Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 8:15 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 8:15 am

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.

WHAT THE **** DO YOU THINK A GRAND JURY DOES BESIDES DETERMINE IF THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO TAKE THE CASE TO TRIAL?? IF THEY DO, a "True bill" is issued and an INDICTMENT is written and sent to the Court for trial. AND THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT I SAID!!!

And INDICTMENT has NO REQUIREMENT of a brief to lay out ANY CASE, CUMFACE!!

ARE YOU THIS **** DENSE??

OH WAIT, YOU ARE. Too bad you don't read and comprehend PLAIN ENGLISH so good, huh??

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 8:22 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 8:22 am

WHAT THE **** DO YOU THINK A GRAND JURY DOES BESIDES DETERMINE IF THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE TO TAKE THE CASE TO TRIAL?? IF THEY DO, a "True bill" is issued and an INDICTMENT is written and sent to the Court for trial. AND THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT I SAID!!!

And INDICTMENT has NO REQUIREMENT of a brief to lay out ANY CASE, CUMFACE!!

ARE YOU THIS **** DENSE??

OH WAIT, YOU ARE. Too bad you don't read and comprehend PLAIN ENGLISH so good, huh??

It doesn't file into the courtroom before a judge to explain things.

Its position is represented by the Indictment.


You're a **** idiot.

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 8:25 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 8:25 am

It doesn't file into the courtroom before a judge to explain things.

Its position is represented by the Indictment.

You're a **** idiot.

NO, I JUST CURB STOMPED YOUR MALIGNANT *** AGAIN and you can't stand it, DICKSUCK!!!

Isn't your boyfriend Cletus waiting on you to hit that COCK OF HIS??

An INDICTMENT is nothing more than a PRESENTATION that "probable cause" EXISTS for a TRIAL TO HAPPEN. PERIOD!! It DOES NOT prove any case, has NO REQUIREMENT to prove guilt NOR OFFERS ANY, and isn't the FINAL WORD on ANYTHING. 

NOW GO **** TOURSELF AND SHUT THE HELL UP, LOSER!!

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.

the whole purpose of the filing was to let Jack Smith give his opinion as to what aspects of Trump's criminal behavior fell under "official acts" and shich did not.  I hope you are smart enough to consult a real lawyer when you next need one.

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 8:57 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 8:57 am

NO, I JUST CURB STOMPED YOUR MALIGNANT *** AGAIN and you can't stand it, DICKSUCK!!!

Isn't your boyfriend Cletus waiting on you to hit that COCK OF HIS??

An INDICTMENT is nothing more than a PRESENTATION that "probable cause" EXISTS for a TRIAL TO HAPPEN. PERIOD!! It DOES NOT prove any case, has NO REQUIREMENT to prove guilt NOR OFFERS ANY, and isn't the FINAL WORD on ANYTHING. 

NOW GO **** TOURSELF AND SHUT THE HELL UP, LOSER!!

It DOES NOT prove any case,

no one has suggested it does.

You claimed the filing was "unnecessary".

Because you're a moron.

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 9:17 am

no one has suggested it does.

You claimed the filing was "unnecessary".

Because you're a moron.

Psssst. Here's a CLUE for you, DICKBREATH.

The JUDGE will determine AT TRIAL if something is ADMISSIBLE OR NOT, not the Persecution. Did you get that part??

Smith's BRIEF was nothing more than another attempt to SMEAR TRUMP before the eleciton. HIS HATE for the man is as intense as yours and @maineman  's is. This type of PERSECUTION is literally almost NEVER done and in the length Smith did it is unprecedented on its face. He literally laid out his entire case, witness list, and what attempts he plans to make. THAT is a DIRECT VIOLATION of the 6th Amendment to assure an IMPARTIAL JURY and a FAIR TRIAL!!

So GO **** YOURSELF. AGAIN. Try to enjoy it this time.

The fact is, YOU'RE THE PIG **** IDIOT HERE, not anyone else. I PROVED my point; CURB STOMPED YOUR *** ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS ON THIS THREAD ALONE AND DID IT WITH MAGNIFICANT SPLENDOR!!

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 10:42 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 10:42 am

Psssst. Here's a CLUE for you, DICKBREATH.

