(02-16-2024 09:47 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:06 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Whoa there, Cletus. The damned court set the timing. They gave him 8 days to respond. He replied in 2.

Look up a bit and you'll see where you were asked to provide your legal bona fides. What say you Tom?

Well, nobody really asked me. Most likely because they know I'm not a lawyer. That being said, someone asked why the case was not brought until "now" when trump was a candidate. My guess is that is was brought after they completed their investigation, which undoubtedly took some time. This is far from an easy situation. And the indictment was filed quite a bit ago, and before trump was a declared candidate.

It's doesn't take a legal scholar to know that he was given 8 days to respond by the court and he responded within that time frame. The court is setting the time lines here, not Smith. Smith can only ask for expedience. It's the courts call as to whether they grant it or not. Just as they do the same for the attempts by trump to delay delay delay.

At least tanq is a real lawyer. You're just a wanna be tanq.

(02-16-2024 10:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:47 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:06 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Whoa there, Cletus. The damned court set the timing. They gave him 8 days to respond. He replied in 2.

Look up a bit and you'll see where you were asked to provide your legal bona fides. What say you Tom?

Well, nobody really asked me. Most likely because they know I'm not a lawyer. That being said, someone asked why the case was not brought until "now" when trump was a candidate. My guess is that is was brought after they completed their investigation, which undoubtedly took some time. This is far from an easy situation. And the indictment was filed quite a bit ago, and before trump was a declared candidate.

It's doesn't take a legal scholar to know that he was given 8 days to respond by the court and he responded within that time frame. The court is setting the time lines here, not Smith. Smith can only ask for expedience. It's the courts call as to whether they grant it or not. Just as they do the same for the attempts by trump to delay delay delay.

How's the Fani case working out for you in Atlanta? I guess you haven't seen that thread?

(02-16-2024 10:25 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:47 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:06 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Whoa there, Cletus. The damned court set the timing. They gave him 8 days to respond. He replied in 2.

Look up a bit and you'll see where you were asked to provide your legal bona fides. What say you Tom?

Well, nobody really asked me. Most likely because they know I'm not a lawyer. That being said, someone asked why the case was not brought until "now" when trump was a candidate. My guess is that is was brought after they completed their investigation, which undoubtedly took some time. This is far from an easy situation. And the indictment was filed quite a bit ago, and before trump was a declared candidate.

It's doesn't take a legal scholar to know that he was given 8 days to respond by the court and he responded within that time frame. The court is setting the time lines here, not Smith. Smith can only ask for expedience. It's the courts call as to whether they grant it or not. Just as they do the same for the attempts by trump to delay delay delay.

How's the Fani case working out for you in Atlanta? I guess you haven't seen that thread?

Just fine. I'm not on trial. How's it working our for you?

If I gave two ***** about her, I'd read and post in it.

(02-16-2024 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:25 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:47 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:06 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Whoa there, Cletus. The damned court set the timing. They gave him 8 days to respond. He replied in 2.

Look up a bit and you'll see where you were asked to provide your legal bona fides. What say you Tom?

Well, nobody really asked me. Most likely because they know I'm not a lawyer. That being said, someone asked why the case was not brought until "now" when trump was a candidate. My guess is that is was brought after they completed their investigation, which undoubtedly took some time. This is far from an easy situation. And the indictment was filed quite a bit ago, and before trump was a declared candidate.

It's doesn't take a legal scholar to know that he was given 8 days to respond by the court and he responded within that time frame. The court is setting the time lines here, not Smith. Smith can only ask for expedience. It's the courts call as to whether they grant it or not. Just as they do the same for the attempts by trump to delay delay delay.

How's the Fani case working out for you in Atlanta? I guess you haven't seen that thread?

Just fine. I'm not on trial. How's it working our for you?

If I gave two ***** about her, I'd read and post in it.

You (now) don't care, because it's been exposed as a joke. Shall I bump the threads from a little while back, where you seemed to be very interested in this trial?!? LMAO!

When this case turns the same direction, you'll say the same thing and move on to the next "Get Trump" thing.

We boaf grindin'!

(02-16-2024 10:35 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:25 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 09:47 AM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Look up a bit and you'll see where you were asked to provide your legal bona fides. What say you Tom?

Well, nobody really asked me. Most likely because they know I'm not a lawyer. That being said, someone asked why the case was not brought until "now" when trump was a candidate. My guess is that is was brought after they completed their investigation, which undoubtedly took some time. This is far from an easy situation. And the indictment was filed quite a bit ago, and before trump was a declared candidate.

