Reply With Quote
We now now that Trump paid the Enquirer to e the McDougal story, one wonders if he arranged the mean stories the Enquirer ran about Rubio and Cruz during the campaign.
at landmines
We now now that Trump paid the Enquirer to e the McDougal story, one wonders if he arranged the mean stories the Enquirer ran about Rubio and Cruz during the campaign.
Sounds like the no-nonsense types on Fox News like Shep and Chris Wallace are trying to prepare Trump University enrollees for what's coming. When you start losing the Fox News judges giving their take in fire and brimstone you know bad times are coming
Fox good now
Shep and Wallace were always good. Judge Nap has been pretty pragmatic about the president's legal woes.
Shep is a re ed got, but I respect the judge.
And what are your specific reasons for calling him re ed, Darrin?
We already know you're a phobe.
Nope. I hope they have ties to NRA, Trump etc. Michael Cohen knows. And since he ONLY got 3 years, I'm sure Mueller knows too. Tick tock MFer. Your boy going down. It's only a matter of time.
Fox is complicit along with the Rs. I'm sure they are in bed with the NRA and Pootin. I hope Mueller burns it all down tbh.Sounds like the no-nonsense types on Fox News like Shep and Chris Wallace are trying to prepare Trump University enrollees for what's coming. When you start losing the Fox News judges giving their take in fire and brimstone you know bad times are coming
^ Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad AF!
it's called sarcasm and glad you got a chuckle out of it.
Fox News’ Judge Napolitano just told his viewers the last thing they want to hear about Trump
“We’ve learned that federal prosecutors here in New York City, not Bob Mueller and his team in Washington, D.C.,
career prosecutors here in New York City,
have evidence that the president of the United States committed a felony by ordering and paying Michael Cohen to break the law,” Napolitano said.
“How do we know that? They told that to a federal judge.”
“Under the rules, they can’t tell that to a federal judge unless they actually have that hardcore evidence,” he continued.
“Under the rules, they can’t tell that to a federal judge unless they intend to do something with that evidence.”
Judge Napolitano characterized the non-prosecution agreement between federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York and The Enquirer‘s corporate parent as the evidence that “ties a bow on all of this,” saying that
the information in the agreement
“connects the dots between the payments to the two women who claim they had intimate relationships with the president, and
the line running through all of that is the president himself.”
“Prosecutors have told us through these filings that
they have evidence that the president committed a felony?” Smith asked Napolitano.
“The felony is paying Michael Cohen to commit a felony,” Napolitano replied.
“It’s pretty basic.”
https://washingtonpress.com/2018/12/...ce26o5sEgviq68
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-13-2018 at 01:40 PM.
If your lawyer went to jail for work he did in the course of your representation, how would you feel Joey?
he called him a low level worker in the same interview
lawyers are s bags so who cares... i'd assume my lawyer done some shady that might not pertain to me.
what's with these stupid hypotheticals as well as using my name like you're pulling one over on me? yall s are stupid.
Last edited by koriwhat; 12-13-2018 at 01:37 PM.
You didn’t answer the question and it’s not a stupid hypothetical. Answer the question: if your lawyer received a three year prison sentence for things he did in the course and scope of representing you, how would you feel Joey?
i literally just answered your question corky.
No you didn’t. And I think it’s safe to assume you lack the capacity to answer. Prove me wrong?
"i'd assume my lawyer done some shady that might not pertain to me."
looks like a ing answer to me. might not be the answer you seek and idgaf if it isn't.
btw, i lack the capacity? yall really think i'm some toothless backwoods re redneck huh? funny how someone who can teach himself many things in many different areas is somehow seen as dense; i'm not claiming to be some prodigy however i'm definitely not who you try to make me out to be either.
Your assumption isn’t what the question asked. That’s what words like “your lawyer” and “course and scope” and “representation” mean. Kinda like what happened with Cohen and Trump here.
So no, not an answer. You’ve really jumped the shark on this one Joey.
most definitely an answer. what exactly did you want me to type so you could read exactly what you wanted?
I’m not going to argue with you about what clearly isn’t an answer to a very direct and simple question.
What I wanted you to do was answer a question you clearly couldn’t. My mistake for thinking you had that capability.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
