To all you attorneys here - “well within the presidential scope”!? Do you believe this to be true?
Sixty minutes opens this discussion of trump mobstyle shake-down and the rule of law and fairness for all Americans.
Link: Let’s see all the cowards
Replies to: To all you attorneys here - “well within the presidential scope”!? Do you believe this to be true?
Mango is a mob boss and is operating like one here. The cowardly firms are only slightly less worse.
(no message)
It’s interesting, 34 felony convictions, oodles of evidence and information and lawfare by D’s is
their deflection. Well, other than Hunter Biden’s laptop.
"Politics is a blood sport." Aneurin Bevan
We are fortunate that our politicians are able to use the legal system to grapple with one another for POWER because the alternative is actual violence.
For example, it's not hard to imagine Trump as an actual gangster.
I sldo confess that I find Scott Pelley insufferably sanctimonious, as a personality, without regard to anything he might be discussing.
He is an actual gangster. What’s your answer to my question below to Manion?
(no message)
Not what was asked.
(no message)
Rhetorical questions do not seek answers.
(no message)
Dumb
(no message)
I’m sorry. I got 30 seconds in. Could that MFer speak any more slowly?
(no message)
Should the president be able to bar attorneys/law firms who have opposed him from appearing in
federal courthouse buildings? That simple champ. Any thoughts?
When they were part of the conspiracy to prevent a legitimate presidential candidate, yes. They can
sue to appeal. I'm sure they have a decent chance of winning, although their behavior is tantamount to an insurrection, so maybe not. His argument has merit.
They all had the capacity to walk away from the sham charges. No lawyer is stuck with his or her client, especially if they are engaging in illegal behavior.
What conspiracy would that be and where is the charge and the conviction?
(no message)
Let me ask you, do Trump's actions extend to the CO attorneys who tried to get him off the ballot?
(no message)
He committed sedition, he shouldn’t have been allowed to run
Of course you’ll refuse to admit that because he’s your hero
Kinda my point about Colorado. No he didn't. And he let the Supreme Court take care of them.
(no message)
Uhm yeah, and let the Courts and D boards take care of lawyers who are alleged to have been involved
in conspiracies.
POTUS gotta protect the country. There are Democrat insurrectionists afoot.
(no message)
Bwahahahaha. Protect the country! That’s a gas.
(no message)
Your denial is irrelevant. He organized and attempted a coup.
The Supreme Court is corrupted, of course they’d let a traitor run again.
You guys can rest easy. When the RIght stages a coup, they apparently don't bring any guns with them
(no message)
Just pipe bombs.
(no message)
Not worth it, he will just keep on arguing his warped point of view.
He doesn't like Trump. Who knew?
Fair. This is one of those agree to disagree things I guess.
(no message)
I don’t know but it doesn’t matter. You are a lawyer, yes?
There is recourse under the law for those who are victim of unlawful conspiracies. He pursued none of those or if he did wasn’t successful. It’s not for an opposing party if elected prez to determine there was a conspiracy against him and bar lawyers from a courthouse. That’s what dictators do. If that’s not the case, I can’t wait to see all the Ed Martin’s barred from federal court for representing true conspirators. Or all of the Orange lawyers who pursued demonstrably false claims of election interference. I will laugh when the far lefties turn this around and against all of you morons next D administration.
(no message)
Ah a conspiracy! We should have known. It's the Stonecutters!
I enjoy a good conspiracy, although in this case, it's a fact. Sadly for the firms, they failed.
And now the guy they were trying to unjustly prosecute is the POTUS. No lawyer is obligated to take a client or prosecute a case. This goes beyond zealous advocacy.
It's bullshit. But it's part of your new faith, so there is no point in discussing it.
(no message)
CBS seems to forget about the lawfare used against Trump.
I can't wait to see that exposé, they can start with the Russia hoax.
Define lawfare. - how about in your words.
(no message)
If they cared about lawfare so much, why wouldn’t they condemn Trump for it
The answer is because they’re hypocritical imbeciles who believe only in party over country. MAGA is a cancer that soon will be eradicated
Therein lies the problem. These aren't just firms that supported innocent clients; they fomented
insurrection. Arguably, enemies of the state.
Coward!
(no message)
Posting something from 60 Minutes is the same as the NYT or WaPo. No credibility.
(no message)
Like I said, coward.
(no message)
Yet, you would post something from FNC?
Stop being a coward.
Whatevs. He won. There are consequences. Three years 8 months left, thankfully.
(no message)