US Politics: Bike tricks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kieppie said:
Just because they claim felony doesn't mean it actually is.
Click to expand...

You go with feelings then.

Kieppie said:
Should ask Hillary's team they purposely misfiled their campaign finances and received a fine.
This case with Trump they still to even prove it was purposefully done.

Come off it, this case is a joke and everyone except ideologues knows it.
Even leftist publications says as much
Click to expand...

Yeah let’s conflate totally different scenarios. Lol.
 
Kieppie said:
The difference is that Soros does this openly and with a clearly stated agenda funneling millions to further this.

The hypocrisy would be to try and equate this with Clarence, whos a frequent target of leftists making up bunk stories.
Click to expand...
Bwahaha. Critical thinking again.
 
quovadis said:
Bwahaha. Critical thinking again.
Click to expand...
Soros is a known bad actor. With a known agenda.
The story with Clarence is not remotely comparable.
But I guess if you want to compare a grain of sand to a molehill...
 
The_Right_Honourable_Brit said:
Expel them all. If you are a legislator, you act like one. If you want to cosplay as a bunch of lazy protesters, then be my guest - just expect consequences.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1644070937908617218
Click to expand...
He has a history of being a "standup guy".

www.tennessean.com

Activist Justin Jones banned from Capitol after alleged assault on Speaker Glen Casada

Justin Jones is accused of throwing a to-go cup of coffee into the elevator where Tennessee House Speaker Glen Casada stood.
www.tennessean.com

Thoughts and prayers...
 
Kieppie said:
Nah that's Braggs justification for the charges. His feelings.
Click to expand...
The indictments were handed down by the Grand Jury not Bragg.
Kieppie said:
Sure. Different...
Different in that Hillary's one was true.
Click to expand...
You’re contradicting yourself again.

Kieppie said:
Soros is a known bad actor. With a known agenda.
The story with Clarence is not remotely comparable.
But I guess if you want to compare a grain of sand to a molehill...
Click to expand...
Perhaps one day you’ll be able to see how foolish this statement is.
 
quovadis said:
The indictments were handed down by the Grand Jury not Bragg.
Click to expand...
Actual rubber stamp remember. Especially in Manhattan.

quovadis said:
You’re contradicting yourself again.
Click to expand...
Nope, Hillary did something. Got a fine. Even *if* Trump was guilty a fine would have been suitable.
Sadly Bragg has his feelings that he knows what Trump was thinking.

quovadis said:
Perhaps one day you’ll be able to see how foolish this statement is.
Click to expand...
Clarence has been attack numerous times. My personal favourite was when they accused him of planning to interfere with interracial marriage :X3:
Nah perhaps one day you'll see how cancerous Soros has been.
I'll wait for more information to come to light regarding Clarence instead, especially given the typical bunk relating to him.
 
Kieppie said:
Actual rubber stamp remember. Especially in Manhattan.

Nope, Hillary did something. Got a fine. Even *if* Trump was guilty a fine would have been suitable.
Sadly Bragg has his feelings that he knows what Trump was thinking.

Clarence has been attack numerous times. My personal favourite was when they accused him of planning to interfere with interracial marriage :X3:
Nah perhaps one day you'll see how cancerous Soros has been.
I'll wait for more information to come to light regarding Clarence instead, especially given the typical bunk relating to him.
Click to expand...
You're so conflicted. Wow.
 
Kieppie said:
If you say so. I just see the court case as the farce is it.
It's really shocking that you do not.
Click to expand...
I believe in the rule of law and the process itself. Obviously there's a case to answer and evidence will be presented. The process will play out and the outcome will be known. You're attacking the charges, the grand jury, the jury pool, the DA and the Judge based on political lean and ideology without any idea what the basis of each charge and the evidence itself is. If you ask me that's the shocking part.
 
quovadis said:
I believe in the rule of law and the process itself. Obviously there's a case to answer and evidence will be presented. The process will play out and the outcome will be known. You're attacking the charges, the grand jury, the jury pool, the DA and the Judge based on political lean and ideology without any idea what the basis of each charge and the evidence itself is. If you ask me that's the shocking part.
Click to expand...
I'm pointing out existing bias which obviously affect this case to an extreme amount. Denying this is ridiculous.
The case has very little merit and this has been addressed by lawyers on both sides of the aisle.
It is by far the weakest of the cases being leveled. Don't know why it's being played up so much when it will just result in people being disappointed.
 
Kieppie said:
I'm pointing out existing bias which obviously affect this case to an extreme amount. Denying this is ridiculous.
The case has very little merit and this has been addressed by lawyers on both sides of the aisle.
It is by far the weakest of the cases being leveled. Don't know why it's being played up so much when it will just result in people being disappointed.
Click to expand...
You have no idea of the merit or weakness because you and the lawyers haven't seen the evidence. But keep defending the unknown :thumbsup: :X3:
 
quovadis said:
You have no idea of the merit or weakness because you and the lawyers haven't seen the evidence. But keep defending the unknown :thumbsup: :X3:
Click to expand...
Of course I have, the case lacked merit previously, and much to the disappointment of many, no new information was brought forward.
There's not some hidden bombshell waiting to be revealed.
 
quovadis said:
Are you clairvoyant?
Click to expand...
I'm merely taking note of what the previous DA said, along with the many other lawyers, about the merits of the case.
This one and when they first considered it.

Could Bragg pull a rabbit out of the hat? Sure, but it won't be because of the merits of the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X