It's doesn't take a legal scholar to know that he was given 8 days to respond by the court and he responded within that time frame. The court is setting the time lines here, not Smith. Smith can only ask for expedience. It's the courts call as to whether they grant it or not. Just as they do the same for the attempts by trump to delay delay delay.

How's the Fani case working out for you in Atlanta? I guess you haven't seen that thread?

Just fine. I'm not on trial. How's it working our for you?

If I gave two ***** about her, I'd read and post in it.

You (now) don't care, because it's been exposed as a joke. Shall I bump the threads from a little while back, where you seemed to be very interested in this trial?!? LMAO!

When this case turns the same direction, you'll say the same thing and move on to the next "Get Trump" thing.

We boaf grindin'!

Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:35 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:25 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:08 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Well, nobody really asked me. Most likely because they know I'm not a lawyer. That being said, someone asked why the case was not brought until "now" when trump was a candidate. My guess is that is was brought after they completed their investigation, which undoubtedly took some time. This is far from an easy situation. And the indictment was filed quite a bit ago, and before trump was a declared candidate.

It's doesn't take a legal scholar to know that he was given 8 days to respond by the court and he responded within that time frame. The court is setting the time lines here, not Smith. Smith can only ask for expedience. It's the courts call as to whether they grant it or not. Just as they do the same for the attempts by trump to delay delay delay.

How's the Fani case working out for you in Atlanta? I guess you haven't seen that thread?

Just fine. I'm not on trial. How's it working our for you?

If I gave two ***** about her, I'd read and post in it.

You (now) don't care, because it's been exposed as a joke. Shall I bump the threads from a little while back, where you seemed to be very interested in this trial?!? LMAO!

When this case turns the same direction, you'll say the same thing and move on to the next "Get Trump" thing.

We boaf grindin'!

Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

Your stupidity never disappoints!

Quote:“The criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered,” declared Benjamin Cardozo (a famous judge and ultimately Supreme Court justice). But, responded another Supreme Court justice, Louis Brandeis, “If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law.”

AS FREE AS THE WIND BLOWS

(02-16-2024 11:45 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:35 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:25 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  How's the Fani case working out for you in Atlanta? I guess you haven't seen that thread?

Just fine. I'm not on trial. How's it working our for you?

If I gave two ***** about her, I'd read and post in it.

You (now) don't care, because it's been exposed as a joke. Shall I bump the threads from a little while back, where you seemed to be very interested in this trial?!? LMAO!

When this case turns the same direction, you'll say the same thing and move on to the next "Get Trump" thing.

We boaf grindin'!

Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

Your stupidity never disappoints!

Not a doctor either, but perhaps you should get some Preparation-H.

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

You should be interested though.

An obviously corrupt DA who is trying to put a Presidential candidate in prison deserves major scrutiny from EVERYONE.

Again, liberals who said there is a two tiered justice system for decades, cannot admit that it goes it every direction.

(02-16-2024 12:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:45 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:35 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:32 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Just fine. I'm not on trial. How's it working our for you?

If I gave two ***** about her, I'd read and post in it.

You (now) don't care, because it's been exposed as a joke. Shall I bump the threads from a little while back, where you seemed to be very interested in this trial?!? LMAO!

When this case turns the same direction, you'll say the same thing and move on to the next "Get Trump" thing.

We boaf grindin'!

Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

Your stupidity never disappoints!

Not a doctor either, but perhaps you should get some Preparation-H.

Why? Does laughing at dumb people cause hemorrhoids?

(02-16-2024 12:28 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:45 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 10:35 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  You (now) don't care, because it's been exposed as a joke. Shall I bump the threads from a little while back, where you seemed to be very interested in this trial?!? LMAO!

When this case turns the same direction, you'll say the same thing and move on to the next "Get Trump" thing.

We boaf grindin'!

Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

Your stupidity never disappoints!

Not a doctor either, but perhaps you should get some Preparation-H.

Why? Does laughing at dumb people cause hemorrhoids?

Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't join your circle jerk.

(02-16-2024 12:17 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

You should be interested though.

An obviously corrupt DA who is trying to put a the leading Presidential candidate from an opposing party in prison deserves major scrutiny from EVERYONE.

Again, liberals who said there is a two tiered justice system for decades, cannot admit that it goes it every direction.

CONSISTENT & PERSISTENT

(02-16-2024 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:28 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:45 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:41 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not interested in FANI WILLIS on trial. Get a clue. If she broke any laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, disbar her. If she abused her position in this trial, kick her off it. I don't give a **** about her.