The JUDGE will determine AT TRIAL if something is ADMISSIBLE OR NOT, not the Persecution. Did you get that part??

Smith's BRIEF was nothing more than another attempt to SMEAR TRUMP before the eleciton. HIS HATE for the man is as intense as yours and @maineman  's is. This type of PERSECUTION is literally almost NEVER done and in the length Smith did it is unprecedented on its face. He literally laid out his entire case, witness list, and what attempts he plans to make. THAT is a DIRECT VIOLATION of the 6th Amendment to assure an IMPARTIAL JURY and a FAIR TRIAL!!

So GO **** YOURSELF. AGAIN. Try to enjoy it this time.

The fact is, YOU'RE THE PIG **** IDIOT HERE, not anyone else. I PROVED my point; CURB STOMPED YOUR *** ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS ON THIS THREAD ALONE AND DID IT WITH MAGNIFICANT SPLENDOR!!

You're wrong on the facts.

**** your feelings.
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 10:46 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 10:46 am

You're wrong on the facts.

**** your feelings.

You don't know the definition of facts. You don't post any. 

Die. 

*Vegas » 04 Oct 2024, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 10:48 am

You don't know the definition of facts. You don't post any. 

Die.

I show that you're lying, and you kill yourself...

Deal?

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 10:50 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 10:50 am

I show that you're lying, and you kill yourself...

Deal?

What happened to all the deals that I give you? You run. 

Take me deals first, then I will take yours. 

Coward. 

*Vegas » 04 Oct 2024, 10:53 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 10:53 am

What happened to all the deals that I give you? You run. 

Take me deals first, then I will take yours. 

Coward.

I took your deal. Cannon failed to disqualify himself - as the advanced, and accelerating, deterioration of his barely functioning senses due to syphilis demanded.

I took the sanction.

Now take the deal, lying coward

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 10:46 am » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 10:46 am

You're wrong on the facts.

**** your feelings.

Which "facts" that the GRAND JURY issued an INDICTMENT that isn't anything BUT a "finding" or probable cause?? OR the FACT that this brief is highly unusual and without precedent?? 

Or the FACT that the JUDGE decides if something is admissible?? OR can you show us a case where this kind of brief has been issued in the past to support your claim??

OR the FACT that NO ONE DISPUTES THAT YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A DAMD MORONIC **** PIG TURD OF AN IDIOT!!

 

*Beekeeper » 04 Oct 2024, 1:02 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 1:02 pm

Which "facts" that the GRAND JURY issued an INDICTMENT that isn't anything BUT a "finding" or probable cause?? OR the FACT that this brief is highly unusual and without precedent?? 

Or the FACT that the JUDGE decides if something is admissible?? OR can you show us a case where this kind of brief has been issued in the past to support your claim??

OR the FACT that NO ONE DISPUTES THAT YOU ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A DAMD MORONIC **** PIG TURD OF AN IDIOT!!

You're an idiot.

The indictment describes THE FACTS which led to its issuance.
They are considered so because they are supported by statements of the accused, sworn testimony, documentation, or other physical evidence.

Until they are contradicted by other evidence, they will constitute the facts of the matter.
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 5:45 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 5:45 pm

You're an idiot.

The indictment describes THE FACTS which led to its issuance.
They are considered so because they are supported by statements of the accused, sworn testimony, documentation, or other physical evidence.

Until they are contradicted by other evidence, they will constitute the facts of the matter.

So?? It STILL is prejudicial to the DEFENDENT and is NOT REQUIRED as you claimed it was!! Just MORE FODDER FOR TRUMP TO APPEAL ANY VERDICT, IF you ever get a trial and I would be more inclined to say will NEVER happen!! Seeing how Smith appealed his DISMISSAL of all charges in the "documents" case based on the FACT he was ILLEGALLY APPOINTED, which he was under our CONSTITUTION which you ASSHOLES HATE!!

Now, enjoy your CURB STOMPING!!

Blackvegetable » 04 Oct 2024, 5:45 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Oct 2024, 5:45 pm

You're an idiot.

The indictment describes THE FACTS which led to its issuance.
They are considered so because they are supported by statements of the accused, sworn testimony, documentation, or other physical evidence.

Until they are contradicted by other evidence, they will constitute the facts of the matter.

And Smith's BRIEF is NOT THE INDICTMENT, DICKBREATH IDIOT!!!

