Judge sides with trump on some issues

[Truth Detector]

How does that work in your mind? Every defendant should be able to do anything she wants in defense of herself?

How does it work in yours? AGs should be able to leak anything they want to a submissive media?

 

[Truth Detector]

Do you think that a defendant should be able to intimidate witnesses, tamper with jurors, disappear people, and lie in defense of herself? Were you thinking when you came up with that absurdity? Nope.

STRAWMAN alert. No one is intimidating witnesses other than this DOJ.

 

[Nomad]

She should not interfere with anyone's right to defend themselves, period.

Then why did she tell Trump anything? it will hinder his defense. That is the idea.

Trump is not going to get a fair trial.

If it were anyone else on trial, especially a Democrat and especially if they were accused of what Trump is accused of, you wouldn't have the slightest problem with it.

You'd be cheering it.

Lying Trumper cultist a-holes will defend that piece of slime with their dying breaths.

 

[Diesel]

How does it work in yours? AGs should be able to leak anything they want to a submissive media?

Defendants are not free to do whatever they want whether or not they think it works in their defense.

 

[Diesel]

STRAWMAN alert. No one is intimidating witnesses other than this DOJ.

You don't understand logical fallacies. Stop trying.

The judge told Trump that his free speech right is not limitless. coldjoint is advocating that any defendant can do whatever they want in their own defense. Surely you realize how stupid that is.

 

[coldjoint]

You would be as insane as trump


If you were a human

I would be and am honest with myself. Something you are incapable of. Sucks for you.

 

[coldjoint]

Do you think that a defendant should be able to intimidate witnesses, tamper with jurors, disappear people, and lie in defense of herself? Were you thinking when you came up with that absurdity? Nope.

Why do you ask that when that is exactly what Jack Smith has done?

 

[coldjoint]

If it were anyone else on trial, especially a Democrat and especially if they were accused of what Trump is accused of, you wouldn't have the slightest problem with it.

You'd be cheering it.

Lying Trumper cultist a-holes will defend that piece of slime with their dying breaths.

You are wrong. I do not want to see power abused this way no matter who it is.

 

[evince]

I would be and am honest with myself. Something you are incapable of. Sucks for you.

You suck ass

Get violent for trump if you are real

You will get quickly dead

 

[coldjoint]

You suck ass

Get violent for trump if you are real

You will get quickly dead

The violence comes from your side you loudmouthed POS.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

So now what you assholes?



You gonna keep trashing her?

you didn't mention whoch judge you are talking about so I will assume you mean the one in Florida........odd.....the only folks I've seen trashing her so far have been demmycrats......

 

[Diesel]

Why do you ask that when that is exactly what Jack Smith has done?

Jack Smith? You're like a bird chasing a reflection on the ground. Stay on topic.

 

[coldjoint]

Jack Smith? You're like a bird chasing a reflection on the ground. Stay on topic.

Smith is very much the topic in anything concerning Trump. You better see if you can get a thinking cap on Amazon.

 

[Diesel]

Smith is very much the topic in anything concerning Trump. You better see if you can get a thinking cap on Amazon.

I see. So as you continue trying to deflect with the savvy of a 5-year-old, did you want to decide whether or not a defendant should have unlimited rights to self defense? Or were you going to continue to interrupt conversations that didn't include you that you don't understand and are not qualified to join?

 

[coldjoint]

I see. So as you continue trying to deflect with the savvy of a 5-year-old, did you want to decide whether or not a defendant should have unlimited rights to self defense? Or were you going to continue to interrupt conversations that didn't include you that you don't understand and are not qualified to join?

Of course, he should have every right to defend himself. Why limit it? Is the prosecutor limiting anything?

 

[Diesel]

Of course, he should have every right to defend himself. Why limit it? Is the prosecutor limiting anything?

No, the judge is. And no, he should not. You don't know anything about criminal law.

 

[coldjoint]

No, the judge is. And no, he should not. You don't know anything about criminal law.

I seem to know more than you do, but that is nothing to brag about either way.