This is your supreme Court religious corrupt hypocrits.

As usual, Trump was nowhere near the target. The indictment does not allege any violation of the Presidential Records Act. Rather, it alleges that Trump violated (among other things) the Espionage Act.

you failed again. lol

seriuosly, read the indictment so you don't look stupid.
False allegations contradicted by Bergman Jackson's court ruling will not likely survive a trial, or at least in a just environment will not survive a fair trial.
 
Werbung:
False allegations contradicted by Bergman Jackson's court ruling will not likely survive a trial, or at least in a just environment will not survive a fair trial.

her ruling doesn't apply. he wasnt' charged under the PRA. duh.

read the indictment so you don't look so stupid.
 
Indictments are not guilty verdicts and Democrats are known to use the law to achieve crooked ends. Do not trust the Marx-loving, God-despising, leftist enemies of the US. One Democrat motto is: Show me a Republican and I will find a crime to charge him with.

Is there an English idiom that means "you can always find a law to convict anyone"? - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange
Not sure how common it is, but I've heard "Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime" quite a few times.
Indictments a not a status of guilt or otherwise.
Same old leftist Marxist ungodly blah blah.
You're as dumb as dogshyt.
 
her ruling doesn't apply. he wasnt' charged under the PRA. duh.

read the indictment so you don't look so stupid.
You say her ruling does not apply but offer no support for claiming the ruling does not apply to others besides Bill Clinton.
 
You say her ruling does not apply but offer no support for claiming the ruling does not apply to others besides Bill Clinton.

what? lol. try to make sense.
of course her ruling doesn't apply to trump's indictment, since her ruling was about different laws than trump was indicted under. duh.
we aren't talking about "others", we are talking about trump. Try to keep up so you don't look so stupid
 
what? lol. try to make sense.
of course her ruling doesn't apply to trump's indictment, since her ruling was about different laws than trump was indicted under. duh.
we aren't talking about "others", we are talking about trump. Try to keep up so you don't look so stupid
Democrats can violate precedent court rulings by filing charges using a different law? How does that work.
 
Democrats can violate precedent court rulings by filing charges using a different law? How does that work.

you don't understand how indictments work? no surprise. trump is accused of violating the espionage act, not PRA. duh
PRA precedents don't apply to different laws. duh

read the indictment so you don't look stupid
 
you don't understand how indictments work? no surprise. trump is accused of violating the espionage act, not PRA. duh
PRA precedents don't apply to different laws. duh

read the indictment so you don't look stupid
Biden committed espionage, not Trump. Leave it to Democrats to blame other for the crimes they commit.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top