Joe Biden will spend a full week at Camp David to prepare for a 90 minute debate

[MarathonMike]

Wow, thats almost 1/1000th of the time the blob spent golfing.

That's really a dumb response, even for you! Oh well, the pays the same right?

 

[MarathonMike]

The time will be split between going through the questions CNN provided and experimenting with different drugs. First thing to check, how dark will Biden's eyes look from the pupil dilation? I'm guessing it's going to be Stepford Wive's level creepiness.

 

[lantern2814]

That's not true. The defense objected to several of the secondary crimes cited as justification of the felony enhancement of 175.10. The judge sided with the defense, reducing the number of crimes the jury could consider from 5...to 3.

Brad Smith was allowed to testify to matters of fact. But not to matters of law. That's for the judge to decide, and be held accountable for on appeal. The defense wanted to bring in Brad to argue with the judge's interpretation of the law. The judge obviously said no. That's not unusual. That's perfectly normal.

The defense chose not to call the former FEC head when he was limited to points of fact, rather than Brad Smith's personal interpretation of the law.

You lie yet again. The corrupt judge REFUSED to allow the former head of the FEC to testify. Because he would destroy your pathetic narrative. Sorry dipshit, but Smith has every right to testify to matters of election law. The judge has NO right to deny that. But keep lying to yourself. It's all you have.

 

[lantern2814]

I keep forgetting.....y'all just believe whatever hapless batshit you make up.

There goes another irony meter....

 

[Skylar]

You lie yet again. The corrupt judge REFUSED to allow the former head of the FEC to testify.

That's nonsense. The judge allowed Bradley A Smith, the former head of the FEC to testify on any point of fact. He didn't allow him to argue with the judge on points of law.


"CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter."

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

apnews.com

So why did YOU believe that Smith wasn't allowed to testify? Simple: Trump lied to you. And you never bothered to fact check anything.

 

[lantern2814]

That's nonsense. The judge allowed Bradley A Smith, the former head of the FEC to testify on any point of fact. He didn't allow him to argue with the judge on points of law.


"CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter."

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

apnews.com

So why did YOU believe that Smith wasn't allowed to testify? Simple: Trump lied to you. And you never bothered to fact check anything.

The AP? Get a REAL unbiased source. Oh wait, you don't do those. Smith was banned from testifying per the legal experts. While you cite nothing but yourself. As usual. Smith overrules the corrupt judge on election law as former HEAD of the FEC. You lied again. And since you never get any facts, you continue to look like a know nothing sheep who just bleats out your Dim master's talking points. Try again whiner.

 

[Skylar]

The AP? Get a REAL unbiased source. Oh wait, you don't do those.

Show me a better source than AP.

Smiling....is it you citing you? Its you citing yourself, isn't it?

Smith was banned from testifying per the legal experts.

Which 'legal experts'. Quote them. Because Smith was allowed to testify on ANY point of fact. But he wasn't allowed to argue with the judge on point of law. Trump's legal team CHOSE not to call Smith. Says who? Says Bradley Smith:

"Judge Merchan has so restricted my testimony that defense has decided not to call me. Now, it’s elementary that the judge instructs the jury on the law, so I understand his reluctance," former FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith posted on X on Monday.

Key Trump witness nixed after Merchan's stringent rulings reveals what his testimony would have been

Former FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith was set to testify in NY v. Trump, but he was not brought before the court after the presiding judge limited what he could discuss.

www.foxnews.com

Remember, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

While you cite nothing but yourself.

Uh-huh.

CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter.

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

apnews.com

 

[lantern2814]

Show me a better source than AP.

Smiling....is it you citing you? Its you citing yourself, isn't it?



Which 'legal experts'. Quote them. Because Smith was allowed to testify on ANY point of fact. But he wasn't allowed to argue with the judge on point of law. Trump's legal team CHOSE not to call Smith.

They had every right to.




Uh-huh.

CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter.

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

apnews.com

And double down on the stupid and only citing yourself. I don't need to disprove your verbal diarrhea. YOU need to debunk the legal experts who all laugh at you and state that the corrupt judge REFUSED to allow the former HEAD of the FEC to testify on ELECTION LAW. Keep crying. It's all you ever do when you repeatedly get your ass handed to you because you're nothing but a Dim sheep. Enjoy the overturn on appeal and try not to hurt yourself too badly when Trump wins in November.

