The only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:28 pmHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 2:34 amThere were jurors that donated money to Sussman...the defendant??? Who knew!???!!!RiverguyVT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 4:34 pmTo be so invested in the well being and promotion of a defendant's interests that one is giving money to promote and advance those interests and that defendant?HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 1:52 amWhy should it be a reason for disqualification???RiverguyVT wrote: ↑Mon May 30, 2022 10:16 pmNot at all.HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Sat May 28, 2022 3:08 am
LOL @Turley. He's become such a publicity ho, he'll say anything. The idea that someone's donation history.should disqualify them, is ludicrously stupid.
Wow.
And why do you think the prosecution didn't use either their peremptory challenges, or asked to have them dismissed for cause??? Maybe because the history of legal precedent disagrees with you and Turley.
Yeah. No bias there.
A juror said:
"“I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”
The verdict was unanimous. Durham must be the absolute worst at voir dire.
Also fairly certain that the majority of ppl in the US would agree with that juror about "bigger things", including 90% of UWS.
IOW, it's a very discomforting situation for lefties, so there are more iMpOrTaNt things to fOcUs on...Like fixing the problems leftist DF's voted for in electing Biden.
Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:48 pmThe only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:28 pmHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 2:34 amThere were jurors that donated money to Sussman...the defendant??? Who knew!???!!!RiverguyVT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 4:34 pmTo be so invested in the well being and promotion of a defendant's interests that one is giving money to promote and advance those interests and that defendant?HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 1:52 amWhy should it be a reason for disqualification???
And why do you think the prosecution didn't use either their peremptory challenges, or asked to have them dismissed for cause??? Maybe because the history of legal precedent disagrees with you and Turley.
Yeah. No bias there.
A juror said:
"“I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”
The verdict was unanimous. Durham must be the absolute worst at voir dire.
Also fairly certain that the majority of ppl in the US would agree with that juror about "bigger things", including 90% of UWS.
IOW, it's a very discomforting situation for lefties, so there are more iMpOrTaNt things to fOcUs on...Like fixing the problems leftist DF's voted for in electing Biden.
Uh huh.
A POTUS candidate (Hillary Clinton) sold a verified lie to the FBI for political retribution. The democrats doubled down on the bullish!t story to appoint a special counsel ffs over the same allegation.
Keep sawing that lefty log, HFDC.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
And.....that has what to do with Sussman charge of lying to the FBI? As usual, you dolts act like Hillary was on trial and that it was going to bring out some never before known corruption or action. I'm not sawing any log, Joe. Just watching you guys fall for the same act, once again. Fool you once, that's a mistake. Fool you 100 times......HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 12:41 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:48 pmThe only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:28 pmHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 2:34 amThere were jurors that donated money to Sussman...the defendant??? Who knew!???!!!RiverguyVT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 4:34 pmTo be so invested in the well being and promotion of a defendant's interests that one is giving money to promote and advance those interests and that defendant?HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 1:52 am
Why should it be a reason for disqualification???
And why do you think the prosecution didn't use either their peremptory challenges, or asked to have them dismissed for cause??? Maybe because the history of legal precedent disagrees with you and Turley.
Yeah. No bias there.
A juror said:
"“I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”
The verdict was unanimous. Durham must be the absolute worst at voir dire.
Also fairly certain that the majority of ppl in the US would agree with that juror about "bigger things", including 90% of UWS.
IOW, it's a very discomforting situation for lefties, so there are more iMpOrTaNt things to fOcUs on...Like fixing the problems leftist DF's voted for in electing Biden.
Uh huh.
A POTUS candidate (Hillary Clinton) sold a verified lie to the FBI for political retribution. The democrats doubled down on the bullish!t story to appoint a special counsel ffs over the same allegation.
Keep sawing that lefty log, HFDC.
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:53 amAnd.....that has what to do with Sussman charge of lying to the FBI? As usual, you dolts act like Hillary was on trial and that it was going to bring out some never before known corruption or action. I'm not sawing any log, Joe. Just watching you guys fall for the same act, once again. Fool you once, that's a mistake. Fool you 100 times......HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 12:41 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:48 pmThe only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:28 pmHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 2:34 amThere were jurors that donated money to Sussman...the defendant??? Who knew!???!!!RiverguyVT wrote: ↑Wed Jun 01, 2022 4:34 pm
To be so invested in the well being and promotion of a defendant's interests that one is giving money to promote and advance those interests and that defendant?
Yeah. No bias there.
A juror said:
"“I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”
The verdict was unanimous. Durham must be the absolute worst at voir dire.
Also fairly certain that the majority of ppl in the US would agree with that juror about "bigger things", including 90% of UWS.
IOW, it's a very discomforting situation for lefties, so there are more iMpOrTaNt things to fOcUs on...Like fixing the problems leftist DF's voted for in electing Biden.
Uh huh.
A POTUS candidate (Hillary Clinton) sold a verified lie to the FBI for political retribution. The democrats doubled down on the bullish!t story to appoint a special counsel ffs over the same allegation.
Keep sawing that lefty log, HFDC.
Sussman didn't lie, he actually believed that f'ing Alfa Bank bullish!t. All the characters in play were either donors, legal representatives or campaign officials from the dnc. No chance it was a political hit job!
