HTownAg98 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Can prosecutors and judges lie in a court of law? Regarding prosecutors, I am not talking about supposition or a conclusion based on facts that may turn out wrong. I am talking lying Schiffty Schiff style with no repercussions.

---

Lawyers aren't supposed to lie, as they are officers of the court. If they get caught doing it, they can be sanctioned for it. And I would assume a judge could be removed from the bench for lying, but I can't think of a situation why a judge would lie. The closest thing I can come up with is the judge who had a prosecutor writing orders for him on cases the prosecutor was working on.

---

Do you believe members of Congress should be subject to at least the same standards?

Asking more of your personal opinion and I am still laughing. Especially when a warbling lil swine agrees with you. An endorsement by Whistle Pig is all I need to know something is TDS fueled bovine excrement.

Ag with kids said:

---

Maroon Dawn said:

---

Just slow roll until GOP controls Congress and replaced all the Dems on the committee

Should be fun to let them have a taste of their own medicine

---

The committee cannot exist past 01/03/2023 unless the next Congress decides to reconvene it.

---

I kinda wish they would, then publicly tear up the paperwork like old nasty Nancy did. Flip the script 180 and call her to testify first, on her involvement, refusal of the Nat'l Guard and why she had cameras on her that day. Go from there.

Second thought, never mind they don't have time for that petty stuff.

fka ftc said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Okay, without specifics on his lies I will just assume you just do not like Trump.

---

Here you go.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202210/1277612.shtml

---

I hope to God you are kidding or that you a joking about being a lawyer.

He lied by saying he believed the number of fraudulent votes were true and correct?

Counselor, any judge would toss you out on your ass for bringing a perjury charge on that.

Trump merely has to assert the defense that "yes, well I did see the CNN Rachel Maddow special on fraudulent votes and she said the number was under 10 total fraudulent votes. I think her statement is incorrect and the true and correct number, to my knowledge, is more like 10 MILLION very ugly, very bad, very fake votes."

Show me on your doll of legal knowledge where he broke the law?

---

Quote:

---

The emails show that president Trump knew that the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong but continued to tout those numbers, both in court and to the public.

---

That's straight from the judge's opinion. The judge thinks he lied under oath. Whether he's prosecuted for it remains to be seen (I would bet a large sum of money he's not charged with anything on that lie).

fka ftc said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Can prosecutors and judges lie in a court of law? Regarding prosecutors, I am not talking about supposition or a conclusion based on facts that may turn out wrong. I am talking lying Schiffty Schiff style with no repercussions.

---

Lawyers aren't supposed to lie, as they are officers of the court. If they get caught doing it, they can be sanctioned for it. And I would assume a judge could be removed from the bench for lying, but I can't think of a situation why a judge would lie. The closest thing I can come up with is the judge who had a prosecutor writing orders for him on cases the prosecutor was working on.

---

Do you believe members of Congress should be subject to at least the same standards?

Asking more of your personal opinion and I am still laughing. Especially when a warbling lil swine agrees with you. An endorsement by Whistle Pig is all I need to know something is TDS fueled bovine excrement.

---

Yes.

Whistle Pig said:

---

Yes. He lied about fraud claims even his nutty lawyers warned were lies.

---

Lord, have mercy. You have talking points for this too?

HTownAg98 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Okay, without specifics on his lies I will just assume you just do not like Trump.

---

Here you go.
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202210/1277612.shtml

---

I hope to God you are kidding or that you a joking about being a lawyer.

He lied by saying he believed the number of fraudulent votes were true and correct?

Counselor, any judge would toss you out on your ass for bringing a perjury charge on that.

Trump merely has to assert the defense that "yes, well I did see the CNN Rachel Maddow special on fraudulent votes and she said the number was under 10 total fraudulent votes. I think her statement is incorrect and the true and correct number, to my knowledge, is more like 10 MILLION very ugly, very bad, very fake votes."

Show me on your doll of legal knowledge where he broke the law?

---

Quote:

---

The emails show that president Trump knew that the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong but continued to tout those numbers, both in court and to the public.

---

That's straight from the judge's opinion. The judge thinks he lied under oath. Whether he's prosecuted for it remains to be seen (I would bet a large sum of money he's not charged with anything on that lie).

---

"A California federal judge..."

Got it. Radical judge thinks Trump and friends lied and cannot get radical Soros prosecutor to pick up the charge?

You do realize that is next level TDS.

Watch yeh video in the article in the OP

The lawyers says she would recommend Trump cooperates because he has nothing to hide.

Another lawyer, one that will represent him on this issue, will tell Trump not to. And he won't.

Unless there's some other video, there's no indication Trump has said he will testify or cooperate.

People will then claim he really wants to testify and own congress, but his lawyers won't let him.

Trump is a media master. This will be another example.

GAC06 said:

---

People voted against Trump

---

Because he's "dumb", yet they pulled the lever for the true genius Biden.

GAC06 said:

---

He didn't though. Unfortunately he tried to shout down Biden and it cost him the presidency

---

So you believe Biden got 81MM votes?

TDS flaring up big time today. People getting worried.

Its like all the right pigs are squealing. Votes are slipping away like a greased watermelons.

Time to sit back and pop a miller or sip a manhattan.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

People voted against Trump

---

Because he's "dumb", yet they pulled the lever for the true genius Biden.

---

You can argue about how you want things to be or you can look at the way things are

fka ftc said:

---

Its like all the right pigs are squealing. Votes are slipping away like a greased watermelons.

