Abrego Garcia is still out on the streets.

[Yakuda]

Sorry you do not like reality.

You're right I don't like when you twats play fast and loose with the law to "get trump" and then listen to your lies about follow ling the law. It's not so much that you cockroaches do it that bothers me its that you think everyone else believes your lying horseshit

 

[Jarod]

You're right I don't like when you twats play fast and loose with the law to "get trump" and then listen to your lies about follow ling the law. It's not so much that you cockroaches do it that bothers me its that you think everyone else believes your lying horseshit

If you don't like something, you make up a reason it happened. Nobody is playing fast or loose with the law. You just do not like the Constitution.

 

[Lionfish]

Speaking of "roaming the streets", make sure you turn your earnings into your pimp tonight!

 

[LurchAddams]

View attachment 70933

In order for you to insult me, you'd first have to round up a 2nd brain cell to go with your other one.

 

[QP!]

How? Pam Bondi says he's a human trafficker. Are you saying she's a fucking goon/liar?

He is doing what i do often and people too often miss here.

it is granting these claims, for sake of argument only (not because they are true) that 'these people Garcia, Clintons, Obama, Biden, Comey, James, etc, etc) are as SO OBVIOUSLY GUILTY as the magats proclaim they are, and yet magats fail at EVERY ATTEMPT, despite never ending investigations to jail or even indict any (many) of them.

so if the Magats believe that then they must accept it is incompetence that is the reason as they refuse to believe the accusations are meritless. Or they default to 'activist judges' despite the judges ranging from Nixon to Trump and every Potus in between, ruling against them.

 

[QP!]

Because of one case out of something like 100,000? Yea, sure...

No because Magats are failing at historically high rates in so many of the high level, high publicity, political, prosecutions, in ways completely never seen prior.


All the areas of the DOJ Trump has taken control of are a disaster and only the normal every day areas where his finger prints are not all over them, are still successfully doing the countries business.

 

[QP!]

You're right I don't like when you twats play fast and loose with the law to "get trump" and then listen to your lies about follow ling the law. It's not so much that you cockroaches do it that bothers me its that you think everyone else believes your lying horseshit

the CONVICTIONS each and every time things got to verdict, prove no one played fast and loose with Trump re the Law.

Do not do the crime, if you do not want to be held responsible for breaking the law.

Contrast that with what Trump's DOJ and all the prior GOP investigations into both Clintons, Obama, joe Biden, Comey, james, etc, etc where despite endless investigations and accusations they GOT NOTHING.

Funny how you did not complain about those investigations finding nothing but you only care about the ones into Trump that found and got crimes CONVICTED.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

No because Magats are failing at historically high rates in so many of the high level, high publicity, political, prosecutions, in ways completely never seen prior.


All the areas of the DOJ Trump has taken control of are a disaster and only the normal every day areas where his finger prints are not all over them, are still successfully doing the countries business.

Wrong. It's just the MSM nitpicking every little thing they can find and making it into a negative about Trump, just as they did in his first term. The obverse was true with Biden where the MSM ran continuous cover for the administration and tried to spin major disasters like the border situation into positives.

In the electronics age, that sort of shit no longer works. There are simply too many ways today to get information and piece the facts together without spin on them.

So, your sweeping generalities about current events simply won't fly.

 

[Jake Starkey]

Bullshit. You twats play fast and loose with the law all the time. Reading your posts is all the studying people need to do.

Jake Starkey: You suckers go judge shopping all the time.


T. A. Gardener: Wrong. It's just the MSM nitpicking every little thing they can find and making it into a negative about Trump, just as they did in his first term. The obverse was true with Biden where the MSM ran continuous cover for the administration and tried to spin major disasters like the border situation into positives.

Jake Starkey: Give it up, T. A. Trum[ deserves all he gets and more.

 

[LurchAddams]

He is doing what i do often and people too often miss here.

it is granting these claims, for sake of argument only (not because they are true) that 'these people Garcia, Clintons, Obama, Biden, Comey, James, etc, etc) are as SO OBVIOUSLY GUILTY as the magats proclaim they are, and yet magats fail at EVERY ATTEMPT, despite never ending investigations to jail or even indict any (many) of them.

so if the Magats believe that then they must accept it is incompetence that is the reason as they refuse to believe the accusations are meritless. Or they default to 'activist judges' despite the judges ranging from Nixon to Trump and every Potus in between, ruling against them.

