump would have made that phone call himself!

So it didn't have anything to do with required protocol?

 

[Man With A Plan]

So it didn't have anything to do with required protocol?

You think Jack Smith is worried about "protocol"? Now THAT is funny!
Jack knows that he's going to be fired the second that Trump becomes President. He doesn't want to give Trump the satisfaction so he's quitting now.

 

[BluesLegend]

You do have a point there, Blues! The rule of law doesn't mean much to Democrats...does it? But then again...showing the American people that...was probably one of the things that cost them the election!

Dems laugh at the law and the Constitution.

 

[struth]

Of course, you couldn't argue why they are absurd, if your life depended on it.

Neither could Trump's lawyers.

Well, first and foremost, Jack smith wasn’t representing the United States, he was illegally appointed.

Second trump won’t be running for president again, so the demafasict won’t need to conduct a political prosecution against him

 

[lafayette]

It ain't ignorance it is religious faith and hope, worshipping at the alter of the democrat party

He requested dismissal without prejudice. It was so order and granted in the dismissal.

 

[lafayette]

Too bad the statute of limitations for those charges runs out BEFORE 2029!

The four years of exclusion can be counted against Trump, extending the limitations.

 

[lafayette]

Well, first and foremost, Jack smith wasn’t representing the United States, he was illegally appointed.

Second trump won’t be running for president again, so the demafasict won’t need to conduct a political prosecution against him

Such an illiterate statement, yes.

 

[lafayette]

Sure laffy. Sure.

You haven’t guided anything.

And the fact remains, the case will never be resuscitated as you initially claimed it could be.

What you don’t understand about a motion to refile dismissed charges could fill a law library.

Oh, another statement by you with nothing to say.

 

[Man With A Plan]

The four years of exclusion can be counted against Trump, extending the limitations.

Show me where that's spelled out in the statute of limitations, Lafayette? The truth is that Democrats delayed bringing these suits against Trump because they wanted him stuck in court defending himself instead of being out on the campaign trail. That was THEIR choice...done for political reasons! Why should they be granted an extension to continue their lawfare?

 

[lafayette]

Show me where that's spelled out in the statute of limitations, Lafayette? The truth is that Democrats delayed bringing these suits against Trump because they wanted him stuck in court defending himself instead of being out on the campaign trail. That was THEIR choice...done for political reasons! Why should they be granted an extension to continue their lawfare?

You said the statue of limitations would run out without any citation. Now you want me to rebut your allegation with proof? You are laughable.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This case against Trump was already heard. It wasn't dismissed, Jack Smith LOST.

False.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You said the statue of limitations would run out without any citation. Now you want me to rebut your allegation with proof? You are laughable.

Sophomoric nonsense from a mindless troll.

 

[Man With A Plan]

You said the statue of limitations would run out without any citation. Now you want me to rebut your allegation with proof? You are laughable.

You said the statue of limitations would run out without any citation. Now you want me to rebut your allegation with proof? You are laughable.

I simply asked you to show where in the statute of limitations there is a provision to extend the statute. Can you not do so?

 

[BackAgain]

Oh, another statement by you with nothing to say.

Nothing you can grasp.

 

[struth]

The four years of exclusion can be counted against Trump, extending the limitations.

Why? He’s not the one requesting a stay

 

[lafayette]

I simply asked you to show where in the statute of limitations there is a provision to extend the statute. Can you not do so?

I don't have to if you made a claim you won't support.

 

[Man With A Plan]

I simply asked you to show where in the statute of limitations there is a provision to extend the statute. Can you not do so?

It's "funny" to ask you that question? You made a claim...back it up!

 

[lafayette]

It's "funny" to ask you that question? You made a claim...back it up!

I rebutted your unevidenced claim.