boyst Posted June 1 Posted June 1 Just now, ChiGoose said: You literally said Edwards didn’t face charges. Now you’re moving the goalpost to say he wasn’t convicted. Can you read your own writing? Or is that too hard for you too? I just needed someone to set the trap and link the evidence he was to show that he was found not guilty of the same violations trump was. ... And you did it. You new here, bud? The shift of the goal post was exactly what I did. Now explain why it's ok to find Edwards innocent of what trump was accused of doing and convicted of??? Also, in NC we all knew Edwards just like cal Cunningham who is absolutely and positively an idiot. It was known he had a thing for the ladies. 1 1
Tenhigh Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 3 minutes ago, boyst said: I just needed someone to set the trap and link the evidence he was to show that he was found not guilty of the same violations trump was. ... And you did it. You new here, bud? The shift of the goal post was exactly what I did. Now explain why it's ok to find Edwards innocent of what trump was accused of doing and convicted of??? Also, in NC we all knew Edwards just like cal Cunningham who is absolutely and positively an idiot. It was known he had a thing for the ladies. Queue the "he wasn't aware it wast wrong because Dems are incompetent" shtick on 3-2-1.... 1
ChiGoose Posted June 1 Posted June 1 3 minutes ago, boyst said: I just needed someone to set the trap and link the evidence he was to show that he was found not guilty of the same violations trump was. ... And you did it. You new here, bud? The shift of the goal post was exactly what I did. Now explain why it's ok to find Edwards innocent of what trump was accused of doing and convicted of??? Also, in NC we all knew Edwards just like cal Cunningham who is absolutely and positively an idiot. It was known he had a thing for the ladies. Oh buddy. I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you were an idiot. That’s my bad. Sorry! Edwards was found not guilty on some charges because the jury found that he acted solely to prevent the news of his affair from reaching his wife. The jury was hung on other charges. Unlike Trump, Edwards acted to cover up his affair immediately. He didn’t wait for a decade until he was running for office. In Trump’s case, the jury believed he acted not to prevent Melania from finding out but to help his campaign, which is a violation of campaign finance laws. I know these things seem super obvious to someone with a couple of brain cells to rub together but I guess you’re too much of a mastermind to recognize the obvious reality. 1 1 1
Pokebball Posted June 1 Posted June 1 5 hours ago, nedboy7 said: “Watching my party — the party of law and order — absolutely turn their guns against the jury, against the judge, against the system … this party has lost all ability to think for itself,” Kinzinger said Friday I think Kinzinger's and Cheney's hatred of Trump clouds their judgement. I didn't vote for Trump in either 2016 or 2020, largely due to his character flaws. I didn't necessarily think he did anything illegal. He was just an arrogant SOB with little to no civility. For full disclosure, I didn't vote for Clinton or Biden. I liked and respected both Kinzinger and Cheney for calling Trump's character out. I voted for Cheney in 2020. Now, however, I believe both Kinzinger and Cheney purposefully withheld information and testimony from the public relating to the Jan 6 investigation. Kinzinger's comment today is in this same vein. The means doesn't matter to him, as long as it's harmful to Trump. This NYC trial was 100% political and the result severely hurt many Americans trust and faith in the judiciary, all "to get Trump" A few years ago, I held Gabbard, Cheney and Kinzinger in the same category. I thought all three were brave, willing to put country over party. Cheney and particularly Kinzinger seem to me, to be willing to push truth aside over their hatred of Trump. That's not America. 2
49er Fan Posted June 1 Posted June 1 3 hours ago, Pokebball said: This NYC trial was 100% political Awwww Awwww Awwww Is Alvin Bragg running for Federal office? Did Joe Biden personally direct state prosecutors to charge Trump with crimes, himself? Awwww Awwww Awwww ”It’s so UNFAIR. Nothing like this has EVER occurred before in our COUNTRY.” Awwww Awwww Awwww So SAD! 2
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 1 Posted June 1 Don't take investment advice from Fox or Breitbart. Don't take any advice from them: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/dow-gains-nearly-600-points-after-fox-business-guest-predicted-crash-after-trump-conviction/ 1
Biden is Mentally Fit Posted June 1 Posted June 1 1 hour ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Don't take investment advice from Fox or Breitbart. Don't take any advice from them: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/dow-gains-nearly-600-points-after-fox-business-guest-predicted-crash-after-trump-conviction/ Reminiscent of the claims from ultra leftist genius Paul Krugman. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout Still, I guess people want an answer: If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.
