- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Georgia DA Fani Willis possesses exonerating evidence in her case against Trump
Posted on 9/3/23 at 12:01 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
Posted on 9/3/23 at 12:01 pm to Major Dutch Schaefer
Focking joke and a dog and pony show
0
Posted on 9/3/23 at 12:01 pm to Indefatigable
quote:cool sort of like the scumbag known as Al Gore and "no legal controlling authority"
Cool. If those things can be proven and are against the law, charge the offenders.
clear where you are coming from, lawfare jr wannabe
This post was edited on 9/3/23 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 9/3/23 at 12:03 pm to JJJimmyJimJames
quote:
clear where you are coming from lawfare jr
Mmk.
Enjoy your fantasy
Posted on 9/3/23 at 12:04 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
The jury will decide. If the most avid cultist here was on the jury but followed the evidence and the law there are counts the cultist would vote guilty.
Which ones, specifically?
Posted on 9/3/23 at 5:51 pm to JJJimmyJimJames
Are the actions of democrats the standards you want??? Not me
Posted on 9/3/23 at 5:52 pm to BBONDS25
none specifically I can address because unlike a cultist juror will have, I have not seen the evidence.
Posted on 9/3/23 at 5:56 pm to I B Freeman
I wish I was on every jury Trump goes in front of.
Posted on 9/4/23 at 10:28 am to Indefatigable
quote:So, a typical J5 post.
Bizarre comment from you (J5) that has nothing to do with my post.
Posted on 9/4/23 at 10:38 am to BBONDS25
quote:Which cultists?
The jury will decide. If the most avid cultist here was on the jury but followed the evidence and the law there are counts the cultist would vote guilty.quote:
Which ones, specifically?
None. I disagree with IBF’s premise. Our local cultists would not convict Trump even if they had been present and witnessed the charged crime … on 5th Avenue no less.
Posted on 9/4/23 at 10:39 am to TDTOM
quote:Exhibit A
I wish I was on every jury Trump goes in front of.
Posted on 9/4/23 at 11:41 am to SlowFlowPro
and cwill, if said evidence is of the nature such that it obviously clears the president as will happen sooner or later, has the DA overstepped legal requirements that she should be charged related to malicious prosecution, RICO conspiracy with the Biden DOJ, and/or election meddling?
Posted on 9/4/23 at 11:43 am to AggieHank86
quote:Just because you dont understand it... a condition frequently habited by yourself.. does not give your opinion any weight whatsoever
So, a typical J5 post.
sort of like your need to be the only downvoter against those to whom you posit
and to your own posts
as all of which are perfectly laid out on this page as of 1 pm CT
you are a cartoon at best
This post was edited on 9/4/23 at 1:03 pm
Posted on 9/4/23 at 11:47 am to Indefatigable
supportive of goals she espouses =/= supportive of her actions
Posted on 9/4/23 at 12:28 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Are the actions of democrats the standards you want??? Not me
You actually support the CCP
Posted on 9/4/23 at 1:16 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
So prosecutors can file charges that they know to be false?
quote:
No, but they certainly CAN file charges when they know of the existence of evidence which would be used to challenge the assertions made in the indictment.
See guys. It sounds much less illicit and political when you change the words around a bit.
Posted on 9/4/23 at 1:20 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:Nonsense.quote:
So prosecutors can file charges that they know to be false?quote:See guys. It sounds much less illicit and political when you change the words around a bit.
No, but they certainly CAN file charges when they know of the existence of evidence which would be used to challenge the assertions made in the indictment.
If there are ten pieces of evidence and one of them supports the defense, are you seriously suggesting that the prosecutor should not seek an indictment?
No. He seeks the indictment and PROVIDES that evidence to the defense. Then, the jury decides.
But this is Trump. In your minds, ANY arguably-exculpatory evidence is automatically 100% probative of the entire case.
This post was edited on 9/4/23 at 1:23 pm
Posted on 9/4/23 at 1:27 pm to AggieHank86
Idk. I was told just a year or two ago that seeking investigations much less indictments of a political rival was impeachable election interference. So I guess I’m still trying to catch up on the new rules, but I would think if I were an honest prosecutor and had exonerating evidence, as was stated in the OP, I wouldn’t pursue those specific charges. But maybe I’m just an old fashioned, first world thinker.
Posted on 9/4/23 at 1:42 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
You need to go back to that vending machine and try again.
If ONLY you were a real lawyer!! Freaking loser
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News