A federal judge's conclusion is more than a stinging rebuke of Trump

[CaughtInThe]

This one comment from the article really sums it up...

"As Carter reminds us, we experienced “a coup in search of a legal theory,”



THAT is how close we came to losing this country to crooks and liars and anti-American pigs.

Opinion | Judge's scathing rebuke of Trump, Eastman goes beyond criminal charges

What you really need to know about a federal judge’s stinging 44-page rebuke of Trump and his attorney John Eastman.

www.msnbc.com

 

[HikerGuy83]

Please move to conspiracy theories forum.

 

[Callen]

How is a judges legal ruling a conspiracy theory?

 

[CaughtInThe]

Please move to conspiracy theories forum.

yeah, a judge who reviewed all the evidence and made a ruling (with, you know, words) is definitely a CT.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Definitely a rebuke, but I think "stinging" is a bit much, especially after six years of the same.

 

[Grand Mal]

Please move to conspiracy theories forum.

Some of you guys sure have low opinions of America.

 

[bluesmoke]

"Most likely..." means jack****.

"The big question, of course, is whether any of this means that Trump, Eastman and others will be on the receiving end of federal criminal indictments. Maybe, but not certainly." means that Trump hasn't been held to anything, yet, but handing over emails that may take quite a while and may, possibly, just guessing, not include all of them. Exec priv or whatever. A number of lines blacked out. Just like the 1/6 phone recordings are missing the 7 most critical hrs of the insurrection. If, and the big when that has been working for Trump, those recordings are handed over, how much will be "blacked out"?

 

[CaughtInThe]

Some of you guys sure have low opinions of America.

we have way more "anti" americans than even i thought.

 

[HikerGuy83]

we have way more "anti" americans than even i thought.

I would agree.

And the way they promote division by calling riots insurrections is so obvious.

 

[HikerGuy83]

How is a judges legal ruling a conspiracy theory?

The OP didn't focus on the ruling.

Hope that helps.

 

[reflechissez]

We have many threads on this already.

 

[CaughtInThe]

I would agree.

And the way they promote division by calling riots insurrections is so obvious.

yes, as they bum rushed our capital and tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power that wasn't an attempted insurrection or anything.

 

[HikerGuy83]

yes, as they bum rushed our capital and tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power that wasn't an attempted insurrection or anything.

Totally agree.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Please move to conspiracy theories forum.

How is a judge's ruling a conspiracy theory?

 

[HikerGuy83]

How is a judge's ruling a conspiracy theory?

Already answered this.

The OP isn't about the ruling.

Can't help that.

 

[CaughtInThe]

How is a judge's ruling a conspiracy theory?

i think his feelings are hurt.

 

[The AntiDonald]

"Most likely..." means jack****.

"The big question, of course, is whether any of this means that Trump, Eastman and others will be on the receiving end of federal criminal indictments. Maybe, but not certainly." means that Trump hasn't been held to anything, yet, but handing over emails that may take quite a while and may, possibly, just guessing, not include all of them. Exec priv or whatever. A number of lines blacked out. Just like the 1/6 phone recordings are missing the 7 most critical hrs of the insurrection. If, and the big when that has been working for Trump, those recordings are handed over, how much will be "blacked out"?

That's entirely up to the Biden WH. He has not yet blocked any documents related to the Jan. 6th insurrection.

 

[The AntiDonald]

I would agree.

And the way they promote division by calling riots insurrections is so obvious.

Once again, for the 10,000th time, what we had at the capitol was a violent uprising against our federal seat of government. I challenge you to find me one definition of 'Insurrection' that does not contain that description, among others.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Once again, for the 10,000th time, what we had at the capitol was a violent uprising against our federal seat of government. I challenge you to find me one definition of 'Insurrection' that does not contain that description, among others.

Yes, and the 10,001th time won't make it any more true.

 

[LouC]

Please move to conspiracy theories forum.

 

[LouC]

I would agree.

And the way they promote division by calling riots insurrections is so obvious.

 

[LouC]

The OP didn't focus on the ruling.

Hope that helps.

 

[LouC]

yes, as they bum rushed our capital and tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power that wasn't an attempted insurrection or anything.

 

[LouC]

Yes, and the 10,001th time won't make it any more true.

I agree 100%, it only needed to be true once, which it most definitely was, right from the start.

 

[HikerGuy83]

I agree 100%, it only needed to be true once, which it most definitely was, right from the start.

Most definitely was.....



My side hurts.