Liberal Forum

Cedar » 03 Oct 2024, 4:32 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 4:32 pm

5th amendment, the right to due process

6th amendment, right to an impartial jury and the right to confront his accusers. It's been released to the public tainting any prospective jurors with inadmissible evidence.

You think @maineman  gives 2 **** about the Constitution or ANY rights Trump might have??

HELL **** NO he doesn't care and never will. His HATE far exceeds his desire to assure a FAIR TRIAL to anyone he hates politically. That's the NAZI IN THIS DOG TURD OF AN STOLEN VALOR "sailor". I hope SOMEONE takes his *** out in the near future. We would be a FAR BETTER PLACE without one dick sucking @maineman  .
 

Cedar » 03 Oct 2024, 4:32 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 4:32 pm

5th amendment, the right to due process

6th amendment, right to an impartial jury and the right to confront his accusers. It's been released to the public tainting any prospective jurors with inadmissible evidence.

How has he been denied due process?

Was there anything in that filing that caught you by surprise?

Did anything that Smith laid out in that filing cause you to go, "Wow!  I had no **** idea that happened?"

Cedar » 03 Oct 2024, 4:32 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 4:32 pm

5th amendment, the right to due process

6th amendment, right to an impartial jury and the right to confront his accusers. It's been released to the public tainting any prospective jurors with inadmissible evidence.

You people are **** idiots...

it's an indictment.

Cedar » 03 Oct 2024, 4:38 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 4:38 pm

Unfortunately not before the election, this whole charade is nothing more than election interference.

Trump DID win today as he got until Nov 7th to submit his answer to the **** brief.

Which will keep it out of the news cycle for a wile.

AMAZING STILL how @maineman  's HATE for Trump outweighs his love for FREEDOM AND RIGHTS!! Something he CLAIMS he joined the military to protect. What a **** PIECE OF LYING ****!!

Blackvegetable » 03 Oct 2024, 6:07 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 6:07 pm

You people are **** idiots...

it's an indictment.

So?? Do you think that gives total freedom for the PERSECUTION to do whatever the **** they want without regard to a DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS TO A FAIR TRIAL WITH AN IMPARTIAL JURY??

YOU'RE A **** MORONIC IDIOT!!

*Beekeeper » 03 Oct 2024, 6:36 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 6:36 pm

So?? Do you think that gives total freedom for the PERSECUTION to do whatever the **** they want without regard to a DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS TO A FAIR TRIAL WITH AN IMPARTIAL JURY??

YOU'RE A **** MORONIC IDIOT!!

They're OBLIGED to file it...it is a public record.

It was up to the judge how much would released.

DeezerShoove » 03 Oct 2024, 1:06 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 1:06 pm

Congrats.

What's the punchline? Orange man bad?

I was going to tell you that the punchline should be obvious but I see the that's already been taken care off..

maineman » 03 Oct 2024, 1:22 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 1:22 pm

..and he's gonna take him to trial and send him to prison.

Damn, they really should make an updated version..

 


 

maineman » 02 Oct 2024, 4:42 pm » wrote: ↑

02 Oct 2024, 4:42 pm

I am going to spend the evening reading the  entire 165 pages, but an interesting tidbit is this from page 142: 

"Upon receiving a phone call alerting him that Pence had been taken to a secure location,[REDACTED NAME OF PERSON #15] rushed to the dining room to inform the defendant in hopes that the defendant would take action to ensure Pence’s safety. Instead,after  [REDACTED NAME OF PERSON #15] delivered the news, the defendant looked at him and said only, “So what?""

Great thread BTW

Keep up the good work Patriot
I am anxious for more   
 
 
 

Blackvegetable » 03 Oct 2024, 6:45 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 6:45 pm

They're OBLIGED to file it...it is a public record.

It was up to the judge how much would released.

Show me the REQUIREMENT to make such a filing!!

GO!!

(Watch this folks!!)

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 6:20 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 6:20 am

Show me the REQUIREMENT to make such a filing!!

GO!!

(Watch this folks!!)

First you tell me what you think an Indictment is....
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 6:24 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 6:24 am

First you yell me what you think an Indictment is....

Keep up the good work Patriot!
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 6:24 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 6:24 am

First you tell me what you think an Indictment is....

An INDICTMENT is a finding by a GRAND JURY that enough evidence exists for a Trial Court to hear the case. NOTHING more. It's NOT a finding of guilt or innocence, but ONLY that enough "probable cause" exists.

SUCKS you are stupid as a **** PIG TURD, HUH??

