As Special Prosecutor during the Georgia probe.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nathan-...t-suggests

Looking forward to Tanq's word salads on this one.

Well, he knows that could be verified and he'd be caught perjuring himself if he didn't admit it.

That entire gang deserves to be disbarred. Embarrassment to the legal community.

(10-21-2024 02:18 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Looking forward to Tanq's word salads on this one.

Dang. Beat me to it.

Well he'll just claim it was fraudulent billing and the guy didn't talk to Biden & co.

Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Exactly. its not like we are talking about 1999. And we all talk to the people in the White House every day.

Probably a 1 hour meeting with Garland, maybe Biden, but he billed 8.

(10-21-2024 02:21 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 02:18 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  Looking forward to Tanq's word salads on this one.

Dang. Beat me to it.

He'll chime in shortly, because he is such a great defender of "truth" and the "rule of law".

Any attorney given any of his billing records that can't recall what it was about either lied about the billing or is lying about not remembering.

Trying to find a response to copy. Junior clerk

(10-21-2024 01:54 PM)TripleA Wrote:  As Special Prosecutor during the Georgia probe.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nathan-...t-suggests

Anyone really surprised that these "independent" multi-front lawfare suits were all being carefully coordinated by the Biden DOJ?

Brutal

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Probably got the idea from watching The Firm.

(10-21-2024 03:28 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Probably got the idea from watching The Firm.

faux invoicing = income tax

(10-21-2024 03:32 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 03:28 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Probably got the idea from watching The Firm.

faux invoicing = income tax

Oh damn, you let the cat out of the Bag.

Tanqs lost his internet connection

(10-21-2024 03:39 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 03:32 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 03:28 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Probably got the idea from watching The Firm.

faux invoicing = income tax

Oh damn, you let the cat out of the Bag.

what's most amusing is commie and corp state they're clueless within muh rhetoric, on ignore, and yet, still respond...

I need to come up with a special word/phrase for that stupid arse shite ... it's not quite 420, yet (and muh sig line is full) ...

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Eight hours billed. Some travel, some interviews. Indeterminate on how much travel, how much meeting.

Also note the following item in the article -- "The United States Supreme Court case of United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951), requires that prosecutors confer with government officials before interviewing current or former federal employees".

Mark Meadows, and any host of of former Trump cabinet employees.

I see 5 responses of the 16 directly refer to me. Rent free......

(10-21-2024 03:59 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-21-2024 02:32 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Eight hours of billed meetings in one day and don't know with whom or what it was about...

not possible

Eight hours billed. Some travel, some interviews. Indeterminate on how much travel, how much meeting.

Also note the following item in the article -- "The United States Supreme Court case of United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (1951), requires that prosecutors confer with government officials before interviewing current or former federal employees".

Mark Meadows, and any host of of former Trump cabinet employees.

I see 5 responses of the 16 directly refer to me. Rent free......

He finally found someone to copy....there it is.



Weve rarely had a poster here embarass himself the way you have. Youre special.

Congrats!

One of the lawfare warriors engages in questionable ethics. How does tanq respond? Like this:



Also, "but Trump blah blah blah."

Predictable. So, so predictable.