First Clarence Thomas and now...

[Glennfs]

We’ll see at the hearing, won’t we?

Because all you know is what Donald Trump tells you. You don’t know ANYTHING as a fact.

So which of the 5 are not true.

Could it be you were lying when you said they were all false


http://www.radiofreeliberal.com/viewtop ... 968#p79968

For a guy who pitched a bitch about numbers recently you sure are pissing backwards.

Which is false. Come on big guy you said they were all false. So which one isn't true? Time to step up or shut up.

[gounion]

So which of the 5 are not true.

Could it be you were lying when you said they were all false


http://www.radiofreeliberal.com/viewtop ... 968#p79968

For a guy who pitched a bitch about numbers recently you sure are pissing backwards.

Which is false. Come on big guy you said they were all false. So which one isn't true? Time to step up or shut up.

Glenn, there will be a hearing, and the judge will decide. Will you accept the judge’s decision? Yes or no?

[Glennfs]

Glenn, there will be a hearing, and the judge will decide. Will you accept the judge’s decision? Yes or no?

I am not aware of what the hearing is about and I certainly don't trust your assessment.
I believe the hearing is simply to decide whether or not Willis can proceed.
Which because you keep harping on this and don't have the balls to give a personal opinion about whether or not you personally believe what she has done is corrupt. Giving the same argument you did about Menendez years ago.
That being the case then I am assuming that the judge is going to decide to let her continue. Yes I will support his decision.

Now after she gets investigated by the state are you going to accept those findings.

Finally are you ever going to grow a pair of balls and give us your personal opinion on whether or not what she did is ethical or not.

Lord knows you have no problem giving an opinion about Clarence Thomas.

[gounion]

I am not aware of what the hearing is about and I certainly don't trust your assessment.
I believe the hearing is simply to decide whether or not Willis can proceed.
Which because you keep harping on this and don't have the balls to give a personal opinion about whether or not you personally believe what she has done is corrupt. Giving the same argument you did about Menendez years ago.
That being the case then I am assuming that the judge is going to decide to let her continue. Yes I will support his decision.

Now after she gets investigated by the state are you going to accept those findings.

Finally are you ever going to grow a pair of balls and give us your personal opinion on whether or not what she did is ethical or not.

Lord knows you have no problem giving an opinion about Clarence Thomas.

So you won’t care how the judge rules. Got it.

[Glennfs]

So you won’t care how the judge rules. Got it.

I said I don't know what the judge is ruling on. Of he simply rules she can continue that does not mean she is innocent.
If he rules she has to step aside that doesn't mean she is legally guilty.

Sp man up is what she did on your opinion corrupt no matter if it's legal or nit. Come on big guy show you have a pair

[gounion]

I said I don't know what the judge is ruling on. Of he simply rules she can continue that does not mean she is innocent.
If he rules she has to step aside that doesn't mean she is legally guilty.

Sp man up is what she did on your opinion corrupt no matter if it's legal or nit. Come on big guy show you have a pair

He is having a hearing as to whether there is anything to the charges against Willis.

Please try to keep up. I guess Trump didn’t tell you what was going on.

And if the judge doesn’t rule against Willis, you’ll say he’s a corrupt judge out to get Trump, like all the rest.

[Glennfs]

He is having a hearing as to whether there is anything to the charges against Willis.

Please try to keep up. I guess Trump didn’t tell you what was going on.

And if the judge doesn’t rule against Willis, you’ll say he’s a corrupt judge out to get Trump, like all the rest.

No I will wait for the state investigation. There has been no investigation no sworn testimony.
No matter how the judge rules there should be an investigation.
Do you agree?

[gounion]

No I will wait for the state investigation. There has been no investigation no sworn testimony.
No matter how the judge rules there should be an investigation.
Do you agree?

No. The judge will find the facts. The Trumper made the accusations without any sworn testimony or evidence.

They will have their chance to present it.

But good job of setting up supporting Trump even if the judge finds no wrongdoing.

[Glennfs]

No. The judge will find the facts. The Trumper made the accusations without any sworn testimony or evidence.

They will have their chance to present it.

But good job of setting up supporting Trump even if the judge finds no wrongdoing.

So you are opposed to an in depth detailed investigation, imagine that.

[Glennfs]

No. The judge will find the facts. The Trumper made the accusations without any sworn testimony or evidence.

They will have their chance to present it.

But good job of setting up supporting Trump even if the judge finds no wrongdoing.

All the judge is going to decide is if Willis can continue not guilt not innocence.
Now Willis isn't going to testify in the divorce and her " well qualified " boyfriend is attempting to get the financial records sealed.

Sounds exactly like what Trump would do and you would have no problem giving your personal opinion on.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/georgi ... vorce-case

[gounion]

All the judge is going to decide is if Willis can continue not guilt not innocence.
Now Willis isn't going to testify in the divorce and her " well qualified " boyfriend is attempting to get the financial records sealed.

Sounds exactly like what Trump would do and you would have no problem giving your personal opinion on.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/georgi ... vorce-case

So, you won’t accept what the judge says. Got it.