Unless you find she broke some laws going after trump specifically, no, it has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of trump.

Your stupidity never disappoints!

Not a doctor either, but perhaps you should get some Preparation-H.

Why? Does laughing at dumb people cause hemorrhoids?

Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't joint your circle jerk.

You posted a lot on the Georgia trial over the past few months.

Odd that you now seem to have no interest in it.

I find it quite funny to see a certain poster here tell others to "get a clue."

Maybe that's just me but I doubt it.

(02-16-2024 01:59 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:28 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 11:45 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  Your stupidity never disappoints!

Not a doctor either, but perhaps you should get some Preparation-H.

Why? Does laughing at dumb people cause hemorrhoids?

Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't join your circle jerk.

You posted a lot on the Georgia trial over the past few months.

Odd that you now seem to have no interest in it.

A G A I N, yes, I have interest in the Georgia trial of trump. I do not, however, have any interest in the sideshow of Fani. I'll leave that to you and your minions.

(02-16-2024 02:16 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 01:59 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:28 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:02 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Not a doctor either, but perhaps you should get some Preparation-H.

Why? Does laughing at dumb people cause hemorrhoids?

Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't join your circle jerk.

You posted a lot on the Georgia trial over the past few months.

Odd that you now seem to have no interest in it.

A G A I N, yes, I have interest in the Georgia trial of trump. I do not, however, have any interest in the sideshow of Fani. I'll leave that to you and your minions.

Got it. No concern about corrupt public officials.




Unless their name is Trump.

(02-16-2024 02:21 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 02:16 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 01:59 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:28 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Why? Does laughing at dumb people cause hemorrhoids?

Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't join your circle jerk.

You posted a lot on the Georgia trial over the past few months.

Odd that you now seem to have no interest in it.

A G A I N, yes, I have interest in the Georgia trial of trump. I do not, however, have any interest in the sideshow of Fani. I'll leave that to you and your minions.

Got it. No concern about corrupt public officials.




Unless their name is Trump.

I know reading and comprehension isn't your strongest suit, so I'll say it again.

If Fani broke laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, report and or disbar her. If she did anything improper on the trump case, kick her off it. If she somehow falsified anything to compromise the case, throw it out.

It's not that hard of a concept to understand...at least I thought.

Short of the last item above, it doesn't change anything about the illegalities of donald j. trump, the most indicted and impeached president in our nations history.

(02-16-2024 02:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 02:21 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 02:16 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 01:59 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't join your circle jerk.

You posted a lot on the Georgia trial over the past few months.

Odd that you now seem to have no interest in it.

A G A I N, yes, I have interest in the Georgia trial of trump. I do not, however, have any interest in the sideshow of Fani. I'll leave that to you and your minions.

Got it. No concern about corrupt public officials.




Unless their name is Trump.

I know reading and comprehension isn't your strongest suit, so I'll say it again.

If Fani broke laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, report and or disbar her. If she did anything improper on the trump case, kick her off it. If she somehow falsified anything to compromise the case, throw it out.

It's not that hard of a concept to understand...at least I thought.

Short of the last item above, it doesn't change anything about the illegalities of donald j. trump, the most indicted and impeached president in our nations history.

Just out of curiosity. HOw many indictments have been successful?

He also has a 100% impeachment vindication rate.

(02-16-2024 02:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 02:21 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 02:16 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 01:59 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  

(02-16-2024 12:56 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Nope, I don't have any. Just thought you might need some for your butthurt because I won't join your circle jerk.

You posted a lot on the Georgia trial over the past few months.

Odd that you now seem to have no interest in it.

A G A I N, yes, I have interest in the Georgia trial of trump. I do not, however, have any interest in the sideshow of Fani. I'll leave that to you and your minions.

Got it. No concern about corrupt public officials.




Unless their name is Trump.

I know reading and comprehension isn't your strongest suit, so I'll say it again.

If Fani broke laws, charge her. If she broke ethics rules, report and or disbar her. If she did anything improper on the trump case, kick her off it. If she somehow falsified anything to compromise the case, throw it out.

It's not that hard of a concept to understand...at least I thought.

Short of the last item above, it doesn't change anything about the illegalities of donald j. trump, the most indicted and impeached president in our nations history.

If she did something wrong, someone should go after her. Maybe. But, it's not that important. Whatever.

Kill the evil Trump today!!! He's an existential threat!!! REEEEEE!!!!!