Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
https://uwsboard.com/
Blind spot!Jack Galt wrote:Nope. Kiss my ass. Got it. Danville. Neck. Ok.ip_law-hokie wrote:That's all you got, Jack? Hillary?Jack Galt wrote:Why are you bringing Hillary into this?ip_law-hokie wrote:
Physical threats and campaign violations, like perjury, are not 'just sex'. There are allegations, whether or not they are true nobody on here knows for sure.
Donna Brazille says 'sup.
Am I doing it right?
Wow! An attempted cut down by the guy who said the Jets were going to win the Super Bowl next year.ip_law-hokie wrote:I expect it will just come natural for you.Jack Galt wrote:Nope. Kiss my ass. Got it. Danville. Neck. Ok.ip_law-hokie wrote:That's all you got, Jack? Hillary?Jack Galt wrote:Why are you bringing Hillary into this?ip_law-hokie wrote:
Physical threats and campaign violations, like perjury, are not 'just sex'. There are allegations, whether or not they are true nobody on here knows for sure.
Donna Brazille says 'sup.
Am I doing it right?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
And this has to do with russian collusion and the nov 16 election how?HooFighter wrote:
The Clinton Pivot. That's the TDB white flag of surrender.ip_law-hokie wrote:That's all you got, Jack? Hillary?Jack Galt wrote:Why are you bringing Hillary into this?ip_law-hokie wrote:
Physical threats and campaign violations, like perjury, are not 'just sex'. There are allegations, whether or not they are true nobody on here knows for sure.
Donna Brazille says 'sup.
The IG report is still coming out, still waiting on the arrest of the russians that Mueller indicted for putting mean stuff on facebookHokieFanDC wrote:The Clinton Pivot. That's the TDB white flag of surrender.ip_law-hokie wrote:That's all you got, Jack? Hillary?Jack Galt wrote:Why are you bringing Hillary into this?ip_law-hokie wrote:
Physical threats and campaign violations, like perjury, are not 'just sex'. There are allegations, whether or not they are true nobody on here knows for sure.
Donna Brazille says 'sup.
It's a coup.HokieJoe wrote:This is 100% a power struggle and this is DC pols waving a big fat middle finger at the Americans who voted for the policies Trump ran on. Policies which they hate with every bought-and-paid-for fiber of their rancid beings.
How so?USN_Hokie wrote:It's a coup.HokieJoe wrote:This is 100% a power struggle and this is DC pols waving a big fat middle finger at the Americans who voted for the policies Trump ran on. Policies which they hate with every bought-and-paid-for fiber of their rancid beings.
Like every soft coup, it only requires faintest legitimacy for the base to buy into it. That's why there will be civil war if Democrats try to remove Trump. Is that what you want?ip_law-hokie wrote:How so?USN_Hokie wrote:It's a coup.HokieJoe wrote:This is 100% a power struggle and this is DC pols waving a big fat middle finger at the Americans who voted for the policies Trump ran on. Policies which they hate with every bought-and-paid-for fiber of their rancid beings.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Calm down.USN_Hokie wrote:Like every soft coup, it only requires faintest legitimacy for the base to buy into it. That's why there will be civil war if Democrats try to remove Trump. Is that what you want?ip_law-hokie wrote:How so?USN_Hokie wrote:It's a coup.HokieJoe wrote:This is 100% a power struggle and this is DC pols waving a big fat middle finger at the Americans who voted for the policies Trump ran on. Policies which they hate with every bought-and-paid-for fiber of their rancid beings.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
LOL. Thanks for reminding me that today is the anniversary of Appomattox though.USN_Hokie wrote:Like every soft coup, it only requires faintest legitimacy for the base to buy into it. That's why there will be civil war if Democrats try to remove Trump. Is that what you want?
USN_Hokie wrote:It's a coup.HokieJoe wrote:This is 100% a power struggle and this is DC pols waving a big fat middle finger at the Americans who voted for the policies Trump ran on. Policies which they hate with every bought-and-paid-for fiber of their rancid beings.
At the very minimum, we’ve entered into a hegemon situation where the leftist deep state is calling the shots, and we the people no longer are.HokieJoe wrote:USN_Hokie wrote:It's a coup.HokieJoe wrote:This is 100% a power struggle and this is DC pols waving a big fat middle finger at the Americans who voted for the policies Trump ran on. Policies which they hate with every bought-and-paid-for fiber of their rancid beings.
Yup.
You're welcome. I'm a Yankee.HooFighter wrote:LOL. Thanks for reminding me that today is the anniversary of Appomattox though.USN_Hokie wrote:Like every soft coup, it only requires faintest legitimacy for the base to buy into it. That's why there will be civil war if Democrats try to remove Trump. Is that what you want?
Nice victory. I’m from the south!USN_Hokie wrote:You're welcome. I'm a Yankee.HooFighter wrote:LOL. Thanks for reminding me that today is the anniversary of Appomattox though.USN_Hokie wrote:Like every soft coup, it only requires faintest legitimacy for the base to buy into it. That's why there will be civil war if Democrats try to remove Trump. Is that what you want?
Forrest?HooFighter wrote: Nice victory. I’m from the south!
HooFighter wrote:"Leftist deep state"
You know a judge would have had to sign off on a search warrant. Just imagine the amount of probable cause evidence they would have to present in this particular case.cwtcr hokie wrote:so what, again, how is any of what they took usable? attorney-client privilege, never mind that even if Trump was banging some washed up pron star 12 YEARS AGO nobody gives a crap. As for the $130k, Trump can spend his cash anyway he wants to, don't you agree?
And I thought the $130K came from his good buddy Michael Cohen? If so, that's an illegal campaign donation. If not, it's at least money laundering.The attorney-client privilege does not apply when a client consults a lawyer for the purpose of furthering an illegal or fraudulent act. United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 563 (1989); In re Antitrust Grand Jury, 805 F.2d 155, 162 (6th Cir. 1986); In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum, 773 F.2d 204, 206 (8th Cir. 1985); United States v. Horvath, 731 F.2d 557, 562 (8th Cir. 1984); cf. Clark v. United States, 289 U.S. 1, 13-14 (1933). The so-called “crime-fraud exception” removes the protection of the attorney-client privilege for communications concerning contemplated or continuing crimes or frauds. This exception encompasses criminal and fraudulent conduct based on action as well as inaction.
Interesting that you all of a sudden care about the law and such things. It's like you're a partisan hack or something.HooFighter wrote:You know a judge would have had to sign off on a search warrant. Just imagine the amount of probable cause evidence they would have to present in this particular case.cwtcr hokie wrote:so what, again, how is any of what they took usable? attorney-client privilege, never mind that even if Trump was banging some washed up pron star 12 YEARS AGO nobody gives a crap. As for the $130k, Trump can spend his cash anyway he wants to, don't you agree?
And attorney-client privilege, well....
And I thought the $130K came from his good buddy Michael Cohen? If so, that's an illegal campaign donation. If not, it's at least money laundering.The attorney-client privilege does not apply when a client consults a lawyer for the purpose of furthering an illegal or fraudulent act. United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554, 563 (1989); In re Antitrust Grand Jury, 805 F.2d 155, 162 (6th Cir. 1986); In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum, 773 F.2d 204, 206 (8th Cir. 1985); United States v. Horvath, 731 F.2d 557, 562 (8th Cir. 1984); cf. Clark v. United States, 289 U.S. 1, 13-14 (1933). The so-called “crime-fraud exception” removes the protection of the attorney-client privilege for communications concerning contemplated or continuing crimes or frauds. This exception encompasses criminal and fraudulent conduct based on action as well as inaction.