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
OK, what does that have to do with Sussman's trial about lying to the FBI? You keep on talking about things that have nothing to do with whether the charges against him were valid.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 2:22 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:53 amAnd.....that has what to do with Sussman charge of lying to the FBI? As usual, you dolts act like Hillary was on trial and that it was going to bring out some never before known corruption or action. I'm not sawing any log, Joe. Just watching you guys fall for the same act, once again. Fool you once, that's a mistake. Fool you 100 times......HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 12:41 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:48 pmThe only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 7:28 pmHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 2:34 am
There were jurors that donated money to Sussman...the defendant??? Who knew!???!!!
The verdict was unanimous. Durham must be the absolute worst at voir dire.
Also fairly certain that the majority of ppl in the US would agree with that juror about "bigger things", including 90% of UWS.
IOW, it's a very discomforting situation for lefties, so there are more iMpOrTaNt things to fOcUs on...Like fixing the problems leftist DF's voted for in electing Biden.
Uh huh.
A POTUS candidate (Hillary Clinton) sold a verified lie to the FBI for political retribution. The democrats doubled down on the bullish!t story to appoint a special counsel ffs over the same allegation.
Keep sawing that lefty log, HFDC.
Sussman didn't lie, he actually believed that f'ing Alfa Bank bullish!t. All the characters in play were either donors, legal representatives or campaign officials from the dnc. No chance it was a political hit job!
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
HokieFanDC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 4:21 amOK, what does that have to do with Sussman's trial about lying to the FBI? You keep on talking about things that have nothing to do with whether the charges against him were valid.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 2:22 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:53 amAnd.....that has what to do with Sussman charge of lying to the FBI? As usual, you dolts act like Hillary was on trial and that it was going to bring out some never before known corruption or action. I'm not sawing any log, Joe. Just watching you guys fall for the same act, once again. Fool you once, that's a mistake. Fool you 100 times......HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 12:41 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:48 pmThe only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.
Uh huh.
A POTUS candidate (Hillary Clinton) sold a verified lie to the FBI for political retribution. The democrats doubled down on the bullish!t story to appoint a special counsel ffs over the same allegation.
Keep sawing that lefty log, HFDC.
Sussman didn't lie, he actually believed that f'ing Alfa Bank bullish!t. All the characters in play were either donors, legal representatives or campaign officials from the dnc. No chance it was a political hit job!
The charges against him ARE valid. He lied, but the dirty F's at the FBI didn't care that he was lying. Their bogus FISA applications prove that much.
Hillary Clinton framed her political with opponent with bullish!t charges and the FBI helped her accomplish her goal.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
- HooFighter
- Posts: 4292
- Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:16 pm
- Party: all the time
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
Last time I checked Hillary Clinton lost the election, seems like she didn't really accomplish her goal. I think If the FBI helped accomplish anyone's goals it was by doing the "but her emails" thing.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 10:29 pm The charges against him ARE valid. He lied, but the dirty F's at the FBI didn't care that he was lying. Their bogus FISA applications prove that much.
Hillary Clinton framed her political with opponent with bullish!t charges and the FBI helped her accomplish her goal.
Anyway, speaking of lying,..
Donald Trump is a stupid man's idea of a smart man, a poor man's idea of a rich man, and a weak man's idea of a strong man.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
12 out 12 jurors disagree with you.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 10:29 pmHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 4:21 amOK, what does that have to do with Sussman's trial about lying to the FBI? You keep on talking about things that have nothing to do with whether the charges against him were valid.HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 2:22 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 1:53 amAnd.....that has what to do with Sussman charge of lying to the FBI? As usual, you dolts act like Hillary was on trial and that it was going to bring out some never before known corruption or action. I'm not sawing any log, Joe. Just watching you guys fall for the same act, once again. Fool you once, that's a mistake. Fool you 100 times......HokieJoe wrote: ↑Fri Jun 03, 2022 12:41 amHokieFanDC wrote: ↑Thu Jun 02, 2022 11:48 pm
The only people heavily invested in the trial were the usual Charlie Browns that always fall for the false hope aimed at them.
Uh huh.
A POTUS candidate (Hillary Clinton) sold a verified lie to the FBI for political retribution. The democrats doubled down on the bullish!t story to appoint a special counsel ffs over the same allegation.
Keep sawing that lefty log, HFDC.
Sussman didn't lie, he actually believed that f'ing Alfa Bank bullish!t. All the characters in play were either donors, legal representatives or campaign officials from the dnc. No chance it was a political hit job!
The charges against him ARE valid. He lied, but the dirty F's at the FBI didn't care that he was lying. Their bogus FISA applications prove that much.
Hillary Clinton framed her political with opponent with bullish!t charges and the FBI helped her accomplish her goal.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
- UpstateSCHokie
- Posts: 11993
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
New info the further proves Trump was spied on
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
- HokieHam
- Posts: 26677
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
- Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
Yup. Posted it in another thread……….someone, preferably a group of these AHoles, needs to go to jail for this utter bullshiRt
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."
ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
Of course he was spied on. And sh!tlibs have the stones to still whine about Watergate.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
- UpstateSCHokie
- Posts: 11993
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
And yet crickets from the AWOLS here.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
When they can't get their way, they run away.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
- HokieHam
- Posts: 26677
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
- Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....
Re: Sussman, Georgia Tech and the Clinton’s. Of course!
This Maoist fuk is probably trying to figure out a way to repeat what happened in 2016……
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."
ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function