[johnforbes]

rogressive daughter of judge presiding over Donald Trump's hush money case in Manhattan who worked for Kamala Harris and Joe Biden - and is swirling speculation of bias against the ex-president
Manhattan Judge Juan Merchan's daughter, Loren, 34, works for progressive digital strategies firm Authentic Campaigns
She was a digital director for Vice President Kamala Harris' 2020 presidential campaign and has worked for a slew of other Democratic campaigns

[Clownkicker]

Great!

If the judge was Republican then everyone knows the fix would be in for an acquittal, just as the fix was in for Trump's impeachment trial with Republicans running the show.

At least this way there is a chance at a fair trial.

[johnforbes]

No, the goal is always to have a fair trial -- not some partisan witch hunt.

Clinton paid Paula Jones 850k to be quiet, and that was not a crime either, and neither was Cohen's private capacity payoff of Stormy Daniels.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, not a single one of the 34 felony charges against Trump is for paying hush money.

Why do you insist on pretending one of them is?

And even if one of them were, what about the other 33 charges?

[johnforbes]

No felony is stated in any one of those 34.

Actually that violates the 6th Amendment, but Bragg wouldn't know that.

[Clownkicker]

Does anyone else wonder why johnforbes is so concerned about a judge having a politically active daughter?

As if no other judges have politically active daughters who worked for politicians? As if judges make their decisions based on who their daughters support.

If johnforbes finds finds this to be a problem, why hasn't he started any threads about Republicans with politically active daughters. Not a one of them can decide a case on its merits, apparently.

Meanwhile, johnforbes has yet to start a thread about Supreme Court Justice Thomas accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of undeclared gifts from a conservative billionaire mega-donor to conservative politicians who also has a huge Nazi 'memorabilia' collection. And mysteriously, Thomas' opinions always skew toward white nationalism.


This is something that should actually concern Americans, but johnforbes is just fine with it, as his lack of a thread on the topic shows.

So much for johnforbes' phony concern for "the appearance of justice" in our courts.

[johnforbes]

The judge himself contributed money (albeit tiny amounts) to "Stop Republicans."

Clearly that shows bias, and also it is against the code of ethics judges should cleave to.

[Clownkicker]

So that judge GAVE a few hundred bucks, and Thomas TOOK hundreds of thousands in undeclared gifts.

Hmmmm, which causes you more concern, johnny? A judge who gives a pittance or a judge who takes hundreds of thousands for himself?

[johnforbes]

"The Wind and the Lion" is instructive here.

Clown is a leftist lion, and growls in his den, but when Clown's lips move he is lion.

Per contra, Mr Forbes is more like Teddy Roosevelt, with the power of the wind whereas Clowntoker's remarks merely blow.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^^^^ Look at johnny desperately divert from the serious dangers of a judge accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in undeclared gifts (which concerns him not at all) by pretending that compares to a judge having a daughter who is politically active, just as many judges do and which has no moral or ethical ramifications whasoever. What a moron.

Dimwit johnny pretends his regular behavior of merely breaking wind in his posts somehow compares to my noble postings which reveal the truth of his partisan hypocrisy.

[johnforbes]

My position is crystal clear.

No judge should accept gifts to influence a decision, but the sad reality is that the very definition of a judge is "A lawyer who knows a politician."

The Democrats on the Sup Ct have voting patterns which are trivially easy to predict.

We all know that Sotomayor, Kagan, etc favor criminals over crime victims, favor illegal aliens over US citizens, favor censorship over free speech, favor socialism over capitalism, and so on.

[Clownkicker]

We all know that johforbes is trivially easy to predict.

He will only blame Democrats for things that Republicans do more often and in a far more egregious manner.

He doesn't start a thread about Justice Thomas TAKING hundreds of thousands of dollars in undeclared gifts and still can't bring himself to criticize Thomas by name.

Meanwhile, johnny is pissing his shorts that a Democrat Judge GAVE a few hundred dollars to a single candidate. That a judge would support a candidate of his choice is something johnforbes just can't abide.

He knows quite well that a judge is supposed to TAKE huge sums (as does Republican Thomas for decades) and not GIVE a pittance (as did the Democrat judge once.)

This is what keeps johnfoibles up at night, apparently. He can only abide judges who TAKE. He will never start a thread about a judge who TAKES. (Unless of course that judge is a Democrat.)


In like fashion, the Republicans on the Sup Ct have voting patterns which are trivially easy to predict. But this also doesn't bother hypocrite johnforbes. He only criticizes if a Democrat is easy to predict. (As we see he did by name above. The Republicans ALL got a free pass for doing the same thing.)

[johnforbes]

That friend had no business before the Court, but of course other justices such as Ruth Bader G and Kagan and Sotomayor et alia have been totally owned by leftist orthodoxy.

For example, if you take away Marxism and von Sacher-Masoch, Clowntroller would be devoid of intellectual influences.

[Clownkicker]

The friend contributed millions of dollars to Right Wing causes and organizations, so of course he frequently had business before the court, dimwit.

Regardless, this point is merely another of your distractions from the true concern which is that Thomas accepted over a million dollars in gifts without declaring them. (Not to mention that Thomas' wife accepted over $600,000 from a Right Wing think tank which Thomas also didn't declare. They paid her hoping she would influence her husband's decisions. You know this because she isn't exactly one of the great minds of out time, is she.)

And as you so frequently insist here, the judicial system should have the APPEARANCE of impartiality, which Thomas' decisions don't have.

Thomas was the sole dissenting opinion on one of the Trump cases brought before the Supreme Court. If even the other Rightist justices agreed with the liberals, maybe the gifts had an impact after all, didn't they, johnny.

[johnforbes]

In an ideal world, no rich person would be able to influence politicians.

But Bragg got heavy donations from Soros.

And the Hunter laptop isn't just about drugs and chicks, but business deals for millions, and why?

Because Hunter went to good schools and lived a pampered life as the son of a politician? No, it was because he might have access to power, perhaps a gateway to access to a decisional person.

And, beyond money, look at Kagan and Sotomayor and Ginsberg -- people who were wholly owned by leftist ideology.

[Clownkicker]

johnny, if Hunter did illegal things, then throw the book at him. Who cares. Produce some evidence of it.

Meanwhile, you are here pretending it's a "witch hunt" to throw the book at Trump for the many illegal things he has done for which there is a mountain of evidence and as you know quite well that he did. Your political position is always that rich white guys mysteriously never commit any crimes and shouldn't have to pay taxes. Only poor blacks and Latinos (and children of Democrats) do, apparently.

Why is your sole political position always that of a partisan hypocrite?

[johnforbes]

My sole position is always the same -- that nobody is above the law.

But Democrats are above the law de facto, and America is the poorer for it.

It is now known that Blinken organized the letter from 51 retired intel "experts" who said the laptop was Russian disinfo, but any rational person before the election strongly suspected it was real.

Heck, the store owner received it from a stoned Hunter who signed a work order.

[Clownkicker]

Johnny, no laptop from anyone other than Joe Biden would have made more people vote for Trump, regardless of the content.

Whereas it is a fact that Trump would have lost if he hadn't illegally buried the Stormy Daniels affair just weeks before the election.

[johnforbes]

There were some surprising polls on that, showing that knowing the laptop was real would have changed the minds of enough voters to tilt the election.

After all, the laptop suggested not only the son's character defects such as drug addiction, but trading influence for $ suggestions were apparently all throughout it.

Supposedly, a whistleblower supervisory IRS agent who investigated the laptop for 3 years is now saying political influence retarded the investigation -- not a suprise in D.C.