 

[Skylar]

And double down on the stupid and only citing yourself.

Yawning....that's it? Just straight up denial? Well, shit. That was easy.

Back in reality I quoted AP and Bradley Smith himself.

First AP:


"CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan wouldn’t let the defense call campaign finance expert Bradley A. Smith to testify in former President Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. Merchan did not bar Smith from testifying. Trump’s legal team chose to not call on him after the judge on Monday declined to broaden the scope of questioning the defense could pursue. The ruling echoed his pretrial ruling on the matter."

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

apnews.com

Then Bradley Smith:

"Judge Merchan has so restricted my testimony that defense has decided not to call me. Now, it’s elementary that the judge instructs the jury on the law, so I understand his reluctance," former FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith posted on X on Monday.

Key Trump witness nixed after Merchan's stringent rulings reveals what his testimony would have been

Remember, Lantern....you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. It tends to hamper your arguments.

 

[candycorn]

These things have been going on for decades. It’s stupid to believe it doesn’t.

True...conservatives have been making up shit for decades...they used to have some self respect...now they have nobody’s respect.

 

[yidnar]

Wow, could you imagine if that was true? Get your excuses ready in case you need them.

you and your Marxist comrades are counting on it being true .

 

[tahuyaman]

True...conservatives have been making up shit for decades...they used to have some self respect...now they have nobody’s respect.

lol.

 

[tahuyaman]

Or....I just ask for evidence connecting your fantasies to the real world. And you have none.

You don't do well outside the echo chamber.

Shut up you idiot.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Nope. I'm talking about Bradley A. Smith, former head of the FEC. And the witness that Trump wanted to call as an expert on campaign finance law, to dispute the judge. Here's Trump sniveling and whining about it:

"The expert witness that we have, the best there is in election law, Brad Smith, he’s considered the Rolls Royce, or we’ll bring it back to an American car, Cadillac, but the best there is,” Trump said on his way out of court on Monday. “He can’t testify. He’s not being allowed to testify.”

Judge in Trump’s hush money trial did not bar campaign finance expert from testifying for defense

As the trial continued Tuesday, social media users misrepresented Merchan’s ruling, repeating a statement Trump made that Smith, a law professor and former Republican member of the Federal Election Commission, was not being allowed to take the stand.

apnews.com

The judge rightly allowed Bradley A. Smith to testify on any point of fact. But NOT to argue with the judge on points of law. Trump's legal team then CHOSE not to call Bradley A. Smith. And he never testified. Making any claim that he 'wasn't allowed to finish an answer' more pseudo-legal gibberish.

Remember, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. That tends to hamper your argument.

The judge who was a generalist lawyer refused an expert on election law the ability to testify on the subject he was an expert on. That’s like a medical GP overruling the country’s foremost expert on a patient’s ailment.

 

[tahuyaman]

The judge who was a generalist lawyer refused an expert on election law the ability to testify on the subject he was an expert on. That’s like a medical GP overruling the country’s foremost expert on a patient’s ailment.

The idiot doesn’t get that.

 

[Delldude]

No conviction is being overturned on vague claims like what you've offered.

People higher on the Totem pole than you have a different vision.

 

[tahuyaman]

Nope. I've asked again and again what reversible errors were committed. And you can't say. And limiting a witnesses testimony to the facts isn't a reversible error by the judge. But a completely normal call for a judge to make.

No conviction is being overturned on vague claims like what you've offered.

Stop responding. You’re an imbecile

 

[tahuyaman]

True...conservatives have been making up shit for decades...they used to have some self respect...now they have nobody’s respect.

You are not smart. You have no intellectual curiosity. You have no ability to question or challenge leadership or the conventional wisdom which is spoon fed to you.

 

[SweetSue92]

I guess they have to work on the right concoction of drugs to drag him thru 90 minutes. A full week off the job so he can prepare for a debate.

I thought he has been doing this for 50 years and it's just second nature to him.

Roll Call Factba.se - Joe Biden - President's Public Schedule

This is the full public scheduled as published by the Joe Biden White House.

rollcall.com

I always picture some kind of exotic Swedish infusions or something

Whatever it is, it's not working anymore