Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, John from Riverside said:

See it’s post like this that offer. Nothing but an insult that are really not needed.
 

Goose asked for a specific alligation you provided none

You guys have truly lost any sense of humor….if you ever even had one. GET OVER YOURSELVES!  

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:


If you’re going to make a specific allegation, then do so. I’m not here for games. 
 

But I would say getting legal ”insight” from someone with no experience or background in law is quackery. 

Attorneys disagree with each other all the time. That's what they do. This is why we have them. Some legal positions are, what shall I call it, based on "novel legal theory"? That's why higher courts toss cases out.

 

If I were to make an allegation, it would be that some internet legal warriors believe they have a better grasp of the law than do others.

4 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

See it’s post like this that offer. Nothing but an insult that are really not needed.
 

Goose asked for a specific alligation you provided none

We're taking the level of legal debate to a place that probably exceeds a sports message board. I'll always make fun of that. Always

  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

Attorneys disagree with each other all the time. That's what they do. This is why we have them. Some legal positions are, what shall I call it, based on "novel legal theory"? That's why higher courts toss cases out.


Of course, you know that’s not what’s happening here. Trump’s lawyers told him he was wrong, even the ones who ended up advancing this BS told him it wouldn’t work because it was wrong. 
 

Why do you think the lawyers who pushed this stuff are getting disbarred? You don’t get disbarred for pushing a novel legal theory. 

21 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

The King doesn’t play games. So shall it be written, so shall it be so. 

And those who call him The King are just admitting they can’t read. So I commend you on your dedication to announcing your illiteracy. 

Posted
14 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

Attorneys disagree with each other all the time. That's what they do. This is why we have them. Some legal positions are, what shall I call it, based on "novel legal theory"? That's why higher courts toss cases out.

 

If I were to make an allegation, it would be that some internet legal warriors believe they have a better grasp of the law than do others.

We're taking the level of legal debate to a place that probably exceeds a sports message board. I'll always make fun of that. Always

Hogwash! Goose is always confident that his/her legal opinions are the only ones that count. I’m guessing that attitude makes him/her a very good  counsel for his/her clients. And…it’s also why he/she’s been awarded the title King of the Message Board. (And the fact that he/she doesn’t post any Trump memes.) 

  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:


Of course, you know that’s not what’s happening here. Trump’s lawyers told him he was wrong, even the ones who ended up advancing this BS told him it wouldn’t work because it was wrong. 
 

Why do you think the lawyers who pushed this stuff are getting disbarred? You don’t get disbarred for pushing a novel legal theory. 

And those who call him The King are just admitting they can’t read. So I commend you on your dedication to announcing your illiteracy. 

Legal experts have specifically stated that this recent indictment is based on "novel legal theory". That's why I put it in quotes. Heavens!

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Do you even read

You can stop there because the answer is no. 
 

He has demonstrated time after time that he’s an idiot who can’t read. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 The King @ChiGoose in rare form tonight!

 

Anyway...

 

 

Cue more attacking the messenger by useful idiots....

 

Next thing they'll tell you is that the chief of the Capitol Police isn't an expert on policing the Capitol because The National Pulse is the source of the interview and Tucker Carlson did the interviewing. 

 

Delusional useful idiots living under a green sky.

 

 

In the hour-long interview, Sund laments the behaviors of then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as well as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, who he says had intelligence to suggest problems on Capitol Hill, which they failed to communicate with Sund and his cops on the ground.

 

“If I was allowed to do my job as the chief we wouldn’t be here, this didn’t have to happen,” Sund begins, around 19 minutes into the conversation, during which he describes himself as “pissed off” about being “lambasted in public” over the events.

 

“Everything appears to be a cover up,” says the decorated police chief, explaining that most things to do with his department were political, specifically because he reported to politicians including then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

 

“Like I said, I’m not a conspiracy theorist,” Sund explains, “…but when you look at the information and intelligence they had, the military had, it’s all watered down. I’m not getting intelligence, I’m denied any support from National Guard in advance. I’m denied National Guard while we’re under attack, for 71 minutes…”

 

“It sounds like they were hiding the intelligence,” Carlson quizzed, to which Sund stunningly responds: “Could there possibly be actually… they kind of wanted something to happen? It’s not a far stretch to begin to think that. It’s sad when you start putting everything together and thinking about the way this played out… what was their end goal?”

Posted
1 minute ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

Next thing they'll tell you is that the chief of the Capitol Police isn't an expert on policing the Capitol because The National Pulse is the source of the interview and Tucker Carlson did the interviewing. 

 

Delusional useful idiots living under a green sky.

 

 

In the hour-long interview, Sund laments the behaviors of then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as well as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, who he says had intelligence to suggest problems on Capitol Hill, which they failed to communicate with Sund and his cops on the ground.

 

“If I was allowed to do my job as the chief we wouldn’t be here, this didn’t have to happen,” Sund begins, around 19 minutes into the conversation, during which he describes himself as “pissed off” about being “lambasted in public” over the events.

 

“Everything appears to be a cover up,” says the decorated police chief, explaining that most things to do with his department were political, specifically because he reported to politicians including then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

 

“Like I said, I’m not a conspiracy theorist,” Sund explains, “…but when you look at the information and intelligence they had, the military had, it’s all watered down. I’m not getting intelligence, I’m denied any support from National Guard in advance. I’m denied National Guard while we’re under attack, for 71 minutes…”

 

“It sounds like they were hiding the intelligence,” Carlson quizzed, to which Sund stunningly responds: “Could there possibly be actually… they kind of wanted something to happen? It’s not a far stretch to begin to think that. It’s sad when you start putting everything together and thinking about the way this played out… what was their end goal?”

