+- Mock (https://mockforums.net)
+-- Forum: Serious Shit? (https://mockforums.net/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: POLITICS (https://mockforums.net/forum-36.html)
+--- Thread: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY (/thread-12806.html)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - BigMark - 05-29-2023
You are a quintessential cracker, a redneck swamp dweller if you will.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - rothschild - 05-29-2023
Donovan would be a far better choice, sally. A virtue-signalling liberal of niggardly intellect that knows just what the negro needs, in spite of having no idea as to what their needs actually are. His qualifications are impeccable.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - BigMark - 05-29-2023
His leather elbow patches were the first clue.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-08-2023
Popcorn? *shakes bag*
![[Image: FyIyfXiXsAI0yZl?format=jpg&name=medium]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyIyfXiXsAI0yZl?format=jpg&name=medium)
![[Image: FyIyfXlX0AAyfKs?format=jpg&name=medium]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FyIyfXlX0AAyfKs?format=jpg&name=medium)
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Clang McFly - 06-08-2023
(06-08-2023, 07:36 PM)Duchess Wrote: Popcorn? *shakes bag*
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-09-2023
It's being reported that Cassidy Hutchinson testified before the grand jury that the night before trump's last day in office she saw her boss, Mark Meadows, trump's chief of staff, take 1000's of classified documents at the direction of trump. This is in addition to her testimony that he was using burn bags and the fireplace in his office to burn documents. If convicted, this is a serious amount of prison time and incentive for him to roll on trump.
There are 7 charges in trump's indictment. We won't know what they are until Tuesday, but there is some thought that we may find out sooner because of all the bullshit trump and his defenders/supporters are putting out there, many of these people are lawmakers in DC who are attorneys in their own right and who know better. They are a fucking disgrace. To be clear, grand juries indict, no one else.
I am delighted to see trump indicted AGAIN, but this is not a great day for our country. It's a friggin' disgrace. If I never hear the word unprecedented again it will be too soon.
I believe that the special counsel would not have taken the grand jury's recommendation unless he felt he has an airtight case.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-09-2023
...and just to remind everyone, Reality Winner got 5 years in the slammer for having ONE document. Meadows had thousands, trump had hundreds and spent years lying, denying and hiding.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-09-2023
trump put more effort into keeping his taxes hidden than he did in protecting our nation's secrets. "This is secret information. Look, look at this. This was done by the military and given to me."
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - rothschild - 06-09-2023
Grand juries are all about politics. Always. They do not serve the interests of justice -- ever. In this particular instance it's about creating the appearance of nonpartisanship.
Trump may be guilty of what the indictment alleges but it's ignorant to assume that it's credible, because all that was presented to the GJ was what the prosecution wanted to present.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-09-2023
Aren't grand juries chosen from jury pool?
The evidence of trump's crimes is in the indictment. Some of the top secret documents were from the Department of Defense and CIA that had information about our nuclear programs, foreign defense, weapon capabilities and our military vulnerabilities.
"trump may be guilty of what the indictment acknowledges" Shiiiit.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - rothschild - 06-09-2023
(06-09-2023, 08:06 PM)Duchess Wrote: Aren't grand juries chosen from jury pool?
The evidence of trump's crimes is in the indictment. Some of the top secret documents were from the Department of Defense and CIA that had information about our nuclear programs, foreign defense, weapon capabilities and our military vulnerabilities.
"trump may be guilty of what the indictment acknowledges" Shiiiit.
Evidence presented cannot be fairly judged in the absence of rebuttal, which is why we have trials. Grand juries are purely political devices for creating the appearance of impartiality with those who do not understand that there is no judicial expectation for it. "Justice" is inherently political, and consequently corrupt. If people were honest about this we might be able to fix it, but that would require them to acknowledge being ignorant, which is a very tall order.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-10-2023
Oh my god just stop. How can you stand being in your own head.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-10-2023
Damn shame I can't cram all this in Maggot's face.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - rothschild - 06-10-2023
(06-10-2023, 04:50 AM)Duchess Wrote: Oh my god just stop. How can you stand being in your own head.
What does that statement say about you?
I could tell you, but I don't think you'd like it very much.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-10-2023
(06-10-2023, 05:29 AM)rothschild Wrote: What does that statement say about you?
I could tell you, but I don't think you'd like it very much.
rothschild, I would never presume to tell you or anyone else posting that you should self censor. My god.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - cannongal - 06-10-2023
(06-09-2023, 07:36 PM)rothschild Wrote: all that was presented to the GJ was what the prosecution wanted to present.
I thought the grand jury's job was to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. I mean, I'm probably wrong but it's my understanding that the prosecution doesn't have to present any 'rebuttal ' evidence. The grand jury is just there to decide 'yes, there's enough evidence that we think the defendant should stand trial' or 'no, there's not enough evidence to waste taxpayer dollars ' meh-high school civics was 30 years ago.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-10-2023
(06-10-2023, 07:35 AM)cannongal Wrote: I thought the grand jury's job was to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. I mean, I'm probably wrong but it's my understanding that the prosecution doesn't have to present any 'rebuttal ' evidence. The grand jury is just there to decide 'yes, there's enough evidence that we think the defendant should stand trial' or 'no, there's not enough evidence to waste taxpayer dollars ' meh-high school civics was 30 years ago.
You're absolutely right. It's the (Florida) grand jury's job to hear witnesses and to determine whether there is enough evidence to charge an individual. It rarely, if ever, hears both sides, it's not their job to listen to any rebuttal.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - rothschild - 06-10-2023
(06-10-2023, 05:43 AM)Duchess Wrote:(06-10-2023, 05:29 AM)rothschild Wrote: What does that statement say about you?
I could tell you, but I don't think you'd like it very much.
rothschild, I would never presume to tell you or anyone else posting that you should self censor. My god.
That's not what I meant.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - Duchess - 06-10-2023
It's okay to insult me, rothschild. I can handle it. I won't clutch my mom's pearls. I won't be pissed off & I surely wouldn't delete your content. I don't have the expectation that you or anyone else agree with me and the one thing I really don't want in Mock is for us all to be like minded.
RE: THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY - rothschild - 06-10-2023
(06-10-2023, 07:35 AM)cannongal Wrote:(06-09-2023, 07:36 PM)rothschild Wrote: all that was presented to the GJ was what the prosecution wanted to present.
I thought the grand jury's job was to decide whether there's enough evidence to prosecute. I mean, I'm probably wrong but it's my understanding that the prosecution doesn't have to present any 'rebuttal ' evidence. The grand jury is just there to decide 'yes, there's enough evidence that we think the defendant should stand trial' or 'no, there's not enough evidence to waste taxpayer dollars ' meh-high school civics was 30 years ago.
(06-10-2023, 08:59 AM)Duchess Wrote: You're absolutely right. It's the (Florida) grand jury's job to hear witnesses and to determine whether there is enough evidence to charge an individual. It rarely, if ever, hears both sides, it's not their job to listen to any rebuttal.
Which is why a preliminary hearing better serves the interest of justice. Why should the process be conducted in secret, without the participation of the defendant?