Our Country's 1st Moron Just Said He's Been Indicated By The Grand Jury...Get Your Guns MAGA Morons
Indicated by a grand jury? I have a finger that indicates my thoughts about you.
As usual, you think you are smart, if you support Biden's plan for America, you are a damn c****e, and should go to China or some other s**thole where you belong. Don't try changing our system because of your h**e for Trump. You should be deported or just put in the ground for being that stupid. Don't bother replying, I despise your kind!
fullspinzoo wrote:
It's "indicted" you frigging MORON!!!!
No, it's indicated; as in it indicated who the moron REALLY is. You see, what is on your car's steering column is the left turn/right turn indicter.
PeterS wrote:
The sad thing is we need poor Donald in the race as I think he is the only one Biden can beat...
Who typed that for you moron?
That's for one good reason to indict him!
Jim0001
Loc: originally from Tennessee, now Virginia, USA
Smedley_buzk**l wrote:
You certainly are giddy about this latest nothing burger. Of course, like most Liberals, you have no idea what the law actually is and no idea how to look it up. Here's a heads up....
Both the DOJ and the FEC refused to prosecute this case because they both said there was no crime to prosecute.
Even if there had been it would have been a misdemeanor and the statute of limitations has long since expired.
The only way the statute of limitations would not have expired is if the charge was a felony. How Bragg plans to manufacture a felony out of something that TWO Federal law enforcement agencies have already said was not even a crime should be entertaining.
I'd be willing to bet folding money that every member of the Grand Jury was a Democrat.
You certainly are giddy about this latest nothing ... (
show quote)
A grand jury has no judge or defense present. The jury ONLY hears what the prosecutor says. A grand jury could indite a ham sandwich....
Jim0001 wrote:
A grand jury has no judge or defense present. The jury ONLY hears what the prosecutor says. A grand jury could indite a ham sandwich....
I have been unable to corroborate this but I understand that originally, in this country, the prosecutors presented their evidence to the grand jury and waited outside for them to reach a decision. They could indict, decline or say to the prosecution that additional evidence was needed. The prosecution did not go into the courtroom. That is a recent development. Today, it's a one man show; the jury only sees the prosecution's side. This is why we have the indict a ham sandwich joke.
To boot, all that is necessary is a simple majority of the grandjurors, e.g.13 of 25. If they decline, the prosecution can convene another grand jury where the same rules apply.
Jim0001
Loc: originally from Tennessee, now Virginia, USA
crazylibertarian wrote:
I have been unable to corroborate this but I understand that originally, in this country, the prosecutors presented their evidence to the grand jury and waited outside for them to reach a decision. They could indict, decline or say to the prosecution that additional evidence was needed. The prosecution did not go into the courtroom. That is a recent development. Today, it's a one man show; the jury only sees the prosecution's side. This is why we have the indict a ham sandwich joke.
To boot, all that is necessary is a simple majority of the grandjurors, e.g.13 of 25. If they decline, the prosecution can convene another grand jury where the same rules apply.
I have been unable to corroborate this but I under... (
show quote)
CORRECT !!!! It's a one trick pony....
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.