All Degenerates, Fuktards, FukTARTs please continue your fight.

[Guest]

New poster to this …

good yes and get to the bottom of all cases …

along those lines did you see how a judge just agreed with DOJ concerns that Trump is *still* hiding docs ? I guess they will be allowed to call the so-called “private investigators” that Trump hired to search.

This while Biden officials voluntarily cooperate.

is TC THIS dumb?

of course he is …

meanwhile inflation has cooled (now 6.5 for year, down quite a bit), meanwhile still record employment and damn my 401k is still looking far more robust than it did during the Trump years

:)

what judge doesnt concur with DOJ concerns?

Biden had NO RIGHT to possess these docs-he wasnt POTUS-totally different standard -just being in possession is illegal for Biden
but dont worry he kept the other set next to his Corvette in the garage
your hypocrisy knows no bounds

as far as your 401K- a lot of people are making cash shorting stocks right now
record employment will be short lived- Hollywood,wall street and big tech have all announced big layoffs
and 6.5 % inflation is 3x higher than when brandon took office
the economy is not doing well-talk more after 1st qt 2023

[Guest]

Obviously both cases have revealed there is a terrible process in place for document removal from top offices. Even Congressional members have said staff pack up their belongings when then they leave office and many members of Congress have classified docs depending on their committee assignments. There's probably many more docs out there that shouldn't be.

The difference, of course, is Biden's cooperation (and the 2nd one was discovered after he ordered all offices searched after discovery #1) vs Trump knowing he'd kept documents that weren't his and refusing to turn them over.

Cooperating after committing the actual crime????

[Guest]

Cooperating after committing the actual crime????

did he pack boxes himself or a staffer? If he had no knowledge of their existence - and in fact the National Archives didn't know either - is that a crime. Trump had BOXES full of documents. It's far less likely he didn't know they came home with hiom - besides the fact that NA reached out multiple times AND he ignored a subpoena for their return. That isn't cooperation that's knowingly breaking the law. Cons have yet to acknowledge that fun fact. If Biden knew, did something nefarious then bring it on. We know Trump did

[Guest]

OP is an example of everything wrong with democrats. Low IQ, close-minded and only believes what he/she/it sees on Clinton News Network or MS-NBC. Probably is for vaxxing of babies too.

[Guest]

OP is an example of everything wrong with democrats. Low IQ, close-minded and only believes what he/she/it sees on Clinton News Network or MS-NBC. Probably is for vaxxing of babies too.

Lol …that’s what , your 4th post on this within 30 min?

triggered much?

:)

[Guest]

what judge doesnt concur with DOJ concerns?

you really walked right into a haymaker once again TC, you impulsive little dummy .

using a popular search engine, here are top eight results from the query “Judge rules against DOJ”:

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/27/92821...efamation-suit


https://www.law.com/nationallawjourn...20230012134947

(^^^^ KBJ, Uber libbie judge, ruled AGAINST DOJ there :) )

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-doj#xj4y7vzkg

https://nypost.com/2022/12/09/judge-...assified-docs/

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2022/...es-against-DoJ

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judg...ry?id=89966326

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisond...h=48d43d02363b

https://www.billboard.com/music/musi...nsing-7511194/


[b] Will more “SCOOPS” be required, TC?

[Guest]

you really walked right into a haymaker once again TC, you impulsive little dummy .

using a popular search engine, here are top eight results from the query “Judge rules against DOJ”:

https://www.npr.org/2020/10/27/92821...efamation-suit


https://www.law.com/nationallawjourn...20230012134947

(^^^^ KBJ, Uber libbie judge, ruled AGAINST DOJ there :) )

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-doj#xj4y7vzkg

https://nypost.com/2022/12/09/judge-...assified-docs/

https://m.dailykos.com/stories/2022/...es-against-DoJ

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/judg...ry?id=89966326

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisond...h=48d43d02363b

https://www.billboard.com/music/musi...nsing-7511194/


[b] Will more “SCOOPS” be required, TC?

you are too fa down the road
we are talking about initial investigation - in court you have to show
judges give a lot of latitude to DOJ requests -
they shouldnt after the whole fabricated Russian collusion mess -but they still do

[Guest]

did he pack boxes himself or a staffer? If he had no knowledge of their existence - and in fact the National Archives didn't know either - is that a crime. Trump had BOXES full of documents. It's far less likely he didn't know they came home with hiom - besides the fact that NA reached out multiple times AND he ignored a subpoena for their return. That isn't cooperation that's knowingly breaking the law. Cons have yet to acknowledge that fun fact. If Biden knew, did something nefarious then bring it on. We know Trump did

yes, it is a crime- Biden simply having the docs is a crime-he was not POTUS
the rest is simply whataboutism with Trump

your bigger problem is that TRUMP nor theGOP had anything to do with this- this is Dem on Dem crime, his own staffers are turning him in-too funny
funny how Joe has his attorneys do his moving for him- wonder what they charge an hour for the service

Andrew Cuomo knows what is going on- Joe should call him

[Guest]

you are too fa down the road
we are talking about initial investigation - in court you have to show
judges give a lot of latitude to DOJ requests -
they shouldnt after the whole fabricated Russian collusion mess -but they still do

Is that what you say when you make a statement like, “What judge doesn’t agree with DOJ concerns,” and are immediately given 8 examples of where you are wrong ? As well as offered MORE if needed?

is that how you deflect ?

[Guest]

Is that what you say when you make a statement like, “What judge doesn’t agree with DOJ concerns,” and are immediately given 8 examples of where you are wrong ? As well as offered MORE if needed?

is that how you deflect ?

when the doj comes to a judge and says we have evidence of some crime and we need a warrant they get it


when you are in a courtroom and make a motion based on specific law they may read it differently

again once you get into court the other side may have a better argument-you are too far down the road

[Guest]

To all the degenerate, Fuktards, FukTARTs and Republikazzzzes your efforts and messaging is working nicely, you have so far enabled a one term presidency, lost the house/Senate in 2020. And after all those loses you all continued your tyrant false narrative.
In a typical downturn year for the incumbent party the house or senate expects huge loses but the Fuktards, FukTARTs and the degenerate party prevented such tidal wave so please continue your work and soon the Republikazzzzes will be the minority in EVERY election

good day.

I wasn’t the OP but I think the sentiment is timely so I wanted to refresh the notion :)