Tigeraholic1 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 19 minutes ago, pfife said: It's also the height of hypocrisy for you to whine about YOUR religion after supporting the dozens and dozens of antisemtic videos MB posted. Apparently your religion deserves special treatment you fail to afford to others. Even weirder you do that on a sports forum. It is weird. Its like we both don't care for persecution based on what religion a human practices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 15 Author Share Posted July 15 (edited) As you mentioned and apparently conveniently forgot after the burn fell super flat, it's a sports message board. You're not being persecuted. People just think your posts are terrible Please stop persecuting other posters for not posting in the forums you post in and also for not agreeing with you. Your cancel culture persecution of people who happen to disagree with your multi-forum content is gross and also infringes on everyone's liberties. Edited July 15 by pfife Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edman85 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (Checks the thermostat) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 15 Author Share Posted July 15 Live view of Tigerholic posting on Motown Forums Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Incredible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Edman85 said: (Checks the thermostat) Everybody is pretty calm no riots or protests that I am aware of. I would like to hear from Kimberly Cheatle as to why we had such a terrible security lapse. Like how the only building which was only 150 meters and perfect line of site from rally and the only in the area was not part of the security halo. I think that might quell some of the angst from the weekend. Has she made any statements I am not aware of? I am sure her handlers have advised her to not comment for 3-4 months after the independent investigation that will be conducted and completed. I think Regans took even longer tbh. Edited July 15 by Tigeraholic1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 15 Author Share Posted July 15 Cannon dismissed the documents case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbomb13 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 No surprise since she’s clearly in his pocket 🙄 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben9753 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 As much as I loathe Trump, there's something incredible about the amount of sheer luck the guy has. He's like a cockroach that somehow manages to scoot away at the last second from under your shoe. Father Time will eventually catch up to him, but I'm starting to think he may live past 100. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Time to start looking for property in Costa Rica Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 15 Author Share Posted July 15 It's obviously bad, but it will be appealed and she may have removed herself from any further jurisprudence in the case if it survives appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 18 minutes ago, pfife said: Cannon dismissed the documents case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.TaterSalad Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) 9 minutes ago, pfife said: It's obviously bad, but it will be appealed and she may have removed herself from any further jurisprudence in the case if it survives appeal. What are the odds it gets successfully appealed and the case goes before a new judge post appeal? Can that legally happen or would Cannon stay on a a judge? Edited July 15 by Mr.TaterSalad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted July 15 Author Share Posted July 15 1 minute ago, Mr.TaterSalad said: What are the odds it gets successfully appealed and the case goes before a new judge post appeal? Can that legally happen or would Cannon stay on a a judge? my stayed at holiday in express understanding is that appeal must win and upon remand they must also win an argument to get the judge changed. There is a legal route. Not sure the viability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 7 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said: What are the odds it gets successfully appealed and the case goes before a new judge post appeal? Can that legally happen or would Cannon stay on a a judge? I’ve read they would appeal to the 11th Circuit Court which has overturned her rulings before. Probably more of a delay tactic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1776 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 16 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said: Time to start looking for property in Costa Rica If you find something enticing let me know. For a couple of years now I’ve been trying to sell that idea to my wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganCardinal Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) The Appointments Clause?!? Are you kidding me?!? I figured it would have been on the grounds of the recent Supreme Court case. But it's on.... the Appointments Clause?! I think they could theoretically just re-file without Jack Smith. I haven't read the full opinion, but I can't imagine how this ruling would get around basically claiming that all Special Prosecutors ever appointed by the DOJ are unconstitutional, because they weren't confirmed by the Senate. It's a joke. Edited July 15 by MichiganCardinal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 It’s a moot point. I think it’s probable this ruling will be overturned, and yet nothing in time for anything to proceed before the election. So judge Eileen, Cannon, “mission accomplished“, your job is done. Put off this trial until after the election. Bravo miss. and when Trump loses this election, given that we know it will be contested again, this trial will be put off for a while longer. However, there will be a day that it will come to trial, and be heard. And a jury of his peers will listen to the evidence and decide his guilt or innocence. And that’s the way it should be. …… That’s if we still do have a working democracy. Because if Trump wins, you can throw everything in my second paragraph right out the window. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Is it too divisive to suggest that this ruling makes me worry about the state of our democracy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Justice delayed is Justice denied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 25 minutes ago, ben9753 said: As much as I loathe Trump, there's something incredible about the amount of sheer luck the guy has. I would suggest that this wasn't luck at play here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Trump dodges another bullet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben9753 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 9 minutes ago, mtutiger said: I would suggest that this wasn't luck at play here... Getting his judge assigned to the case was luck. The rest played out as expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganCardinal Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 9 minutes ago, smr-nj said: It’s a moot point. I think it’s probable this ruling will be overturned, and yet nothing in time for anything to proceed before the election. So judge Eileen, Cannon, “mission accomplished“, your job is done. Put off this trial until after the election. Bravo miss. and when Trump loses this election, given that we know it will be contested again, this trial will be put off for a while longer. However, there will be a day that it will come to trial, and be heard. And a jury of his peers will listen to the evidence and decide his guilt or innocence. And that’s the way it should be. …… That’s if we still do have a working democracy. Because if Trump wins, you can throw everything in my second paragraph right out the window. This case wasn't going to be heard before the election anyway though, that's the weird thing to me. The easy way to kick the can was already lined up by the Supreme Court. Prosecuting a former President will now take months, if not years, of evidentiary hearings to suss out the line between official acts and unofficial acts. That wasn't going to happen before November. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganCardinal Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Footnote 61 from the opinion is telling as to Jack Smith's thoughts about this: Quote Insofar as the Special Counsel may argue that additional briefing on remedy is warranted, the Court explains the record and notes the Special Counsel’s full and fair opportunity to brief the matter of remedy. This action presents a challenging array of issues, almost all of which are resolutely contested; the parties require no prompting before objecting, opposing, and otherwise engaging in “spirited” exchanges. With respect to the instant Motion itself, both the Special Counsel and Defendant Trump submitted briefing; amicus briefs were received; and a lengthy hearing occurred. Yet startlingly, the Special Counsel submitted nothing on the topic of the proper remedy for the Appointments Clause issue, despite challenging dismissal as a remedy in the Appropriations Clause context [ECF No. 374 pp. 22–23 (disputing dismissal and referencing alternative sources of funding); see ECF No. 671 (response to supplemental authority agreeing to supplemental briefing “on the immunity issue” and nothing more)]. Instead, counsel for the Special Counsel remarked at the hearing, in response to a question about remedy in the Appropriations Clause context, that: “to the extent that the Court is seriously entertaining the notion that there is a constitutional or funding problem, I actually think it would behoove the Court and the parties to have some additional briefing” [ECF No. 648 p. 44]. This last-minute reference to conditional supplemental briefing at the hearing—only if the Court disagreed with the Special Counsel on the merits—in no way signals a lack of a full and fair opportunity given to all parties to brief their positions.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.