The 2020 election reminds me of the OJ case.

[MarathonMike]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

 

[miketx]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

I read Chris Dardens' book and in he said they had a mountain of evidence against Simpson and that the judge and all the fake racist BS screwed the prosecutors from the gitgo. He said judge Ito was drunk on the hollywood spotlight.

 

[TheParser]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

In all fairness, the jury decided that Mr. S. was not guilty.

According to many observers, it was a case of jury nullification.

That is to say, many ladies on the jury believed that Mr. S. could not get a fair trial because of his ethnicity.

So the ladies made up their minds regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

 

[postman]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

If the glove don't fit, you must acquit.

They shouldn't have put on the glove, without doing a dry run.

 

[postman]

According to many observers, it was a case of jury nullification.

That is to say, many ladies on the jury believed that Mr. S. could not get a fair trial because of his ethnicity.

One of the key witnesses (Detective Marc Furman) was also caught lying. Even if the lie had nothing go do with the case, it wrecked his credibility.

 

[DrLove]

Yes, we've all seen your "mountain of evidence".

 

[postman]

Yes, we've all seen your "mountain of evidence".

Giuliani was also quoted telling the judge "This isn't a fraud case"

 

[Toro]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

 

[DrLove]

Yes, we've all seen your "mountain of evidence".

Giuliani was also quoted telling the judge "This isn't a fraud case"

Of course not - That would have resulted in sanctions if not a disbar. Lying in court is frowned upon.

 

[task0778]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

View attachment 425793

Seems to me it is the democrats who have been obsessing over/engaged in conspiracy theories over the past 4 years and race war. The first word out of their mouths when it comes to any policy disagreement is racism. What really happened since the 80s is the increase in leftwing propaganda rom the media and Hollywood, proving that if you tell a lie often enough then people will believe it.

 

[$ecular#eckler]

And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

It is not that. The lower court jurists do not want to be involved with elections, because decisions will cause riots and accusations of bias much more detrimental than what you are accusing. All of the famous Supreme Court decisions that overturned subsisting laws of controversy were all appealed, because the lower courts did not return a decision to their favor. that is how it works

 

[task0778]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

In all fairness, the jury decided that Mr. S. was not guilty.

According to many observers, it was a case of jury nullification.

That is to say, many ladies on the jury believed that Mr. S. could not get a fair trial because of his ethnicity.

So the ladies made up their minds regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

Same as they did in the recent election.

 

[postman]

It is not that. The lower court jurists do not want to be involved with elections, because decisions will cause riots and accusations of bias much more detrimental than what you are accusing. All of the famous Supreme Court decisions that overturned subsisting laws of controversy were all appealed, because the lower courts did not return a decision to their favor. that is how it works

Ironically that's the kind of judge that republicans want. Judges who don't legislate from the bench, but instead leave legislative decisions to the legislature.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

I read Chris Dardens' book and in he said they had a mountain of evidence against Simpson and that the judge and all the fake racist BS screwed the prosecutors from the gitgo. He said judge Ito was drunk on the hollywood spotlight.

I met Chris Darden years ago at an event I was shooting in San Diego. He seemed like a good dude.

I believe he stopped practicing law after the Simpson case...

 

[White 6]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

What about the republican appoint judges, some appointed by trump that ruled against him?

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Right me if I am wrong, but we may not know for sure until Inauguration Day.

God bless you and our current leader always!!!

Holly

 

[MarathonMike]

So the ladies made up their minds regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

That is true, but Judge Ito didn't do his job either, turning the trial into a TV spectacle.

 

[Shawnee_b]

I read Chris Dardens' book and in he said they had a mountain of evidence against Simpson and that the judge and all the fake racist BS screwed the prosecutors from the gitgo. He said judge Ito was drunk on the hollywood spotlight.

I read that too, good read.

 

[Coyote]

Despite a mountain of evidence, the "court" decided that OJ was innocent. OJ supporters resemble Trump Haters who deny all the evidence because they wanted him to be innocent. The rest of the country was aghast that such a preponderance of evidence could be dismissed by the "court".

The point is, our judicial system is full of hack judges who have forgotten what their role is, and how important their role is to this country. And thanks to the Democrats, our lower courts are packed with biased judges who just like in OJ case ignore the evidence because they've already decided on their verdict.

Unlike OJ, we have multiple courts issuing the same verdicts. We have judges appointed by multiple administrations - including Trump's - issuing the same rulings. Yet you are trying to claim they are all "hack judges" because they are not favorable to you.