Boo Radley
Gold Member
- Banned
- #521
Patience has expired? Or being worn down?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What embarrassing cultismIs anyone making a statue of Cannon ? If not, they should. She's going to be a hero.
They should make one of Smith too. And put it where the pigeons can s**t on it all day long.
Just imagine, you folks could go tear it down, as destruction is all you know.What embarrassing cultism
I did wonder why the prosecutor's opinion was so important to the proceedings.Well this thread didn't age well...
Nobody wants to hear a grown man whine.Just imagine, you folks could go tear it down, as destruction is all you know.
Because of the content of that opinion, of course.I did wonder why the prosecutor's opinion was so important to the proceedings.
That's all you ever do. Is that why you degenerates want folks to be able to identify as space monkeys, or whatever they like, to limit your hypocrisy? Makes sense , in a sick twisted way.Nobody wants to hear a grown man whine.
The judge outranks him. He can be as petulant and impatient as he wants to be.Because of the content of that opinion, of course.
He is. The problem is the "judge" who's an incompetent hack who fucked this case up from day one, delaying it for your boy.Fuck Smith and his lack of patience.
Suck it, you jerkoff.
Try being an honest prosecutor some day.
Wrong ^ across the board. Oh wait. It’s a Clap post. So of course it’s bullshit.He is. The problem is the "judge" who's an incompetent hack who fucked this case up from day one, delaying it for your boy.
Hmm...Special Counsel Jack Smith Is Done With Judge Aileen Cannon And Lets It Show
In a new filing that bluntly confronts U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, Special Counsel Jack Smith takes a new tone of incredulousness and disdain for her mishandling of the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case.
The issue at hand is her failure to have yet ruled on Donald Trump’s motion to dismiss based on his inane, unprecedented, and counterfactual reading of the Presidential Records Act. Instead of rejecting the argument out of hand, Cannon not only is entertaining it but ordered the two sides to propose jury instructions based on two different deeply flawed interpretations of the PRA.
That set up an nearly impossible challenge for Smith: How do you draft jury instructions that are so wrong on the law without looking like an idiot, undermining your own case, and pissing of the judge?
The answer: You can’t.
So Smith went all in, no longer trying to placate, educate, or hand-hold Cannon.
Smith ripped her interpretations of the PRA: “both of the Court’s scenarios are fundamentally flawed and any jury instructions that reflect those scenarios would be error.” He said her “legal premise is wrong” and her requested jury instructions “would distort the trial.”
Special Counsel Jack Smith Loses Patience With Judge Aileen Cannon
Not a great idea to antagonize a Trump toady but some things need to be done. She's made it clear she is unqualified to be on this case from the standpoint of experience, an understanding of the law, and a lack of impartiality. Good for Smith that he has called her out.
He's not Bill Barr.Fuck Smith and his lack of patience.
Suck it, you jerkoff.
Try being an honest prosecutor some day.
Yes, so the judge must rule. And yes, he can be as impatient as he likes.The judge outranks him. He can be as petulant and impatient as he wants to be.
I just find it funny that people care about a prosecutor getting impatient, as if he runs the show.Yes, so the judge must rule. And yes, he can be as impatient as he likes.
Well that's because you are taking a very shallow and low information approach. Some people actually are considering the content of Smith"s complaints.I just find it funny that people care about a prosecutor getting impatient, as if he runs the show.
The majority of what lawyers say does not represent justice or the entirety of the situation. Therefore, there is little reason to grant their complaints a lot of credibility. Let's just say it this way, would you grant TRUMP!'s lawyers a lot of credibility if they were complaining about something the judge was doing?Well that's because you are taking a very shallow and low information approach. Some people actually are considering the content of Smith"s complaints.
Boilerplate, irrelevant to the content of smith's complaintsThe majority of what lawyers say does not represent justice or the entirety of the situation.
What a terrible argument. This is just intellectual laziness and a dodge of the content.Therefore, there is little reason to grant their complaints a lot of credibility.
Bad form, there. You cut out most my post. Would you grant TRUMP!'s lawyers a lot of credibility if they were complaining about something the judge was doing? The answer, obviously, is that you would not. You would staunchly defend the judge's actions as being unassailable and you would castigate the attorneys for having the gall to complain.Boilerplate, irrelevant to the content of smith's complaints
What a terrible argument. This is just intellectual laziness and a dodge of the content.
Because I don't give a shit about the other irrelevant nonsense.Bad form, there. You cut out most my post