NOW, SHOW ME THE REQUIREMENT TO PRESENT A BRIEF!!

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 6:46 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 6:46 am

An INDICTMENT is a finding by a GRAND JURY that enough evidence exists for a Trial Court to hear the case. NOTHING more. It's NOT a finding of guilt or innocence, but ONLY that enough "probable cause" exists.

SUCKS you are stupid as a **** PIG TURD, HUH??

NOW, SHOW ME THE REQUIREMENT TO PRESENT A BRIEF!!

That filing qualifies the original indictment consistent with the SCOTUS immunity decision.

This is what that decision obliges. Smith's filing distinguishes "official" from "unofficial" acts.

The truth of Grifty is ugly...

 

maineman » 03 Oct 2024, 5:42 pm » wrote: ↑

03 Oct 2024, 5:42 pm

How has he been denied due process?

Was there anything in that filing that caught you by surprise?

Did anything that Smith laid out in that filing cause you to go, "Wow!  I had no **** idea that happened?"

So what did your daughter say?

"The defendant and his co-conspirators also demonstrated their deliberate disregard for the truth—and thus their knowledge of falsity—when they repeatedly changed the numbers in their baseless fraud allegations from day to day. At trial, the Government will introduce several instances of this pattern, in which the defendant and conspirators' lies were proved by the fact that they made up figures from whole cloth. One example concerns the defendant and conspirators' claims about non-citizen voters in Arizona. The conspirators started with the allegation that 36,000 non-citizens voted in Arizona; 55 five days later, it was “beyond credulity that a few hundred thousand didn't vote” ; three weeks later, “the bare minimum [was] 40 or 50,000. The reality is about 250,000"; days after that, the assertion was 32,000; and ultimately, the conspirators landed back where they started, at 36,000—a false figure that they never verified or corroborated."

He just pulled random numbers out of his *** and ALL the MAGA morons ate 'em up like manna from heaven.  

Cedar » 04 Oct 2024, 7:06 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 7:06 am

So what did your daughter say?

She had not read the entire document but saw no violations of Trump's constitutional rights in what she had read thus far.  She pointed out that there are plenty of instances where the details of a defendant's criminal actions are common knowledge before they go to trial. That fact does not prevent them from having a fair trial.

maineman » 04 Oct 2024, 7:13 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 7:13 am

She had not read the entire document but saw no violations of Trump's constitutional rights in what she had read thus far.  She pointed out that there are plenty of instances where the details of a defendant's criminal actions are common knowledge before they go to trial. That fact does not prevent them from having a fair trial.

So she didn’t see problem using opinion as evidence? I hope you didn’t pay too much for that law degree.
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 7:01 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 7:01 am

That filing qualifies the original indictment consistent with the SCOTUS immunity decision.

This is what that decision obliges. Smith's filing distinguishes "official" from "unofficial" acts.

The truth of Grifty is ugly...

So where is the REQUIREMENT??

It's NOT, DICKBREATH, so SHUT THE **** UP WITH YOUR BLATHERING AND IMPOTENCE!!

YOU GOT PWNED AND CURB STOMPED MASSIVELY!!

What Smith did was make a filing that could have been 3 pages and instead he went down that POLITICAL RABBIT HOLE in a blatant attempt to damage Trump right before the election. Along with Judge Chutkan who PLAINLY STATED THAT "Trump belongs in prison" as a JUDGE before a scintilla of evidence has been presented.

YOU **** need to be NEUTERED and sent to the REEDUCATION CAMPS for IDIOTS

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 8:09 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 8:09 am

So where is the REQUIREMENT??

It's NOT, DICKBREATH, so SHUT THE **** UP WITH YOUR BLATHERING AND IMPOTENCE!!

YOU GOT PWNED AND CURB STOMPED MASSIVELY!!

What Smith did was make a filing that could have been 3 pages and instead he went down that POLITICAL RABBIT HOLE in a blatant attempt to damage Trump right before the election. Along with Judge Chutkan who PLAINLY STATED THAT "Trump belongs in prison" as a JUDGE before a scintilla of evidence has been presented.

YOU **** need to be NEUTERED and sent to the REEDUCATION CAMPS for IDIOTS

You still don't understand the purpose of an indictment.

Without an indictment, there can be no trial. The prosecution MUST lay out its case for why the perp is being tried. 

Cedar » 04 Oct 2024, 7:59 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 7:59 am

So she didn’t see problem using opinion as evidence? I hope you didn’t pay too much for that law degree.

Cite the specific passage with which you take issue