Then, maybe the president should’ve called them in what do you think?

Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Then, maybe the president should’ve called them in what do you think?

 

How did I know this would be what you'd say.

 

:lol:

 

This has been gone over many times.

 

The POTUS doesn't have unilateral authority to call up the national guard.

 

He can request the National Guard, but in DC it must be approved by either the house or senate sergeant at arms or the mayor of DC to deploy them.

 

Trump did indeed request the NG for J6, and was denied by both the mayor and the sergeants at arms. 

 

Thanks for playing, but your masters don't program you with these types of inconvenient details.

Edited by BillsFanNC
Posted (edited)

I love how @ChiGoose is lamenting how others would read and listen to a reporter with no formal legal training..

 

:lol:

 

Sorry dude...you lost the 'expert' angle during covid where anyone and their brother could be an expert on infectious disease, molecular/immuno diagnostics, epidemiology, vaccines, etc. 

 

You diluted the meaning to the point it no longer has any meaning. Anyone can be an expert now. Just like everything can be racist.

 

Well as long as you have the right political opinion you can be an expert minus whatever academic credentials you wish.

 

This is the bed you and the rest of your band of useful idiots made.

 

Lie in it and enjoy yourself some Julie Kelly.

Edited by BillsFanNC
  • Disagree 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

I love how @ChiGoose is lamenting how others would read and listen to a reporter with no formal legal training..

 

:lol:

 

Sorry dude...you lost the 'expert' angle during covid where anyone and their brother could be an expert on infectious disease, molecular/immuno diagnostics, epidemiology, vaccines, etc. 

 

You diluted the meaning to the point it no longer has any meaning. Anyone can be an expert now. Just like everything can be racist.

 

Well as long as you have the right political opinion you can be an expert minus whatever academic credentials you wish.

 

This is the bed you and the rest of your band of useful idiots made.

 

Lie in it and enjoy yourself some Julie Kelly.


The rantings of a moron. 

Posted
19 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

I love how @ChiGoose is lamenting how others would read and listen to a reporter with no formal legal training..

 

:lol:

 

Sorry dude...you lost the 'expert' angle during covid where anyone and their brother could be an expert on infectious disease, molecular/immuno diagnostics, epidemiology, vaccines, etc. 

 

You diluted the meaning to the point it no longer has any meaning. Anyone can be an expert now. Just like everything can be racist.

 

Well as long as you have the right political opinion you can be an expert minus whatever academic credentials you wish.

 

This is the bed you and the rest of your band of useful idiots made.

 

Lie in it and enjoy yourself some Julie Kelly.

So education consists of getting online and reading this ***** that confirms your confirmation bias and all of a sudden you’re an expert
 

Got it

  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, John from Riverside said:

So education consists of getting online and reading this ***** that confirms your confirmation bias and all of a sudden you’re an expert
 

Got it


Don’t argue with an idiot. He’ll bring you down to his level and beat you with experience. 
 

This guy is probably the single dumbest person I’ve ever seen on the internet. Best to just remind everyone that he’s a moron and move on. 

Edited by ChiGoose
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

So education consists of getting online and reading this ***** that confirms your confirmation bias and all of a sudden you’re an expert
 

Got it

 

YOUR rules established by leftist covidiots.

 

I'm a molecular biologist with several vaccine formulation and rapid diagnostic patents. Yet I had morons like you, who can't define what a woman is,  telling me what the real deal is with vaccines, immunity and test positives.

 

And confirmation bias ?

 

The projection from you morons should be astounding,  but it's not.

 

Tell me, how is that you still believe, in August of 2023, that Trump didn't request the NG on J6, and his approval for the NG wasn't denied multiple times?

 

 

Edited by BillsFanNC
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

YOUR rules established by leftist covidiots.

 

I'm a molecular biologist with several vaccine formulation and rapid diagnostic patents. Yet I had morons like you, who can't define what a woman is,  telling me what the real deal is with vaccines, immunity and test positives.

 

And confirmation bias ?

 

The projection from you morons should be astounding,  but it's not.

 

Tell me, how is that you still believe, in August of 2023, that Trump didn't request the NG on J6, and his approval for the NG wasn't denied multiple times?

 

 

Wait a minute are you going to say that Donald Trump requested to have the National Guard at the capital for January 6?
 

Is that what you’re going with this is gonna be fun

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Wait a minute are you going to say that Donald Trump requested to have the National Guard at the capital for January 6?
 

Is that what you’re going with this is gonna be fun

 

I go with reality as it exists in the world under a blue sky. I know that you do not.

 

And before you once again attack the messenger news site, the link to the pdf of the J6 timeline memo produced by the Capitol police is in the article. It confirms the Trump DOD was prepared authorize the NG request once it was formally requested, as is required by law. The sergeants at arms and mayor Bowser all rejected DOD efforts to  receive a formal request. It's all there in writing from the very organizations that rejected the NG.

 

Are we having fun yet?

 

https://justthenews.com/government/congress/trump-pentagon-first-offered-national-guard-capitol-four-days-jan-6-riots-memo

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

Wait a minute are you going to say that Donald Trump requested to have the National Guard at the capital for January 6?
 

Is that what you’re going with this is gonna be fun

 

 

Unbelievable.

 

This is well known.

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

Edited by B-Man
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Posted
36 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Unbelievable.

 

This well known.

 

 

 

Based on what?
 

Donald Trump did not move to have National Guard troops at the capital for January 6 that did not happen

 

You really believe that he’s sitting there, losing his ***** because he’s about ready to get kicked out of office and you think that he’s gonna go through the extra step of protecting the institution of voting

 

Come on man

  • Eyeroll 1
×
×
  • Create New...