Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Yup. Just as I thought.

You can't cite one single example of Legal AF being correct in a single prediction they have ever made since you started ingesting that bullshit.

You're a clickbait junkie.

Gross.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Yup. Just as I thought.

You can't cite one single example of Legal AF being correct in a single prediction they have ever made since you started ingesting that bullshit.

You're a clickbait junkie.

Gross.

---

Point to the asshole Jack, right.


The Institute for Policy Integrity’s analysis — cited in Democracy Forward and CalMatters — found Trump’s administration lost 79 of 85 federal agency deregulatory/policy cases (a roughly 7% win rate for that narrow category) while CalMatters reported a roughly 31% win rate for suits filed against his rules in his first term

Bottom line: you can cite rigorous, narrow statistics (e.g., 79 losses in 85 federal deregulatory cases)

---

Impossible to track. I know, since you want to know, look it up.

too funny...

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

Yup. Just as I thought.

You can't cite one single example of Legal AF being correct in a single prediction they have ever made since you started ingesting that bullshit.

You're a clickbait junkie.

Gross.

---

Point to the asshole Jack, right.


The Institute for Policy Integrity’s analysis — cited in Democracy Forward and CalMatters — found Trump’s administration lost 79 of 85 federal agency deregulatory/policy cases (a roughly 7% win rate for that narrow category) while CalMatters reported a roughly 31% win rate for suits filed against his rules in his first term

Bottom line: you can cite rigorous, narrow statistics (e.g., 79 losses in 85 federal deregulatory cases)

---

Impossible to track. I know, since you want to know, look it up.

too funny...

T

---

Democracy Forward and Cal Matters.

Sounds like real, credible, unbiased stuff.


What you keep forgetting, chud, is that Trump has won literally EVERYTHING on appeal.

There's not a single fucking case of yours in this entire waste of a thread that ever stuck.


Take your California Democrat watchdog firms and shove them up your well-laid asshole.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Another source. You'll notice I didn't leave a link. That is because you just make shit up and don't provide any facts. Well, fact check this asshole.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:

And that's cute...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Another source. You'll notice I didn't leave a link. That is because you just make shit up and don't provide any facts. Well, fact check this asshole.

---

You think hiding a link from me is going to keep me from finding out where your source is?

How do you suppose I constantly out Second for plagiarism when I know he "wrote" something he's literally incapable of writing?

https://democracyforward.org/updates/trump-loses-93-percent-of-cases-w
e-know-because-we-win/


Democracy Forward.

Fuck you, Ted.

You are a waste of carbon, let alone a complete waste of my time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Fucking dying here laughing Gilligan.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Fucking dying here laughing Gilligan.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Don't know what you're talking about Gilligan. Here, chew on this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

OK, we are going to need this thread just to cover all the different losses for Trump in the courts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Don't know what you're talking about Gilligan. Here, chew on this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Don't know what you're talking about Gilligan. Here, chew on this.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
T

Trump SUFFERS Blow After Blow in NIGHTMARE Court Week

http://www.yout ube.com/watch?v=EBVOb3_NkuM

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
T

Trump SUFFERS Blow After Blow in NIGHTMARE Court Week

http://www.yout ube.com/watch?v=EBVOb3_NkuM

---

https://www.axios.com/local/san-antonio/2025/11/22/supreme-court-texas
-congressional-map-redistricting

6ix, have you checked your bag of I Told You Sos? You've been shoveling out a bunch, like every time Ted posts his Libtard nonsense. And you've got a avalanche of more to hand out, coming up.

---

Quote:

---

The Fulton County, Georgia, election interference case against President Donald Trump and others has been dismissed after the prosecutor who took over the case requested that it be dropped.

"In my professional judgment, the citizens of Georgia are not served by pursuing this case in full for another five to ten years," wrote Pete Skandalakis, the executive director of the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council of Georgia, who took over the case after the original prosecutor was disqualified from the case.

Within minutes of Skandalakis' court filing, the judge overseeing the case granted the request and dismissed the case.

"This case is hereby dismissed in its entirety," wrote Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee, who earlier this month had scheduled a Dec. 1 "status/pretrial" hearing in the case.