You don't need PROOF of a crime to get an indictment, ONLY evidence that a crime MAY have been committed!! !!

Sucks for you AGAIN that you massively were just CURB STOMPED!!

*Beekeeper » 05 Oct 2024, 4:47 am » wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2024, 4:47 am

And Smith's BRIEF is NOT THE INDICTMENT, DICKBREATH IDIOT!!!

You don't need PROOF of a crime to get an indictment, ONLY evidence that a crime MAY have been committed!! Oops!!

Sucks for you AGAIN that you massively were just CURB STOMPED!!

You don't need PROOF of a crime to get an indictment, ONLY evidence that a crime MAY have been committed!!

Read this slowly...

YOU....ARE...A....****...MORON.


Nod.

*Beekeeper » 05 Oct 2024, 4:43 am » wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2024, 4:43 am

So?? It STILL is prejudicial to the DEFENDENT and is NOT REQUIRED as you claimed it was!! Just MORE FODDER FOR TRUMP TO APPEAL ANY VERDICT, IF you ever get a trial and I would be more inclined to say will NEVER happen!! Seeing how Smith appealed his DISMISSAL of all charges in the "documents" case based on the FACT he was ILLEGALLY APPOINTED, which he was under our CONSTITUTION which you ASSHOLES HATE!!

Now, enjoy your CURB STOMPING!!

and is NOT REQUIRED as you claimed it was

it was requested by the judge, you **** idiot.

Blackvegetable » 05 Oct 2024, 5:36 am » wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2024, 5:36 am

it was requested by the judge, you **** idiot.

Sucks you are stupider than a **** BOX OF ROCKS!!

READ IT AND WEEP, DICKFACE!! Honig sez you are WRONG AGAIN!!..... NY Mag): 

 Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he’ll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump’s electoral prospects. At this point, there’s simply no defending Smith’s conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis. “But we need to know this stuff before we vote!” is a nice bumper sticker, but it’s neither a response to nor an excuse for Smith’s unprincipled, norm-breaking practice. (It also overlooks the fact that the Justice Department bears responsibility for taking over two and a half years to indict in the first place.) 

 Let’s go through the problems with what Smith has done here. 

 First, this is backward. The way motions work — under the federal rules, and consistent with common sense — is that the prosecutor files an indictment; the defense makes motions (to dismiss charges, to suppress evidence, or what have you); and then the prosecution responds to those motions. Makes sense, right? It’s worked for hundreds of years in our courts. 

 Not here. Not when there’s an election right around the corner and dwindling opportunity to make a dent. So Smith turned the well-established, thoroughly uncontroversial rules of criminal procedure on their head and asked Judge Chutkan for permission to file first — even with no actual defense motion pending. Trump’s team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith’s request to file first was “procedurally irregular” — moments before she ruled in Smith’s favor, as she’s done at virtually every consequential turn. 

 Which brings us to the second point: Smith’s proactive filing is prejudicial to Trump, legally and politically. It’s ironic. Smith has complained throughout the case that Trump’s words might taint the jury pool. Accordingly, the special counsel requested a gag order that was so preposterously broad that even Judge Chutkan slimmed it down considerably (and the Court of Appeals narrowed it further after that). 

 Yet Smith now uses grand-jury testimony (which ordinarily remains secret at this stage) and drafts up a tidy 165-page document that contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination, and files it publicly, generating national headlines. You know who’ll see those allegations? The voters, sure — and also members of the jury pool. 

 And that brings us to our final point: Smith’s conduct here violates core DOJ principle and policy. The Justice Manual — DOJ’s internal bible, essentially — contains a section titled “Actions That May Have an Impact on the Election.” Now: Does Smith’s filing qualify? May it have an impact on the election? Of course. So what does the rule tell us? “Federal prosecutors … may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election.

https://twitter.com/TomBevanRCP/status/ ... h-n2645753
 

Blackvegetable » 05 Oct 2024, 5:35 am » wrote: ↑

05 Oct 2024, 5:35 am

Read this slowly...

YOU....ARE...A....****...MORON.

Nod.

ROFLMAO!!

Looky maw!!! A DICKFACE POS MORONIS IDIOT!!

https://i.postimg.cc/Pf04sdrF/****.jpg