Trump Indictment Watch

Garmel said:
It's right here where you sided with Colorado. You're not going to lie your way out of it.
Click to expand...


Only in your fantasy world does me saying a ruling is going to be overturned mean I am wrong when it overturned. I was simply mocking the way you dismiss any Judge who was appointed by a Democrat as biased. You tell us Liberal justices rule against Trump because they are so biased against him yet all 3 liberal justices voted in favor of Trump. I think the Colorado ruling is correct in that Trump engaged in/aided an insurrection and is disqualified from running. As I stated in other posts I think the state courts should execute the clause for state elections and federal courts for federal elections. I think its silly to say Congress is the only body that can DQ someone when members of Congress who supported the insurrection get to vote on the DQ. The 14th amendment couldnt have even been passed if the insurrectionists got a vote. With the Supreme court ruling the 14th amendment section 3 may as well not exist because it requires a partisan body like Congress to act according to fact and not politics. Which is about as likely as a goldfish growing wings and breathing fire.
 
Tapate50 said:
I mean this was a blatant “attack on democracy” if I’ve ever really seen one.

Trying to remove the most popular candidate ? Uh yeah
Click to expand...


Obama's pretty popular, would it be an attack on Democracy to sue to DQ him from running for a third term? I also remind you that the Democrat SoS was the one being sued in Colorado and she put him on the ballot despite the ruling. I recall all Republicans saying Trump had a right to pursue his legal options after the 2020 election, which he does, which is the same thing people did here. You people acting like this was some grand conspiracy that Democrats were counting on to take down Trump are out of your mind.
 
If we listened to you and those other crackpots every 4 years the dems and reps would be having a war to see how many states they can take the others leading candidate off the ballot. You really want that?

The legal minds of the 19th century knew what they were doing.
 
On what grounds would RDS be taken off the ballot in 2028 if he was the leading candidate? What insurrection did he engage in or aide? On what grounds would Gavin Newsome be taken off any ballot in 2028 if he was the leading candidate? What insurrection did he engage in or aide? You claim someone taking a **** is an insurrection all day long but not even most biased court would agree to that.
 
I'm just wondering when the opposition has such a disregard for our system of laws and all the norms that have sustained this great nation should we follow those same rules?

At what point when your enemy has become as deranged as the left does it make sense to go against your own norms to stop them?
 
cajunrevenge said:
Dont pretend like you people care about Democracy.
Click to expand...

After losing 9-0 and proven wrong about the Insurrection clause you still act as if you're always right with no ability to reexamine your beliefs.

You're a deranged fanatic who's incapable of reason. I feel sorry for you.

Enjoy your lawfare while it lasts.
 
Last edited:
Cajun - "This case is going to be overturned"


Supreme Court overturns case


Garmel - "lol proven wrong again"


Wut?



If you want to say I was wrong about the liberal justices voting against Trump thats fine. I was mocking you, but then you need to admit you are wrong in assuming all liberal judges ignore the facts of the case just to rule against Trump. You seriously want to go into people who cant admit they were wrong. You still cant admit you got the Durhma withhunt lawfare prosecutions wrong. Acquitted in like an hour, literally laughed out of court. Fox News defamation suit. You were wrong again. I was nearly spot on not only on the result but the amount predicting 500 million settlement with another 250 million just so Fox News doesnt have to admit fault. I dont think you weighed in on the Googliani defamation suit but I was right again. You got both E Jean Carroll defemation suits wrong. You got the NY civil fraud case wrong. You got the Weaselberg case wrong. You got the Presidential immunity case wrong. Still some wiggle room for the Conservative Supreme Court to change that one but I highly highly doubt they will. You are going to lose yet again with Trumps upcoming felony trial. Only thing in the trial that is even arguable is whether it can be upgraded to a felony. So tell me more about not being able to admit when someone is wrong.
 
thethe said:
What did he plea to?

You don't even know and are taking some sort of victory lap.
Click to expand...


He pled to perjury for saying he wasnt involved in setting the value of Trumps apartment. Weaselberg sentenced to another 5 months in prison.
 
Last edited:
All of those cases were done in blue states/areas with legal holes the size of a bus that would be laughed out of court in a purple or red state. Almost all legal scholars who aren't extreme left agree with me on these cases so I'm not wrong.

You don't understand that because you don't understand the law.

As I said you constantly fall for the dangerous lawfare the left initiates. This Colorado case is one that could have gone your way if not for the SCOTUS and one that you would have believed was real even though it too had a legal hole the size of a bus.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top