Why is Biden too old but Trump is not?

[braalian]

Broad

He might be broad, but I still don't think that he's obese.

broad = wide shoulders and physical strength. Trump is just fat. Narrow womanly shoulders, spaghetti arms, big gut.

I think he was an effective president, but I get annoyed when fat is conflated with strength.

 

[jotathought]

Why is Biden too old but Trump is not? They are basically the same age - old. So why is there only concern over Biden being old.

Biden is in obvious cognitive decline -- he can't speak off script, he's told what to say, he has productionized interviews and relies on a teleprompter like Fetterman.

 

[SmokeALib]

Because Trump can walk and talk?

 

[Nostra]

Poor Dumbfuck.

I rest my case.

 

[BackAgain]

You're just another Trumper who thinks that the last word makes you right. It doesn't.

You have no possibility, here, of pulling away from the facts which include your prior mistaken claim.

The last word doesn’t necessarily count. But logic and truth in a last sentence sure are powerful.

This explains your butthurt.

There is all kinds of misconduct in legal cases. Pros misconduct is exactly what I have been telling you.

Let's assume you are right - why isn't the Trump team filing the necessary motions if they think there was any kind of misconduct? Their only tactic is to stall, push the trial date back, which is not bad but it's also the only thing they can do at this point.

You should represent Trump since Roodles lost his license

don’t flip and flop so much. You look silly like that.

There are all types of prosecutorial misconduct. You know what the types all involve? Misconduct. And prosecutors.

And it can come before trial.

So you were wrong. And since you were wrong about that, maybe you’re wrong when you claim that Smith can’t have committed pros mis already because there is no trial yet. Yes. By golly. That’s it. You could be just as wrong as you were earlier.

And you are. Maybe, already, before trial, Amith may have engaged in pros mis which resulted ( in that other case I cited) a dismissal before trial. Aha!

Yes. Yes. You see it now. Surely. Not only were you wrong, but I have been right all along! And while it is unlikely, but it is absolutely possible that a judge could dismiss Smith’s felony case against Trump, with prejudice.

“With prejudice” (for those who don’t already know) means dismissed with an order prohibiting re-prosecution.

 

[Arlette]

You have no possibility, here, of pulling away from the facts which include your prior mistaken claim.

The last word doesn’t necessarily count. But logic and truth in a last sentence sure are powerful.

This explains your butthurt.

don’t flip and flop so much. You look silly like that.

There are all types of prosecutorial misconduct. You know what the types all involve? Misconduct. And prosecutors.

And it can come before trial.

So you were wrong. And since you were wrong about that, maybe you’re wrong when you claim that Smith can’t have committed pros mis already because there is no trial yet. Yes. By golly. That’s it. You could be just as wrong as you were earlier.

And you are. Maybe, already, before trial, Amith may have engaged in pros mis which resulted ( in that other case I cited) a dismissal before trial. Aha!

Yes. Yes. You see it now. Surely. Not only were you wrong, but I have been right all along! And while it is unlikely, but it is absolutely possible that a judge could dismiss Smith’s felony case against Trump, with prejudice.

“With prejudice” (for those who don’t already know) means dismissed with an order prohibiting re-prosecution.

It's called proc misconduct because it's misconduct by the prosecutor/s

 

[Orangecat]

Why is Biden too old but Trump is not? They are basically the same age - old. So why is there only concern over Biden being old.

Because Biden is obviously in a cognitive freefall and Trump is not.

 

[Arlette]

Because Biden is obviously in a cognitive freefall and Trump is not.

 

[BackAgain]

It's called procedural misconduct because it's misconduct by the prosecutor/s

Idiot. Pay attention.

Pros mis is PROSECUTORIAL Misconduct. (Criminal cases are rarely dismissed on mere procedural errors anyway.)

But we were discussing was pros mis. Not “procedural” misconduct. Aren’t you smart enough to pretend to know that defense attorneys are not accused of misconduct. Their trial errors are known as “ineffective assistance if counsel.” Judges get it even better. “Judicial error.”

 

[BackAgain]

View attachment 803717

What a fuckin’ stupid symbol.

Trump is right again.

 

[Arlette]

Idiot. Pay attention.

Pros mis is PROSECUTORIAL Misconduct. (Criminal cases are rarely dismissed on mere procedural errors anyway.)

But we were discussing was pros mis. Not “procedural” misconduct. Aren’t you smart enough to pretend to know that defense attorneys are not accused of misconduct. Their trial errors are known as “ineffective assistance if counsel.” Judges get it even better. “Judicial error.”

None of that applies to Trump's case. There was no misconduct by the gov to get the documents back. You wished there was, but that's just not the case.

 

[Arlette]

Idiot. Pay attention.

Pros mis is PROSECUTORIAL Misconduct. (Criminal cases are rarely dismissed on mere procedural errors anyway.)

But we were discussing was pros mis. Not “procedural” misconduct. Aren’t you smart enough to pretend to know that defense attorneys are not accused of misconduct. Their trial errors are known as “ineffective assistance if counsel.” Judges get it even better. “Judicial error.”

Double. Sorry

 

[Arlette]

What a fuckin’ stupid symbol.

Trump is right again.

 

[Faun]

What a fuckin’ stupid symbol.

Trump is right again.

Trump can do no wrong in your eyes, huh, Welshy? No opportunity to fluff him is ever lost on you.

 

[BackAgain]

None of that applies to Trump's case. There was no misconduct by the gov to get the documents back. You wished there was, but that's just not the case.

You’re obtuse. You don’t know what the government has been doing. Your arguments are all devoid of logic.

I’m not talking about the government’s efforts to get the documents back. That was the government. Not the prosecution.

Listen dumbass. I’m talking about allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. In the Trump case. By the office of the Special Counsel.

Is that plain enough for you?

 

[BackAgain]

View attachment 803719

I saw your other duplicate post. Damn you stink at this.

Anyway, Tumo is correct. That is a ridiculous empty symbol. Love that image.

 

[Arlette]

You’re obtuse. You don’t know what the government has been doing. Your arguments are all devoid of logic.

I’m not talking about the government’s efforts to get the documents back. That was the government. Not the prosecution.

Listen dumbass. I’m talking about allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. In the Trump case. By the office of the Special Counsel.

Is that plain enough for you?

You're just repeating what Trump cranks out on his Truthy Social. Everyone is crooked but him, blah blah blah.
But when all is said and done he has to face a jury that was presented with all the evidence. Since it's a criminal case the bar is high, beyond a reasonable doubt. He might ditch some counts, but not all. And he is fucked

 

[BackAgain]

You're just repeating what Trump cranks out on his Truthy Social. Everyone is crooked but him, blah blah blah.

Irony is fun. Right? Because you can’t cobble a thought together on your own you ascribe your mental habits on to others.

But when all is said and done he has to face a jury that was presented with all the evidence.

Unless the case gets dismissed for pros mis prior to trial or unless court dismisses it first for other legal reasons. Or maybe the trial doesn’t take place until after the elections in which case it won’t go to trial. Of course Special Jack may dismiss it it’s too close to the election, anyway.

Since it's a criminal case the bar is high, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Yeah. Congrats on figuring out the criminal burden of proof.

He might ditch some counts, but not all. And he is fucked

You’ve shared this opinion before. You’re very unpersuasive. You’re just not good at it.

 

[BackAgain]

And yet Arlette tries to mock Trump.

 

[Orangecat]

View attachment 803717

That's your evidence? Fail.
The evidence against Biden is legion, and growing daily.