Is this more of you being "good at debate"?*Huey » 06 Jan 2025, 11:35 am » wrote: ↑ You are not a smart person, DEMA.
Go back to the quote about indicting a ham sandwich.
It's ok...
I don't need that lecture. I already know that and was not arguing it. Stop reframing.Blackvegetable » 06 Jan 2025, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑ It's ok...
You have no idea...
It's something you were told.
By some idiot.
Grand juries issue indictments...because no sanction applies to their determinations, there need not be cross examination.
The target is afforded the opportunity to address the grand jury before it issues its decision.
Your idiotic influencers rely on your abject ignorance of the process, your hair trigger and eager credulity to recatapult the tripe they pour in your ear.
That is why you can't answer the question.
Nod.
*Huey » 06 Jan 2025, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑ I need that lecture. I already know that and was not arguing it. Stop reframing.
I need that lecture
Willis is guilty of much more than anything Trump is accused of doing as a private citizenBlackvegetable » 05 Jan 2025, 10:23 am » wrote: ↑ This isn't about me...
It's about your embrace of frivolous appeals.
Prove it.*GHETTOBLASTER » 06 Jan 2025, 1:20 pm » wrote: ↑ Willis is guilty of much more than anything Trump is accused of doing as a private citizen
Willis is a typically corrupt little *** monkey who's crimes have harmed We The People in more ways than one.
She needs to be banned from practicing law in the USA ever again.
Act like a man Richard..not like a little girl having a temper tantrum.
Didn't you just spill a load of feefees?*GHETTOBLASTER » 06 Jan 2025, 1:24 pm » wrote: ↑ Act like a man Richard..not like a little girl having a temper tantrum.
Prove it bitch.....!
What gives you the idea you excel at it? Reality and evolution theory.