Tiberius Posted June 1 Posted June 1 11 hours ago, Tenhigh said: I think he won't make a whole term due to his health, but if he does he will be squeaking over the finish line But I would not support a 3rd term, like everyone i know. If Trump declares the 22nd Amendment an elitist plot against him, his followers in government and out will push to make him king. He won't leave without violence, fraud and destruction. Supporting Trump is supporting a criminal 1
sherpa Posted June 1 Posted June 1 2 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Don't take investment advice from Fox or Breitbart. Don't take any advice from them: https://www.mediaite.com/tv/dow-gains-nearly-600-points-after-fox-business-guest-predicted-crash-after-trump-conviction/ For accuracy, the opinion was from a guest. Guests on all financial media have their own views, disparate and unique to them alone. That's how, and why, markets work. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 1 Posted June 1 (edited) 32 minutes ago, sherpa said: For accuracy, the opinion was from a guest. Guests on all financial media have their own views, disparate and unique to them alone. That's how, and why, markets work. he works for breitbart. guessing his political views had some factor in his choice. Personally, when I listen to economic news on TV, it's from Mark Zandi on PBS. I can't imagine him speculating like this. just another example of how different the tribes are...https://www.economy.com/markzandi Edited June 1 by Joe Ferguson forever
boyst Posted June 1 Posted June 1 11 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Oh buddy. I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you were an idiot. That’s my bad. Sorry! Edwards was found not guilty on some charges because the jury found that he acted solely to prevent the news of his affair from reaching his wife. The jury was hung on other charges. Unlike Trump, Edwards acted to cover up his affair immediately. He didn’t wait for a decade until he was running for office. In Trump’s case, the jury believed he acted not to prevent Melania from finding out but to help his campaign, which is a violation of campaign finance laws. I know these things seem super obvious to someone with a couple of brain cells to rub together but I guess you’re too much of a mastermind to recognize the obvious reality. All of your opinion is really cute. I'm impressed you're able to form sentences with cognitive words. Your opinion is valued and important I'm not being sarcastic No here's the chaser to the shot I already delivered. When his appeal is successful in the case is overturned, will you respect the verdict?
ChiGoose Posted June 1 Posted June 1 14 minutes ago, boyst said: All of your opinion is really cute. I'm impressed you're able to form sentences with cognitive words. Your opinion is valued and important I'm not being sarcastic No here's the chaser to the shot I already delivered. When his appeal is successful in the case is overturned, will you respect the verdict? What is the clear error that will lead to the successful appeal?
ScotSHO Posted June 1 Posted June 1 17 minutes ago, boyst said: All of your opinion is really cute. I'm impressed you're able to form sentences with cognitive words. Your opinion is valued and important I'm not being sarcastic No here's the chaser to the shot I already delivered. When his appeal is successful in the case is overturned, will you respect the verdict? They skip around their maypoles saying "formerly convicted felon".
boyst Posted June 1 Posted June 1 5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: What is the clear error that will lead to the successful appeal? Does it matter? Will you accept the ruling? 2 minutes ago, ScotSHO said: They skip around their maypoles saying "formerly convicted felon". The "they" don't matter. The tribalism is too strong in this.
ChiGoose Posted June 1 Posted June 1 3 minutes ago, boyst said: Does it matter? Will you accept the ruling? The "they" don't matter. The tribalism is too strong in this. You believe it will for certain be overturned on appeal but you don’t know why. And anyone should listen to you… why?
BillsFanNC Posted June 1 Posted June 1 6 minutes ago, boyst said: Does it matter? Will you accept the ruling? The "they" don't matter. The tribalism is too strong in this. Chigoose aka The King, is smarter than all the legal scholars. It's also a "former republican" who is above the partisan fray. It's, BY FAR, the most disingenuous poster here. At least rabid far leftists such as Tibs don't pretend to be anything other than the partisans that they are. Its smarter than this guy and all the rest.
Recommended Posts