@shavixmir saidNow Shav has moved us closer. He says it ‘looks like the prosecution thinks there is a felony.”
Uhhhh… has the case been decided?
It looks like the prosecution thinks there’s a felony.
Personally? trump altering a weather map would be enough for me to send the man to the US to cause stupidity.
But he was already there. And Americans are seemingly the dumbest fukking creatures on Earth.
Best warch out, before Wayoma comes raping you. If he could find the US on a map, that is.
I ‘think’ it will be cloudy at sunset,,,,but, maybe not.
You would convict Trump for altering a weather map? That is not very freedom-loving of you. Oh wait, you don’t know freedom.
@no1marauder saidkeep digging little man 😂
Which stupid thing do you believe;
A) That a corporate check isn't a "business record";
B) That specifying the exact business record(s) defendant is accused of falsifying doesn't give him sufficient notice?
1 edit
@mott-the-hoople saidHe's been afforded all the constitutional rights any criminal defendant in New York has at this stage of the proceedings.
Trump has a constitutional right to know exactly what the charges are...he has not been afforded that
He's not entitled to anything more just because right wing dupes love him.
@averagejoe1 saidthat is what got us where we are at now…I am not shy
Easy Mott, no need for that. Let the others do that.
@mott-the-hoople saidNo, you're an ignorant, bigoted a**hole.
that is what got us where we are at now…I am not shy
@no1marauder saiddont be around me if you dont want the truth lille man
No, you're an ignorant, bigoted a**hole.
@no1marauder saidNo wonder this guy more than likely sucks as a lawyer.😀
No, you're an ignorant, bigoted a**hole.
2 edits
The post that was quoted here has been removedThere is nothing in the US Constitution or anywhere else saying that the Grand Jury must list predicate crimes. There are ample provisions in NY and every other State's law for that information to be given to defendants well before trial.
The Sixth Amendment largely refers to trial rights; defendants don't get to "confront the witnesses against them" in a Grand Jury proceeding for example.
And you really should be banned for your constant homophobic attacks on other posters. From the Posting Guidelines:
"Hate speech is not permitted."
@no1marauder saidMarauder, libs are not too keen on the Constitution when it does not suit them. Here you use the Constitution to make your point?
There is nothing in the US Constitution or anywhere else saying that the Grand Jury must list predicate crimes. There are ample provisions in NY and every other State's law for that information to be given to defendants well before trial.
The Sixth Amendment largely refers to trial rights; defendants don't get to "confront the witnesses against them" in a Grand Jury pr ...[text shortened]... homophobic attacks on other posters. From the Posting Guidelines:
"Hate speech is not permitted."
Help me Rhonda.
This is a good example of why your being often conflicted is hard to debate with. At least you did not smother us with links.
Please see this one for me , to prove MY point.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/1/19/constitution-congress-government-liberals/
@averagejoe1 saidI've read such tripe before.
Marauder, libs are not too keen on the Constitution when it does not suit them. Here you use the Constitution to make your point?
Help me Rhonda.
This is a good example of why your being often conflicted is hard to debate with. At least you did not smother us with links.
Please see this one for me , to prove MY point.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2011/1/19/constitution-congress-government-liberals/
Few right wingers will admit that: A) The Constitution was a vast expansion of Federal power as opposed to the prior, ineffectual Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union; and B) That the commerce clause was meant to give the US Congress considerable latitude in managing the country's economy (the failure of Federal power to do so was the main cause of the economic crisis that led to the Constitutional Convention).
@no1marauder saidWow , what a segue. Anyway, I do not blame you for shirking on this one, I am as clear as a bell. I am not writing about the Convention, nor Federal Power, nor perpetual union, nor the economy.
I've read such tripe before.
Few right wingers will admit that: A) The Constitution was a vast expansion of Federal power as opposed to the prior, ineffectual Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union; and B) That the commerce clause was meant to give the US Congress considerable latitude in managing the country's economy (the failure of Federal power to do so was the main cause of the economic crisis that led to the Constitutional Convention).
Or, are you actually saying that the Constitution should not be followed?
@averagejoe1 saidThen I don't know WTF you are talking about.
Wow , what a segue. Anyway, I do not blame you for shirking on this one, I am as clear as a bell. I am not writing about the Convention, nor Federal Power, nor perpetual union, nor the economy.
Or, are you actually saying that the Constitution should not be followed?
I'm saying the Constitution was meant to give broad powers to the Federal government and that attempts by right wingers to read it in a cramped way (like the article you cited to) are historically unjustified.
@no1marauder saidoh my...the constitution is to give RIGHTS TO THE PEOPLE
Then I don't know WTF you are talking about.
I'm saying the Constitution was meant to give broad powers to the Federal government and that attempts by right wingers to read it in a cramped way (like the article you cited to) are historically unjustified.
how ignorant can you be