I knew you were talking about joinder. It's amusing to watch you try to impress by quoting first year law school procedural rules.

But that was not what was the most laughable part of your post, this was:

quote:
He doesn't know that the DNC has already filed one in Manhattan.

Yon didn't know that the DNC was not a party to the D.C. case, so now you're just trying to cover up your ignorance about the parties with this joinder tripe.

Watching you try to cover up and squirm your way out of stuff is entertaining.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Wolfhound45

Hanging with Chicken in Lurkistan

Member since Nov 2009

120000 posts

Posted on 7/6/18 at 10:50 pm to texridder

You are another dumbass semantics warrior. Here is the simple version for you. They filed in the wrong venue. And it was dismissed. They can file in the correct venue. And it will not be upheld on the merits. You are a simpleton. A hack. But hey, whatever makes you happy. Keep hating Trump. It will change nothing. #45POTUS

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by BBONDS25

Member since Mar 2008

48925 posts

Posted on 7/6/18 at 10:50 pm to texridder

quote:
Yon didn't know that the DNC was not a party to the D.C. case, so now you're just trying to cover up your ignorance about the parties with this joinder tripe

why would joinder apply to the dnc if they originated the New York case? My God man. It's amazing to see you declare victory with absolutely zero basis. Tell me...why would I bring up joinder regarding the D.C. Case when I'm the one that stated the DNC had already filed in NY?

Unlike you...after getting involved in the thread I did 10 seconds of research. Which is why I posted about the dnc's ny case.

This post was edited on 7/6/18 at 10:54 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board