Trump and 18 others pleaded not guilty in August 2023 to all charges in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
OK, we are going to need this thread just to cover all the different losses for Trump in the courts.

---

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

OK, we are going to need this thread just to cover all the different losses for Trump in the courts.

---

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Trump wanting to use troops in American cities isn't gonna happen.

T

BREAKING: SCOTUS DEALS Trump a MASSIVE Defeat

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Trump wanting to use troops in American cities isn't gonna happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Trump wanting to use troops in American cities isn't gonna happen.

T

BREAKING: SCOTUS DEALS Trump a MASSIVE Defeat

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Trump wanting to use troops in American cities isn't gonna happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Trump wanting to use troops in American cities isn't gonna happen.

T

BREAKING: SCOTUS DEALS Trump a MASSIVE Defeat

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

The Supreme Court does not write law. They only interpret it. In the United States, the United States Congress, specifically the House of Representatives and the Senate, is the lawmaking branch of the federal government, meaning they are responsible for writing and debating laws.

Apparently, you don't know this. If you did, you'd realize the laws congress write and wrote, and pass into law, show their intentions and that is what the Supreme court interprets. The intentions behind the law. And, can the president ignore them. Since the congress is an equal branch of the government the President can't ignore the law.

T

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

The Supreme Court does not write law. They only interpret it. In the United States, the United States Congress, specifically the House of Representatives and the Senate, is the lawmaking branch of the federal government, meaning they are responsible for writing and debating laws.

Apparently, you don't know this. If you did, you'd realize the laws congress write and wrote, and pass into law, show their intentions and that is what the Supreme court interprets. The intentions behind the law. And, can the president ignore them. Since the congress is an equal branch of the government the President can't ignore the law.

T

---

---

I called it.

T

Wrongly-deported migrant's trial canceled — and hearing ordered on DOJ misconduct

President Donald Trump's legal war on a Salvadoran immigrant was dealt a bitter blow on Friday, as a federal judge in Tennessee canceled the current date for his trial on human smuggling charges — and will instead hold a hearing on the legality of the prosecution.

The order, by U.S. District Judge Waverly Crenshaw, was first reported by NBC Washington's Paul Wagner. It comes after Kilmar Abrego Garcia's legal team presented evidence that he was being targeted for selective and vindictive prosecution.

"Once a defendant establishes a prima facie showing of vindictiveness, 'a presumption arises in defendant's favor,'" wrote Crenshaw, an appointee of former President Barack Obama. "The Court has already found that Abrego has made such a showing, entitling him to discovery and an evidentiary hearing on why the government is prosecuting him ... Given this, the burden has shifted to the government."

Expand article logo Continue reading

Crenshaw added that if the one-day evidentiary hearing on vindictive prosecution, now set for Jan. 28, goes against the government, the charges against Abrego could be dismissed outright.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/wrongly-deported-migrant-s-trial-
canceled-and-hearing-ordered-on-doj-misconduct/ar-AA1T5hmO?ocid=msedgntp&pc=EDBBAN&cvid=230fae3b3c1048559431984dfa111400&ei=55

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 9:34 PM

This thread has 590 posts, and almost 12 full pages. Has Thuggery ever made any actual point in any of his posts? Somewhere around half of the posts must be his.

I thought of going through the pages to look see if anything posted by Ted was ever solid, but the endless stream of nonsense posted here was daunting.

So, 6ix, is there any posts that he made which are valid? Obviously, some are still unresolved since they have not yet played out. But are there any which have run the course of the topic, and how many?

---

The first federal court hearing on Trump’s tariffs did not go so well for Trump

A federal court held the very first hearing on President Donald Trump’s wide-ranging, so-called Liberation Day tariffs on Tuesday, offering the earliest window into whether those tariffs — and potentially all of the shifting tariffs Trump has imposed since he retook office — will be struck down. The case is V.O.S. Selections v. Trump.

It is unclear how the three-judge panel that heard the case will rule, but it appears somewhat more likely than not that they will rule that the tariffs are unlawful. All three of the judges, who sit on the US Court of International Trade, appeared troubled by the Trump administration’s claim that the judiciary may not review the legality of the tariffs at all. But Jeffrey Schwab, the lawyer representing several small businesses challenging the tariffs, also faced an array of skeptical questions.

---