It seems to all boils down to a "my team" "your team" situation. Republicans approve of Good's murder 77%. Both Democrats and Independents majority disapprove. It's all about power with the Repubs.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Because of one case out of something like 100,000? Yea, sure...

If one case out of 100,000 doesn't prove something, do you think 2 cases out of 100,000 prove something?

 

[QP!]

Wrong. It's just the MSM nitpicking every little thing they can find and making it into a negative about Trump, just as they did in his first term. The obverse was true with Biden where the MSM ran continuous cover for the administration and tried to spin major disasters like the border situation into positives.

In the electronics age, that sort of shit no longer works. There are simply too many ways today to get information and piece the facts together without spin on them.

So, your sweeping generalities about current events simply won't fly.

Then name the high profile cases the Trump Admin, or DOJ has been on tv talking about constantly, that they have succeeded at?

I will then name the ones they have failed and we will see who is wrong Terry.

(this is where you duck and avoid and REFUSE to name any as i do not know of even one while i can name NUMEROUS failures)

 

[T. A. Gardner]

If one case out of 100,000 doesn't prove something, do you think 2 cases out of 100,000 prove something?

Nope. Two disparate cases out of 100,000 are statistically insignificant. They don't even amount to a rounding error.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Then name the high profile cases the Trump Admin, or DOJ has been on tv talking about constantly, that they have succeeded at?

I will then name the ones they have failed and we will see who is wrong Terry.

(this is where you duck and avoid and REFUSE to name any as i do not know of even one while i can name NUMEROUS failures)

From an unlikely source:

SCOTUS Has Given Trump Favorable Rulings in 90 Percent of Cases, Report Finds​

SCOTUS Has Given Trump Favorable Rulings in 90 Percent of Cases, Report Finds

The report stated that, unlike the Supreme Court, lower courts are “engaged in a bipartisan fight for the rule of law.”…

truthout.org

 

[QP!]

From an unlikely source:

SCOTUS Has Given Trump Favorable Rulings in 90 Percent of Cases, Report Finds​

SCOTUS Has Given Trump Favorable Rulings in 90 Percent of Cases, Report Finds

The report stated that, unlike the Supreme Court, lower courts are “engaged in a bipartisan fight for the rule of law.”…

truthout.org

Arguing to the SC over issues of jurisdiction and power divides in the Constitution is NOT the DOJ prosecuting high level cases against law breakers.

As always you conflate things you are too dumb to differentiate.

So again i ask 'name the high profile, Trump Admin publicized cases, that his DOJ has won' or better yet 'not failed at', since the list of failures is REALLY BIG and growing daily.

Lets no forget at the beginning of all these investigations and indictments you proclaimed how all these indicted folks would simply plead out as DOJ had almost a 100% success rate on high profile cases they brought prior to Trumps DOJ. You (being stupid) were certain Trump's team would maintain that level of competence and now REALITY is showing they are approaching a near 100% failure rate.

So put aside your spin deflection and JUST NAME THE CASES Trump's DOJ is winning and we can compare to the list i will provide to see who is being honest.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Nope. Two disparate cases out of 100,000 are statistically insignificant. They don't even amount to a rounding error.

Thanks for admitting that this post by you is bullshit since you are using statistically insignificant data to try to make your point.

These are some of the illegals arrested by ICE in Minnesota. These are the type of people the Left is defending and trying to keep ICE from arresting.

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/ice-arrests-dozens-criminal-illegal-aliens-convicted-murder-child-rape-and-more

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/12/04/ice-arrests-worst-worst-criminal-illegal-aliens-during-operation-metro-surge

While that likely isn't close to everyone ICE has arrested, it does show that there are some really bad people among the illegals in this country and they need to be GONE.

Yet, the Left and the anti-ICE protesters would allow them to stay, or so it would appear given their positions on this matter.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Arguing to the SC over issues of jurisdiction and power divides in the Constitution is NOT the DOJ prosecuting high level cases against law breakers.

As always you conflate things you are too dumb to differentiate.

