- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Fani wins
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:32 am to Vacherie Saint
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:32 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Its mere existence is cannon fodder for Dems. Macafee is a coward just like Kemp.
McAfee had no real legal basis to dismiss the prosecution
1
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:35 am to SlowFlowPro
What’s the first line say?
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:36 am to davyjones
quote:
What’s the first line say?
Which first line? Just quote what you're referencing.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:39 am to SlowFlowPro
If the first line didn’t grab you as it should have in its simplicity, then there’s no use wasting any more time on this.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:43 am to davyjones
quote:
If the first line didn’t grab you as it should have in its simplicity, then there’s no use wasting any more time on this.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:49 am to SlowFlowPro
The only thing that’s hilarious here is that you openly submit that President Biden could be served a notice to appear for arraignment on a charge of contractor fraud in Caldwell Parish District Court next week, if the DA there just willy nilly decided to file a BOI to that effect because he felt like if. But the President has to appear. And I know you really believe this because who would troll by making themselves look like a fool. Right?
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:58 am to davyjones
quote:
But the President has to appear.
His attorney would just file a motion to quash and Biden wouldn't have to appear
quote:
And I know you really believe this because who would troll by making themselves look like a fool. Right?
Again, you have provided nothing that argues state-based prosecutions against a sitting President are illegal.
You cited a memorandum on federal prosecutions that basically argued against every excuse provided in this thread and relied on a very specific separation of powers argument. That argument only applies to federal prosecutions, and I initially acknowledged this memo/argument.
GA is a state, however.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 9:59 am to SlowFlowPro
A motion to quash? Do you know the statutory grounds for a motion to quash in a criminal matter in the State of Louisiana? I don’t think you do.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:02 am to davyjones
quote:
Do you know the statutory grounds for a motion to quash in a criminal matter in the State of Louisiana?
Yes.
He'd just need to get the Bill of Particulars and then argue the BOP does not show the offense was not committed.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:03 am to SlowFlowPro
That’s a matter for the trier of fact, not MTQ.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:19 am to davyjones
I mean we're talking about a completely manufactured claim, right? That President Biden engaged in contractor work within the borders of LA without the proper licensure? While acting as President and never even stepping foot in Louisiana?
If the LEO and victim were willing to testify at the hearing with easily disproven lies, it would, at the worst, open the door for a motion to dismiss via prosecutorial misconduct the very next day.
Biden wouldn't have to appear for either.
And, just to avoid any "gotcha" attempts. The referenced "easily disproven lies" reference facts related directly to the case at hand. Not tertiary issues outside of the litigation (like potentially with Willis and Wade in the GA prosecution)
If the LEO and victim were willing to testify at the hearing with easily disproven lies, it would, at the worst, open the door for a motion to dismiss via prosecutorial misconduct the very next day.
Biden wouldn't have to appear for either.
And, just to avoid any "gotcha" attempts. The referenced "easily disproven lies" reference facts related directly to the case at hand. Not tertiary issues outside of the litigation (like potentially with Willis and Wade in the GA prosecution)
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:24 am to davyjones
He thinks a podunk prosecutor in any US state can arrest the President
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:30 am to SlowFlowPro
Yep, manufactured. Just like the case against Trump. Same situation.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:31 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:Instructions.
What do you think Wade was meeting with WH counsel for?
If it was a discussion of case strategy, RICO details, etc., I'd wager heavily that Wade didn't attend the meeting alone. In that instance Wade's contributions regarding Ricotta Recipes would be valued more than anything he had to say about RICO Law. John Floyd, the apparat-planted RICO expert, would have been there. DiSantis would likely coordinate Atlanta cogs in the interface. Those and a few others are the brains running this BS.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:32 am to thebigmuffaletta
Not only that, he sees no legal basis for her removal through the clear perjury, COI, Money laundering, prosecutorial misconduct, etc revealed in this hearing.
Even though that pussy Scott Macafee said she needed to step down if she wasn't willing to fire her boyfriend- knowing she'd have to do neither.
Even though that pussy Scott Macafee said she needed to step down if she wasn't willing to fire her boyfriend- knowing she'd have to do neither.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:33 am to thebigmuffaletta
Group picture of typical elected Democrats:
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:36 am to davyjones
quote:
Yep, manufactured. Just like the case against Trump. Same situation.
Your hypothetical was a set of facts that did not occur and are easily disproven
The Trump case relies on a set of facts that aren't in dispute for the most part.
That's the difference.
The issue for Trump is if these acts fit within the statute OR if a court will grant him a form of legal cover (like immunity).
If you wanted to ask me if I thought Biden could be prosecuted in Delaware state court for a credible claim of, say, molestation of his daughter (assuming the SOL didn't bar the indictment)z then I would say he could.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:37 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Not only that, he sees no legal basis for her removal through the clear perjury, COI, Money laundering, prosecutorial misconduct, etc revealed in this hearing.
This is a blatant lie
quote:
Even though that pussy Scott Macafee said she needed to step down if she wasn't willing to fire her boyfriend- knowing she'd have to do neither.
Because the conflict was based on their relationship
Posted on 3/16/24 at 10:40 am to SlowFlowPro
You disprove facts at trial. In fact let’s say I belly up to the defense table and lay waste to the prosecutor and win a preliminary examination, judge finds no probable cause exists to support the charges. The one and only prize for that win is the dissolution of the bond obligation. Prosecutor can, does and will continue on with prosecution regardless, as is the state’s right to do so if they wish.
Posted on 3/16/24 at 11:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Dumb mischaracterization
They're being emotional-irrational.
Page 15 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News