Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is like saying the moon rises after the sun sets. So the moon is following the sun.
As I said, the judge supports illegal immigration.
He shouldn't even be allowed to be a judge.
Judges are supposed to uphold the law. This judge doesn't uphold the law because he supports illegal immigration, and illegal immigration is -- well -- illegal.
Trump is opposed to illegal immigration.
So, clearly, this lawless and traitorous judge who supports an illegal invasion of this country by members of his own ethnicity is disqualified both as a judge and as a judge judging Trump.
As I said, the judge supports illegal immigration.
He shouldn't even be allowed to be a judge.
Judges are supposed to uphold the law.
Illegal immigration is -- well -- illegal.
Trump is opposed to illegal immigration.
So, clearly, this lawless and traitorous judge who supports an illegal invasion of this country by members of his own ethnicity is disqualified from judging Trump.
Period.
End.
Prove that the judge has DONE SOMETHING that make it clear that he 1. supports illegal immigration, and 2. that he is lawless and traitorous. Don't use the "he's a member" argument. Don't use the kid's scholarship, because that was done as part of the "Dreamers" thing that gives children, who came here through no fault of their own, a path to legality. You need to come up with something else, because that one is pretty well debunked.
Prove that the judge has DONE SOMETHING that make it clear that he 1. supports illegal immigration, and 2. that he is lawless and traitorous. Don't use the "he's a member" argument. Don't use the kid's scholarship, because that was done as part of the "Dreamers" thing that gives children, who came here through no fault of their own, a path to legality. You need to come up with something else, because that one is pretty well debunked.
Nothing I've said has been debunked.
The judge is a member of a group with "La Raza" in its name that gave a scholarship to an illegal alien.
He has shown utter contempt for the law by helping to support an illegal alien and therefore is not qualified to be a judge, period.
Judges are supposed to uphold the law, not encourage violations of the law.
His support for "his own kind" -- even to the point of illegality -- shows that he is a racist/ethnocentrist who cannot be objective when judging someone who is against illegal immigration.
Furthermore, he is a traitor, supporting the illegal invasion of this country.
So let's break it down.
Proof: Member of a racist Latino Supremacist group as revealed by its name -- "La Raza" (The Race) -- that gave a scholarship to an illegal alien instead of to a needy U.S. citizen, of which we have plenty.
The judge is a member of a group with "La Raza" in its name that gave a scholarship to an illegal alien.
He has shown utter contempt for the law by helping to support an illegal alien and therefore is not qualified to be a judge, period.
Judges are supposed to uphold the law, not encourage violations of the law.
His support for "his own kind" -- even to the point of illegality -- shows that he is a racist/ethnocentrist who cannot be objective when judging someone who is against illegal immigration.
Furthermore, he is a traitor, supporting the illegal invasion of this country.
So let's break it down.
Proof: Member of a racist Latino Supremacist group as revealed by its name -- "La Raza" (The Race) -- that gave a scholarship to an illegal alien instead of to a needy U.S. citizen, of which we have plenty.
As I said, the judge supports illegal immigration.
He shouldn't even be allowed to be a judge.
Judges are supposed to uphold the law. This judge doesn't uphold the law because he supports illegal immigration, and illegal immigration is -- well -- illegal.
Trump is opposed to illegal immigration.
So, clearly, this lawless and traitorous judge who supports an illegal invasion of this country by members of his own ethnicity is disqualified both as a judge and as a judge judging Trump.
Period.
End.
You are well...lying.
The judge was a target of the Mexican Cartel because of his work as a federal prosecutor. He was appointed by Republican Governor Schwarzenegger in 2006, not Obama. He does uphold the law, and Trump's own lawyer agrees that the judge's ruling was correct. Here is some additional information:
I know that your conservative handlers gave you this ammunition, but they loaded your gun with blanks. You see, they got it wrong, but they didn't have any other defense for what Trump said. They were grasping at straws and hoping everyone else would be too stupid to look it up. They weren't. This is why the other party leaders aren't siding with the presumptive republican bigot nominee Donald.
You even have the wrong La Razza. In effect, the information the conservative sycophants gave you is completely wrong. I know you won't examine the validity. I'm not sure that you are even able to deviate from the party line because it marks you as a RINO, but in this instance, it might be a time to quietly avoid the topic. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Try telling a police officer or a judge, "I didn't know I had to wear a seat belt," "I didn't know I had to wear a motorcycle helmet," "I didn't know it was illegal for me to smoke a cigarette in my own car with my own young children present in the car" (illegal in California), "I didn't know it was illegal for me to smoke a cigarette in my own house just because I had my own young children living there" (illegal in California), "I didn't know he was drunk when I served him that drink in my bar; he sure seemed okay"....and see where that gets you in the real world.
Your sources are very weak, by the way. They don't support what you're saying.
Mistake of Fact is not Mistake of Law. Every example you keep giving is a mistake of law not a mistake of fact. I've already explained to you the difference. Not knowing the law is generally not excusable, ignorance of factual situations surrounding the law can be. Even if unreasonable.
Go back to my drug dealing example, it makes sense if you really think about it. But the examples you provide are "I didn't know that was illegal" that's not what I'm saying. If you want another example I can give it to you.
Signed,
A Lawyer who has used that defense to reduce a conviction
Mistake of Fact is not Mistake of Law. Every example you keep giving is a mistake of law not a mistake of fact. I've already explained to you the difference. Not knowing the law is generally not excusable, ignorance of factual situations surrounding the law can be. Even if unreasonable....
Signed,
A Lawyer who has used that defense to reduce a conviction
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64
What you described is ignorance of law not fact. My post clearly states ignorance of fact. Let's try this example:
The law states you cannot sell drugs within 1000ft of a school or it's a class 2 felony. You go to your friends house to sell him drugs unaware you are 980 feet from a school.
Because you were unaware of a fact, not the law, you have legal defenses available. Usually to reduce a conviction.
Your confusion is if the example was:
The law states you cannot sell drugs within 1000 feet of a school or it's a class 2 felony. You walk by the school and sell anyway because you didn't know the penalties were increased near schools.
That's not a legal defense.
Thus, ignorance can be a legal defense, if you are ignorant of factual situations.
Your argument would make sense if the law in question did not reference a specific fact: in this case "within 1,000 feet of a school."
But it does reference that fact. Indeed, that fact is the basis for the law in question.
So your attempt to separate the fact from the law fails.
By your own admission, your client was convicted.
All you were able to do was reduce the sentence -- if, indeed, you were able to do that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
