GA Case

[Anonymous]

Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Mr. Eisen here fails to highlight two issues pertinent to this case.....

1. Fani appointed him.
2. Fani authorizes his salary.
3. Contrary to Fani's statements, Wade is being paid MORE than the other prosecutors who have more experience in these types of cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

Yale.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

DP. I went to GW and took a class from Turley years ago. He was a good teacher then but his years of contrarianism have pickled his brain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

Yale.

Sure. And, I teach at Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

DP. I went to GW and took a class from Turley years ago. He was a good teacher then but his years of contrarianism have pickled his brain.

You don't agree with him. You are incensed that he spoke at the impeachment trial AGAINST impeachment.
His takes on Constitutional law are very consistent. I don't always agree with him, but he is consistent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a typical digging a hole for someone else and then fall in it yourself situation.

This. I hate Trump with every fiber of my being, but what a freaking self own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

DP. I went to GW and took a class from Turley years ago. He was a good teacher then but his years of contrarianism have pickled his brain.

You don't agree with him. You are incensed that he spoke at the impeachment trial AGAINST impeachment.
His takes on Constitutional law are very consistent. I don't always agree with him, but he is consistent.

He is consistently contrarian - which worked for a while but he ran out of reasonable things to be contrarian about and is now contrarian about everything. Which means he is wrong about nearly everything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

DP. I went to GW and took a class from Turley years ago. He was a good teacher then but his years of contrarianism have pickled his brain.

You don't agree with him. You are incensed that he spoke at the impeachment trial AGAINST impeachment.
His takes on Constitutional law are very consistent. I don't always agree with him, but he is consistent.

He is consistently contrarian - which worked for a while but he ran out of reasonable things to be contrarian about and is now contrarian about everything. Which means he is wrong about nearly everything.

What did he say in his X posting that is wrong?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jonathan Turley is not a valid source anymore. Sorry he blew his credibility some time ago.

Sorry you don't like the source. Which law school do you teach at?

DP. I went to GW and took a class from Turley years ago. He was a good teacher then but his years of contrarianism have pickled his brain.

You don't agree with him. You are incensed that he spoke at the impeachment trial AGAINST impeachment.
His takes on Constitutional law are very consistent. I don't always agree with him, but he is consistent.

He is consistently contrarian - which worked for a while but he ran out of reasonable things to be contrarian about and is now contrarian about everything. Which means he is wrong about nearly everything.

What did he say in his X posting that is wrong?

I am not the PP, but the dancing around the facts, and general speculation from him are taken as solid fact by the poorly informed Trumpers. He is part of the right wing news sphere that intentionally misleads people about the law. I’ve seen some pretty bad legal takes from him on con law. He says whatever they pay him to say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is above the law Fani, as you so eagerly stated when indicting Trump.

What law? Paying a special prosecutor is not against the law.

If she hired him improperly and benefited from his employment (vacations and cruises), then it could well be criminal.
On another note, she is being called to testify in Wade's divorce proceedings on Jan. 31, two days before her response is due to the court over the current allegations against her.

+1

[Anonymous]

Fired, Disbarred straight to PRISON.