333d
@averagejoe1 saidWhat do YOU think they were doing at the WH? And do you think there was anything improper about it ?
You missed my question.....do you know why Fani's staff had to go to the WH....Twice? This does not look too good for the Democrats. Surely the dems did not get into scheming about nailing Trump. So, what , then?
333d
@moonbus saidYour question about MY question puzzles me. I asked the question because my granny and I have exhausted our search for any possible reason. I am left to believe that it obviously had to do with a skull session with the administration of the Pres of our country (since it was in his house). Who else would they meet with? So, if they have a major antiTrump legal proceeding going on, we, granny and I, assume that that had to be the subject of the meeting. So it would follow that there was some influence of the president being requested to help them nail his ass. Just a thought.
What do YOU think they were doing at the WH? And do you think there was anything improper about it ?
Now, I am kind enough to answer your question. Can you tell me what you think they visited for?
333d
@shavixmir saidMaybe he doesnt, I just assume he does, as so many people in that world do hate him. I'd think that the way he calls judges out without reservation, usually correctly, really upsets them.
How do you know he hates anybody?
333d
@averagejoe1 saidI have no evidence that they did (visit). Have you any evidence?
Your question about MY question puzzles me. I asked the question because my granny and I have exhausted our search for any possible reason. I am left to believe that it obviously had to do with a skull session with the administration of the Pres of our country (since it was in his house). Who else would they meet with? So, if they have a major antiTrump legal proceedi ...[text shortened]... Now, I am kind enough to answer your question. Can you tell me what you think they visited for?
And even if they did, how would that prejudice the legal proceedings going on now?
333d
@averagejoe1 saidBut they ignored precedent, in favor of Trump. That is favoritism and cronyism, two hallmarks of an authoritarian government.
I don't get your post.......Might I remind you that judges appointed by Trump ruled exactly along the provisions of the Constitution when making their decisions about abortion, the last go around. Did that not make sense to you?,,,,They sent the abortion thing to the states, which is the only thing that they could have done. It is a given that you do not agree with the ...[text shortened]... make an issue of here.
As I said, I don't get your point. Could you elaborate, understandably?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent
Stare decisis is a legal principle by which judges are obligated to respect the precedent established by prior decisions.
But Republicans wanted this, so F precedent. Let them pay for their stupid decisions.
Concerning the Constitution, you can't even abide by the 14th Amendment, so stop claiming that you even care what the Constitution says. You just get it wrong anyways.
330d
@AverageJoe1
So for you just visiting the WH is proof of collusion between Fani and Biden.
Hey assshole, PROVE IT.