[Glennfs]

So, you won’t accept what the judge says. Got it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fulton-count ... 29168.html

More information on the corruption of Fani Willis that GoU doesn't have the balls to offer a personal opinion on.
Now she wants the February 15th hearing postponed.
Imagine if she were a republican prosecuting a Democrat. GoU would be outraged.

No matter the outcome the judge's ruling will not determine guilt or innocence. It will only determine if Wiliis can proceed. The states upcoming investigation is where we will learn if Willis is corrupt according to the law.

While we already know she is corrupt regardless of what the legal definition is.

[gounion]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fulton-count ... 29168.html

More information on the corruption of Fani Willis that GoU doesn't have the balls to offer a personal opinion on.
Now she wants the February 15th hearing postponed.
Imagine if she were a republican prosecuting a Democrat. GoU would be outraged.

No matter the outcome the judge's ruling will not determine guilt or innocence. It will only determine if Wiliis can proceed. The states upcoming investigation is where we will learn if Willis is corrupt according to the law.

While we already know she is corrupt regardless of what the legal definition is.

Article is from weeks ago.

Again, we’ll see what the hearing says. I don’t see that she’s done anything illegal at all. Adults having relationships aren’t against the law.

[Glennfs]

Article is from weeks ago.

Again, we’ll see what the hearing says. I don’t see that she’s done anything illegal at all. Adults having relationships aren’t against the law.

Odd how you have no problem giving a personal opinion about Republicans. But can't muster the intestinal fortitude when it is a democrat.

[gounion]

Odd how you have no problem giving a personal opinion about Republicans. But can't muster the intestinal fortitude when it is a democrat.

I just did. I can’t see anything illegal. I mean, Trump can sexually harass women and you just attack the women. He’s doing the same thing to Willis - throwing mud at her, and I can see you love it.

[Glennfs]

I just did. I can’t see anything illegal. I mean, Trump can sexually harass women and you just attack the women. He’s doing the same thing to Willis - throwing mud at her, and I can see you love it.

You are grasping at straws. It's because she is black it is because she is female.
While ignoring the facts. You even denied theu were in a relationship.

Yet you claim Thomas 100pct guilty

[gounion]

You are grasping at straws. It's because she is black it is because she is female.
While ignoring the facts. You even denied theu were in a relationship.

Yet you claim Thomas 100pct guilty

I didn’t deny anything.

And yes, Thomas accepted a quarter-of-a-million dollar RV from a political activist who put lots of money into right-wing politics.

Something that would have any other judge removed and possible jailed.

[Glennfs]

I didn’t deny anything.

And yes, Thomas accepted a quarter-of-a-million dollar RV from a political activist who put lots of money into right-wing politics.

Something that would have any other judge removed and possible jailed.

So Clarence Thomas isn't allowed to have wealthy friends.

[gounion]

So Clarence Thomas isn't allowed to have wealthy friends.

He shouldn't receive payoffs from them.

You really are grasping for straws now, aren't you?

But we do know from you that Fani Willis isn't allowed to date.

[JoeMemphis]

In both Accounting and Law, ethics standards are set to a level to insure not just actual independence but also the appearance of independence. This is the ethical issue that Thomas and SCOTUS have to deal with. This is no small gift. It’s not a $25 lunch. So yeah, Clarence and the court need to deal with this.

As far as Willis, her ethical question is one of the misappropriation of public funds. In most companies, if you make purchasing decisions such as hiring independent contractors, having an undisclosed personal relationship with a major vendor and accepting things such as travel or other gifts or benefits from said vendor, is grounds for immediate termination. It’s something that’s fairly easy to investigate and determine. If true, it’s a violation of ethical standards and may also be illegal.

[Glennfs]

He shouldn't receive payoffs from them.

You really are grasping for straws now, aren't you?

But we do know from you that Fani Willis isn't allowed to date.

Of course she is just don't hire your unqualified boyfriend and pay him over 650k of taxpayers money

[gounion]

Of course she is just don't hire your unqualified boyfriend and pay him over 650k of taxpayers money

He wasn't her boyfriend when she hired him. And what kind of money do you think lawyers make?

[Glennfs]

He wasn't her boyfriend when she hired him. And what kind of money do you think lawyers make?

That is pure bullshit they were in a relationship when he was hired.
He is not qualified for the job. Not the excessive amount he was paid.
The other two special prosecutors billed under 100k and one of them was paid significantly less per hour.
Of this were about Republicans you would be outraged

[gounion]

That is pure bullshit they were in a relationship when he was hired.
He is not qualified for the job. Not the excessive amount he was paid.
The other two special prosecutors billed under 100k and one of them was paid significantly less per hour.
Of this were about Republicans you would be outraged

All you know is that this is what Dear Leader tells you.

And no, adults having a relationship is NOT against any law. If it is, please show me which one.

[Glennfs]

All you know is that this is what Dear Leader tells you.

And no, adults having a relationship is NOT against any law. If it is, please show me which one.

Your desperation is showing as well as your hypocrisy