- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- 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: Wednesday's thoughts on Tuesday regarding Jack Smith.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:46 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:46 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I can't explain something that doesn't exist
1
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:48 am to Godfather1
It's a subject with a whole lot of 85-IQ discussion.
Like this
Like this
quote:
He was involved in a conspiracy to interfere in the 2024 election. It was an insurrectionist plot. He and all his liberal cronies need to be charged and tried in a district that is 96% pro Trump. That them face the same kind of jury pool that Trump faced.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:48 am to Wednesday
Uses you can find demonstrable examples of him engaging in unethical behavior such as hiding or discarding exculpatory evidence for example, you probably cannot get him disbarred. The fact that he was acting as SC and was vigorous in his job is not enough.
Just leave him alone....shite offer him his old job back in the Netherlands working the ICC. Make him beholden.....that would be smart politics
Just leave him alone....shite offer him his old job back in the Netherlands working the ICC. Make him beholden.....that would be smart politics
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:48 am to KiwiHead
quote:
Uses you can find demonstrable examples of him engaging in unethical behavior such as hiding or discarding exculpatory evidence for example, you probably cannot get him disbarred. The fact that he was acting as SC and was vigorous in his job is not enough.
That does not satisfy the demands of the muh fight crowd.
And if they CAN find that sort of stuff, disbar away.
This post was edited on 11/26/24 at 10:49 am
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:49 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
It's a subject with a whole lot of 85-IQ discussion.
Seemingly about your speed.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:49 am to Godfather1
quote:
Seemingly about your speed.
Pre-emptive ad hom.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:50 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I can't explain something
Well that's a first. This is an event to be cherished.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:51 am to Wednesday
quote:
What should happen to Smith? He needs to be disbarred and unemployable. His license should be gone in any state he currently holds it, and he should be disbarred from litigating in Federal Court in all fifty states. Any accrued federal retirement should be revoked, any pay he earned from participating in this miscarriage of justice should be disgorged. His security clearance should also be revoked, permanently. His name and reputation should be ruined.
ABSOLUTELY
then go after any "conspirators" who willingly connived with him - (up to and including any ex-POTUS if possible)
Use 'prosecutorial discretion' to line up whistleblowers to root out the top dogs in the conspiracy.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Pre-emptive ad hom.
In your case, it’s not a fallacy. There’s genuinely something wrong with you.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:52 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
If he was illegally appointed, as some have said, they yes, he should be prosecuted since he accepted the appointment. He spent $50 million of taxpayer's money for a personal vendetta. That's fraud in my book.
Not to mention the millions Trump has spent defending himself.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:53 am to Wednesday
quote:
prosecutors (like presidents) have immunity from prosecution
Even if a prosecutor illegally frames a defendant, colludes with a judge, falsifies evidence, etc?
quote:
legitimizing this bullshite legal theory will do nothing to end lawfare forever
I like you as a poster, but there's zero chance the lawfare ends without people paying a price. Thinking otherwise is blatant denial.
War was declared years ago.
This post was edited on 11/26/24 at 10:56 am
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:54 am to Godfather1
quote:
In your case, it’s not a fallacy.
But it is, objectively. I've taken many IQ tests in my life.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:54 am to moneyg
quote:
Even if a prosecutor illegally frames a defendant, colludes with a judge, falsifies evidence, etc?
Potentially not, but there is no evidence Jack Smith did any of that. That's the issue with this argument.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I've taken many IQ tests in my life.
Why? Do you keep failing them?
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:57 am to SlowFlowPro
We will let the legal system decide whether he's guilty of a crime or not.
I'm not going to take your word for it.
I'm not going to take your word for it.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 11:05 am to Wednesday
How about prosecute him for sedition
Posted on 11/26/24 at 11:05 am to WDE1980
quote:
Not to mention the millions Trump has spent defending himself.
Not a dime of that defense money came for Trumps pocket, thanks to you gullible trump worshipers. Why worry about payback, lets all just sit back and enjoy the low prices in food, fuel, clothing and goods that will be the legacy of Trumps second Presidency.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 11:08 am to Homesick Tiger
quote:
Why?
It's a typical hobby of people with high IQs
I didn't know this until much later in life.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 11:11 am to moneyg
quote:
Even if a prosecutor illegally frames a defendant, colludes with a judge, falsifies evidence, etc?
I believe that they are immune from prosecution, but do not have civil immunity if they violated someone’s rights. Trump could bankrupt and humiliate Smith, but I don’t think he can be prosecuted
Posted on 11/26/24 at 11:19 am to Wednesday
I agree that any legal pursuit to bring justice to Jack Smith and others that participated in unethical-- if not outright illegal-- lawfare should be done so carefully so as to not perpetuate tit for tat lawfare if/when power goes back to the other side. The system should be strengthened against abuse.
I don't disagree that Smith should be disbarred, etc. along your line of thought.
I wonder, though, what more might be done in Smith's case... I think they have Smith (and/or parts of his team) dead to rights on spoliation of evidence for the purposeful mishandling of seized documents and putting false classified cover sheets on them to stage a photo op. There is no innocent or accidental reason for this. Aside from simple sanctions, since this was done to both falsely hurt Trump's political hopes and to falsely magnify the optics of the legitimacy and importance of this case, what charges might stem from this? Something pertaining to malicious prosecution? The intentional nature of this was along the lines of defamation/libel, and though Trump is a public figure, was this flagrant enough to pursue recourse in this vein?
I saw a couple of guests on Newsmax yesterday note that the way Smith filed to dismiss without prejudice might allow him to revive the case in 4 years, as also noted in point #2 in this article: JDSupra
To this end, I think more should be done than simply disbarring Smith and perhaps some of his team. If you don't go after him, it seems that this case doesn't quite die and that does not seem just. But, again, I do agree that it shouldn't be just be a sloppy tit for tat that perpetuates systemic abuse of the system.
I don't disagree that Smith should be disbarred, etc. along your line of thought.
I wonder, though, what more might be done in Smith's case... I think they have Smith (and/or parts of his team) dead to rights on spoliation of evidence for the purposeful mishandling of seized documents and putting false classified cover sheets on them to stage a photo op. There is no innocent or accidental reason for this. Aside from simple sanctions, since this was done to both falsely hurt Trump's political hopes and to falsely magnify the optics of the legitimacy and importance of this case, what charges might stem from this? Something pertaining to malicious prosecution? The intentional nature of this was along the lines of defamation/libel, and though Trump is a public figure, was this flagrant enough to pursue recourse in this vein?
I saw a couple of guests on Newsmax yesterday note that the way Smith filed to dismiss without prejudice might allow him to revive the case in 4 years, as also noted in point #2 in this article: JDSupra
To this end, I think more should be done than simply disbarring Smith and perhaps some of his team. If you don't go after him, it seems that this case doesn't quite die and that does not seem just. But, again, I do agree that it shouldn't be just be a sloppy tit for tat that perpetuates systemic abuse of the system.
Page 2 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News