Time to sit back and pop a miller or sip a manhattan.

---

Bourbon neat would be my preference.

Spectacle aside...are there some separation of power issues with this Congressional Committee subpoenaing Trump and this paperwork? Yes, he is not POTUS now, but, he was on Jan 6, which is what they want to ask questions on...

I think it was brought up before around here but I think his claim of Executive Privilege on Jan 6th would be pretty solid.

He is not being accused of a crime before the committee, but since its sworn testimony he should also have a clear 5th amendment protection as well.

The Dims would just be banking on the optics. He turns the table when he actually begins answering. Its an interesting decision on it.

yes, there is an enormous separation of powers issue.

Quote:

---

Got it. Radical judge thinks Trump and friends lied and cannot get radical Soros prosecutor to pick up the charge

---

this shows me you don't really understand what that case was about. it had nothing to do with trying to prosecute Trump or anyone with a crime. it was about whether documents were protected by attorney-client privilege. the judge found some where protected, others were not.

BMX Bandit said:

---

yes, there is an enormous separation of powers issue.

---

I was thinking there would be. One branch DEMANDING the other come before it on bended knee seems to be against what the SoP would allow...

we won't ever get an answer because this committee will be done before it made it to the supreme court, which it would if Trump lost at any other level. and for all the roberts hand-wringing that goes on here, theres no way he is going to rule congress can force an ex-president to testify about events that happened during his presidency.

for example, the mark meadows committee subpoena fight has been going on for over a year!

BMX Bandit said:

---

Quote:

---

Got it. Radical judge thinks Trump and friends lied and cannot get radical Soros prosecutor to pick up the charge

---

this shows me you don't really understand what that case was about. it had nothing to do with trying to prosecute Trump or anyone with a crime. it was about whether documents were protected by attorney-client privilege. the judge found some where protected, others were not.

---

Sorry, you are off on this. I understand its not what the case was about. But the reference from the legal eagle was to the Judge's comment relating to the case (I believe in some order to attorneys).

Their "evidence" of him "lying under oath" were to the judge's comments in the order and not the subject of the underlying case itself.

the judge wasn't trying to get anyone prosecuted. your post didn't make any sense, sorry.

BMX Bandit said:

---

ThunderCougarFalconBird said:

---

They invited the pig to the mud. Of course the pig is going to happily oink his way over to jump in and wallow about.

---

So you think Trump shows up and answers their questions? Reallly?

---

Probably not but that is the type of statement you'd expect from Trump, no? Real answer is that I think he maneuvers to stall until after midterms (not difficult) and then outlasts the lame duck session. Reconfigured non-scam J6 committee brings him in (or not; I don't know).

PA24 said:

---

Odds are he shows up and makes a complete mockery out of the committee.

---

Odds are you don't understand what "odds are" means.

BMX Bandit said:

---

The lawyers says she would recommend Trump cooperates because he has nothing to hide.

Another lawyer, one that will represent him on this issue, will tell Trump not to. And he won't.

---

This is pretty much spot on. He'll play the bull in a china shop outwardly and then quietly maneuver to make this go away.

Curious to see if some D.D.C. (or other federal judge) has a serious hard-on to try to at least force him to sit during the lame duck session.

Point was I am surprised a Commie California judge did not insist a compliant Soros attorney arrest Trump for lying if the legal guy thinks it such a slam dunk example of Trump lying under oath.

I will try next time to lay it out more clearer.

Odds are he makes up some excuse and doesn't show, which is his MO.

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

This committee and the Democrats actually do not want him to testify cause they know he will crush them they just want to keep an allusion and a mirage going

---

I disagree for the Democrats have been trying their best to discredit him since before he took his oath of office and actually believe that they have him this time for their hatred of him has them completely blinded.

Trump has been two steps in front of the Democrats his entire time as President and even now, he is going to make them look like the idiots they are.

BMX Bandit said:

---

On one of the debates against Biden, Trump was terrible. Complete bomb.

---

I don't remember Trump ever debating Biden.

agwrestler said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

On one of the debates against Biden, Trump was terrible. Complete bomb.

---

I don't remember Trump ever debating Biden.

---

Well it happened. Multiple times.

GAC06 said:

---

For those claiming Trump will "crush" the committee, did you not watch his debates against Biden?

---

Yes and it was glorious. Even better with the baby filter.

PA24 said:

---

Odds are Trump vs Biden in 2024.

---

Read this and the responses and understand why Trump could in all probability never possibly win in 2024.

The Left and Right really do live in different realities and this is mainly the fault of "news" and "higher education".

They really see Biden so much better, and they really see Trump so wickedly.

There is no possibility of bridging the TDS gap.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-Donald-Trump-always-look-to-his-left-when-speaking-on-camera

Trump's vanity is his biggest weakness/flaw in my opinion. It doesn't bother me, most powerful men and women are very vane and borderline narcissistic people. If you have been around the very, very wealth or the very very famous you see this more often than not.

Trump brings with it policies I agree with, a management style I can support, and a love of this Country I can put my faith in.

Biden is a skeeving narcissist pedophile with an inability to coherently speak, a history or racism, a more recent history of elitism and then you add in the policies and platforms he has and his seeming hate for this Country... and I cannot fathom the stupidity / derangement it takes to vote for ol Joe.

That derangement seems to have affected 81 million people and thus is a syndrome.