Judge sets absurd trial date for Trump case

[toobfreak]

View attachment 822174

QUESTION IS, ARE YOU?

 

[toobfreak]

They could have avoided that by not committing crimes.

What crimes? Accusations, indictments, charges don't mean shit unless actually proven true under cross-examination in a court of law.

Every legal expert out there says they've never seen such a hornswaggle in their lives.

 

[BackAgain]

What crimes? Accusations, indictments, charges don't mean shit unless proven true in a court of law.

Every legal expert out there says they've never seen such a hornswaggle in their lives.

Synthia is one of a new breed of American leftards who stand firmly behind a presumption of guilt.

 

[StoneCold]

You want a legal definition about Biden? I don't know what the legal definition of a cabbage would be

Reading comprehension problems, eh rebel?

 

[Synthaholic]

What crimes? Accusations, indictments, charges don't mean shit unless actually proven true under cross-examination in a court of law.

Every legal expert out there says they've never seen such a hornswaggle in their lives.

Grow a brain, you dumbass. Every person sitting in Rikers Island Jail or the D.C. jail, or the Los Angeles Jail waiting for a court date has not had charges proven true under cross-examination in a court of law.

What crimes?

You are one stupid cocksucker.

 

[toobfreak]

Grow a brain, you dumbass.

No thanks, I already have two: my excellent one and yours pickled in a jar.

Every person sitting in Rikers Island Jail or the D.C. jail, or the Los Angeles Jail waiting for a court date has not had charges proven true under cross-examination in a court of law.

Then maybe we need to reexamine punishing people first before they are even proven guilty.

What crimes?

Odd, where is Trump in any of those pictures?

You are one stupid cocksucker.

And you are one damned GOOD cocksucker from everything I am told!

 

[Care4all]

Is that the attorney Democrats are putting in prison too because you're putting your opposition in prison like all the other tin pot Marxist governments that you aren't going to repeat because you're going to do Marxism right this time, not like all the other times we tried it?

Is that what happened in Watergate, with all the President's Men on trial and convicted and imprisoned?

Your comparison is a joke!

 

[Zincwarrior]

No evidence at all manipulation of the law to fit the crime. Now if you want violations of the law look at Jo crime boss Biden

That is not a legal defense.

 

[forkup]

Who determines that a former President has committed a "crime"? The President in power who will be running against said former President? Do you not grasp how allowing that would lead to election interference, Fork? What's happening right now poses the biggest threat to democracy in our country that I've seen in my lifetime. It's not even close! But you think that a former President having some documents in his possession that the National Archive wants is a bigger crisis than THAT? Seriously?

You know what I find interesting. To you prosecuting a former president is a threat to Democracy. But making a guy president who literally told his vice-president when he held the position previously that he has the right to IGNORE the actual election results and pressured him arguably by violence to do so isn't.

How do you thread that needle even if you ignore the arguable part?

 

[Winco]

Depends on what he is convicted of, you absolute retard.

And which current charge (If convicted) would disqualify trump from running?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Reading comprehension problems, eh rebel?

The problem is yours since the discussion is about Biden and not trump

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That is not a legal defense.

Manipulation of the law to fit the crime is illegal

 

[Faun]

Democrats stole the 2020 election, you aren't fooling anyone, Gomer

 

[forkup]

Manipulation of the law to fit the crime is illegal

Oh really? How exactly do you do that? Criminal statutes tend to be rather precisely written. This to prevent manipulation of it.

This means a prosecutor need to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" the different aspects that make up that statute.

It doesn't really matter that you personally don't believe that that criminal statute was actually broken. The people who will decide that are members of a jury. After being briefed on what the prosecution actually has to prove.

 

[Billo_Really]

Yes it is, you fucking retard.

But the point is that no such thing happened. So take your idiot partisan hack bullshit, fold it and proceed to shove it up your asshole, you asshole.

It happened on Jan 6th. And now on March 4, 2024, you and your sick, un-American cabal, will be held accountable.

 

[BackAgain]

And which current charge (If convicted) would disqualify trump from running?

I say none. Others claim otherwise.

You are sentenced to do your own homework, Winkie dinky.

 

[kaz]

I guess you spend a lot of time thinking about the genitals of teenage boys. Most republicans do.

My noticing that you keep talking about my dick is ME being obsessed with my dick.

Democrats, can't fix stupid

 

[BackAgain]

It happened on Jan 6th. And now on March 4, 2024, you and your sick, un-American cabal, will be held accountable.

False.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Trump’s Federal Trial on Election Interference Set to Start March 4, 2024 — The Wall Street Journal

Trial date one day before Super Tuesday primaries heightens clash between GOP front-runner’s legal and campaign schedules

apple.news

It is unlikely in the extreme that a massive trial of this magnitude (Constitutionally, politically, historically and legally) will be “ready” for trial that soon. But the judge’s very biased agenda is crystal clear. And it’s unacceptable.

(Since this trial is far more about politics than justice, I chose the politics forum).

On the radio the other day (UK BBC4), they were chatting about Trump and his pending cases. It was said State cases have a low success rate , whilst Federal ones have a 95% success rate. America will find out if he's in the 95% or 5% bracket.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Manipulation of the law to fit the crime is illegal

That is not a legal defense.