So again i ask 'name the high profile, Trump Admin publicized cases, that his DOJ has won' or better yet 'not failed at', since the list of failures is REALLY BIG and growing daily.

Lets no forget at the beginning of all these investigations and indictments you proclaimed how all these indicted folks would simply plead out as DOJ had almost a 100% success rate on high profile cases they brought prior to Trumps DOJ. You (being stupid) were certain Trump's team would maintain that level of competence and now REALITY is showing they are approaching a near 100% failure rate.

So put aside your spin deflection and JUST NAME THE CASES Trump's DOJ is winning and we can compare to the list i will provide to see who is being honest.

Read the whole article. The Trump administration is winning most court cases at all levels of the judiciary. It's roughly 60 - 40 overall, with the odds of winning getting higher the higher the case goes.

 

[QP!]

Read the whole article. The Trump administration is winning most court cases at all levels of the judiciary. It's roughly 60 - 40 overall, with the odds of winning getting higher the higher the case goes.

I read it and there is not one high profile case cited and it is mainly referring to what i said which is SC rulings over jurisdictional type questions.

No one is saying that if you go to AnyTown USA and look at a Trump DoJ prosecution of some mortgage broker office defrauding citizens the Trump DOJ is not winning those cases as all prior did, and those type of prosecutions are the over whelming numbers in any admin.

What we are talking about here is EACH AND EVERY high profile, high publicity case, the type of which all DoJ tend to never speak publicly about and allow the indictment and court case and findings do the speaking, unless they feel case is 'high profile' and it is in the 'public interest' to explain why these actions are being taken.

Every Admin has these type cases that are so high profile they go public with them.

It is ONLY THE TRUMP DOJ whose failure rate is approximately 100% on these cases whereas in prior admins (as you stated) it was near 10)% success.


But one more time, do not just say i am wrong and simply quote the cases he has succeeded on? Do not deflect by posting things that do not address that and just post the cases he has succeed on? I can cite the cases that have failed so if you say this is BS and spin you should have a much longer list or AT LEAST ONE????

 

[T. A. Gardner]

I read it and there is not one high profile case cited and it is mainly referring to what i said which is SC rulings over jurisdictional type questions.

No one is saying that if you go to AnyTown USA and look at a Trump DoJ prosecution of some mortgage broker office defrauding citizens the Trump DOJ is not winning those cases as all prior did, and those type of prosecutions are the over whelming numbers in any admin.

What we are talking about here is EACH AND EVERY high profile, high publicity case, the type of which all DoJ tend to never speak publicly about and allow the indictment and court case and findings do the speaking, unless they feel case is 'high profile' and it is in the 'public interest' to explain why these actions are being taken.

Every Admin has these type cases that are so high profile they go public with them.

It is ONLY THE TRUMP DOJ whose failure rate is approximately 100% on these cases whereas in prior admins (as you stated) it was near 10)% success.


But one more time, do not just say i am wrong and simply quote the cases he has succeeded on? Do not deflect by posting things that do not address that and just post the cases he has succeed on? I can cite the cases that have failed so if you say this is BS and spin you should have a much longer list or AT LEAST ONE????

So, you're saying we should judge Trump's legal success on the basis of headlines and celebrity hum?

 

[QP!]

So, you're saying we should judge Trump's legal success on the basis of headlines and celebrity hum?

NO.

I never said any such thing but i can see why a stupid person might say that.

You judge a DOJ by the way they vet and bring their most high profile and technically challenging cases. the very thing you, Terry, said at the start of all these prosecutions that you expected they all would simply PLEAD OUT to deals, as you, Terry, acknowledged that prior COMPETANT DOJ's had such a high success rate that accused defendants more often plead out than faced cases they were almost certain to lose.

That was you, Terry, judging Trump's DOJ future success (you believed in) by the high profile cases, TOP PRIORITY, MOST IMPORTANT CASES, any DOJ brings in a term.

it is only once you saw Trumps DOJ, shocking you and losing ~100% of cases they bring that you had a sudden change of heart that those cases do not matter and you now are trying to create a new expectation that success in those cases is not important.

So for a 3rd time...


Do not deflect by posting things that do not address that and just post the cases he has succeed on? I can cite the cases that have failed so if you say this is BS and spin you should have a much longer list or AT LEAST ONE????