Trump Indictment Watch

Trump filed a motion to dismiss the documents case citing the PRA. In all the other cases the Trump tards say "any other judge in any other district would dismiss this". Now the time to test that. A Judge Trump appointed in Republican Florida. Surely she will dismiss the case. Surely.
 
Garmel said:
Funny, I don't recall anyone here saying this case would be dismissed.
Click to expand...


When you say the PRA allows him to have these documents legally then a motion to dismiss citing the PRA would be successful. The Judge is who interprets the law. The jury only rules of if someone violated the law. When the Judge denies the motion to dismiss based on the PRA Trump wont even be able to bring that up to the jury because the Judge will have already ruled on it.
 
cajunrevenge said:
When you say the PRA allows him to have these documents legally then a motion to dismiss citing the PRA would be successful. The Judge is who interprets the law. The jury only rules of if someone violated the law. When the Judge denies the motion to dismiss based on the PRA Trump wont even be able to bring that up to the jury because the Judge will have already ruled on it.
Click to expand...

Things that are in black and white don't necessarily get dismissed. If that was the case we wouldn't have this ridiculous Trump off the ballot case.

No, the jury can still hear this.
 
Garmel said:
Things that are in black and white don't necessarily get dismissed. If that was the case we wouldn't have this ridiculous Trump off the ballot case.

No, the jury can still hear this.
Click to expand...


Because this is black and white is why this wont be dismissed. The PRA says the exact opposite of what Trump claims. If it said he can just designate anything he wants as his and take it with him the case would be dismissed even if this the most biased liberal Judge in the case. Well the documents part, he would still be on the hook for the obstruction charges.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Because this is black and white is why this wont be dismissed. The PRA says the exact opposite of what Trump claims. If it said he can just designate anything he wants as his and take it with him the case would be dismissed even if this the most biased liberal Judge in the case. Well the documents part, he would still be on the hook for the obstruction charges.
Click to expand...

Nope. I really wish you would quit parroting utter BS from the media. Between the PRA and legal precedent Trump is right.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Because this is black and white is why this wont be dismissed. The PRA says the exact opposite of what Trump claims. If it said he can just designate anything he wants as his and take it with him the case would be dismissed even if this the most biased liberal Judge in the case. Well the documents part, he would still be on the hook for the obstruction charges.
Click to expand...

Nope. I really wish you would quit parroting utter BS from the media. Between the PRA and legal precedent Trump is right.

I have shown you in B&W statutes and precedents that he is correct. I'm done arguing against your ignorance on this subject.
 
So you think he is right but a Judge who he appointed wont agree with him and dismiss the case because the PRA clearly shows what he did isnt a crime. Make it make sense.
 
cajunrevenge said:
So you think he is right but a Judge who he appointed wont agree with him and dismiss the case because the PRA clearly shows what he did isnt a crime. Make it make sense.
Click to expand...

Why are we having the case against Trump being on the ballot when it's quite clear then?
 
lolololol

It's quite clear through legal precedent that the the insurrection clause of the 14th amendment isn't self-executing yet we're at the SCOTUS.

Why do you constantly talk out of ass when you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about?
 
Precedent? Of all the people DQ'd from office via the 14th amendment which of them was done so by act of Congress? If you want to claim it takes an act of Congress to execute section 3 then you your side better hope Democrats dont have both houses of Congress come the 2025 certification.
 
"Of all the people DQ'd from office via the 14th amendment which of them was done so by act of Congress?"

Give me the cases and the year those occurred, please.
 
Last edited:
Almost all of these cases occurred before Chief Justice Chase ruled that the 14th insurrection clause was not self-executing. Anything after that would be illegal. He in his wisdom saw some of the political nonsense that was occurring and decided to put an end to it.

Yes, it's quite clear Trump will win the case because this is lawfare at it's finest.
 
Last edited:
I dont think you understand the meaning of the word illegal. The word you are looking for is unconstitutional. Its kind of funny you call it lawfare when the person sued was the Democrat Secretary of State who ignored the ruling before it was even overturned and put Trump on the ballot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top