3rdnlng Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Because the guy was there to advocate on behalf of the governor (defend him). Are you guys trying to actually say the attorney was independent? Well Gator, you now have a decision to make. Continue with your assertion that the Christie investigation was just for show and a sham and agree that the numerous investigations by the DoJ (IRS Scandal, F&F, DoJ eavesdropping, etc.) are just shams too or admit you are wrong. What will it be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Because the guy was there to advocate on behalf of the governor (defend him). Are you guys trying to actually say the attorney was independent? Again, that's not what defense attorneys do. See Azalin's post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 they're saying that Christie hasn't been charged with anything, and therefore isn't in need of a defense attorney, the role of which is to argue on behalf of a defendant in a criminal or civil trial. this person is an attorney hired to investigate the closing of the bridge lane for purposes of determining who was ultimately directly responsible. and just to preempt accusations of partisanship, the attorney is a democrat. Doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 That's not what defense attorneys do. Do they help the Bills stop the running game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Well Gator, you now have a decision to make. Continue with your assertion that the Christie investigation was just for show and a sham and agree that the numerous investigations by the DoJ (IRS Scandal, F&F, DoJ eavesdropping, etc.) are just shams too or admit you are wrong. What will it be? You are hijacking this thread! How dare you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Do they help the Bills stop the running game? "It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Again, that's not what defense attorneys do. See Azalin's post. They do what they are hired to do. Again, I ask you. Was this attorney independent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 You are hijacking this thread! How dare you. No you dolt, my comments are perfectly in line as a rebuttal to your premise. Have some balls and take a stand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Well Gator, you now have a decision to make. Continue with your assertion that the Christie investigation was just for show and a sham and agree that the numerous investigations by the DoJ (IRS Scandal, F&F, DoJ eavesdropping, etc.) are just shams too or admit you are wrong. What will it be? Gator has just redefined what a Defense attorney does. Brilliant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 they're saying that Christie hasn't been charged with anything, and therefore isn't in need of a defense attorney, the role of which is to argue on behalf of a defendant in a criminal or civil trial. this person is an attorney hired to investigate the closing of the bridge lane for purposes of determining who was ultimately directly responsible. and just to preempt accusations of partisanship, the attorney is a democrat. So what you guys are saying is that banana pudding battles the horn while the cow barks at the moon! Wow, you teabaggers are unhinged! (Amazing how easy it is to imitate gatorman posts) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 they're saying that Christie hasn't been charged with anything, and therefore isn't in need of a defense attorney, the role of which is to argue on behalf of a defendant in a criminal or civil trial. this person is an attorney hired to investigate the closing of the bridge lane for purposes of determining who was ultimately directly responsible. and just to preempt accusations of partisanship, the attorney is a democrat. They are being morons and so are you. Technically sure, he wasn't a "defense attorney" but someone hired to defend the governors reputation and reach a pre-conceived conclusion. Oh! He was a Democrat, really? So what? Wasn't he hired by a Republican? Gator has just redefined what a Defense attorney does. Brilliant. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 They are being morons and so are you. Technically sure, he wasn't a "defense attorney" but someone hired to defend the governors reputation and reach a pre-conceived conclusion. Oh! He was a Democrat, really? So what? Wasn't he hired by a Republican? :doh: So he was a Reputation Attorney? Come on, man, stop- you are making yourself look bad. Sometimes its best to bow out before one embarasses themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 So he was a Reputation Attorney? Come on, man, stop- you are making yourself look bad. Sometimes its best to bow out before one embarasses themselves. good advice, but 1,589 posts too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 So he was a Reputation Attorney? Come on, man, stop- you are making yourself look bad. Sometimes its best to bow out before one embarasses themselves. No dude, defense attorney's present arguments that make the case that their clients are innocent. That's what this dude did. I don't care how many of you idiots can't see that, but if you think it makes me look bad, more power to you. I can't even believe I had to explain that ridiculously simple and common sense fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 They are being morons and so are you. Technically sure, he wasn't a "defense attorney" but someone hired to defend the governors reputation and reach a pre-conceived conclusion. Oh! He was a Democrat, really? So what? Wasn't he hired by a Republican? :doh: Damn, you do a better gatorman post impression than me. You really capture his idiocy. Oh, wait. Never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 So he was a Reputation Attorney? Come on, man, stop- you are making yourself look bad. Sometimes its best to bow out before one embarasses themselves. I don't want it to bow out until it answers my question in post #241. They are being morons and so are you. Technically sure, he wasn't a "defense attorney" but someone hired to defend the governors reputation and reach a pre-conceived conclusion. Oh! He was a Democrat, really? So what? Wasn't he hired by a Republican? :doh: Do you have some sort of link for this or is it just pure speculation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 They are being morons and so are you. Technically sure, he wasn't a "defense attorney" but someone hired to defend the governors reputation and reach a pre-conceived conclusion. Oh! He was a Democrat, really? So what? Wasn't he hired by a Republican? :doh: Funny how this isn't an issue when the very real scandals facing Barry and his admin are "settled." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 They do what they are hired to do. If you hired a defense attorny to dig a ditch, while he was digging that ditch, he wouldn't be acting as a defense attorny. He would be acting as a ditch digger. Further, you haven't demonstrated that any of the attornys hired are, infact, defense attorneys. Again, I ask you. Was this attorney independent? Registered Democrat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Registered Democrat. Yeah but he was hired by a Repub, so that makes him a Repub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 (edited) No dude, defense attorney's present arguments that make the case that their clients are innocent. That's what this dude did. I don't care how many of you idiots can't see that, but if you think it makes me look bad, more power to you. I can't even believe I had to explain that ridiculously simple and common sense fact. No he has read all the information regarding this investigation and has said what was in it which says Christie had nothing to do with the lane closure. Anyone against Christie can, and most likely has read the same investigation and can come to a conclusion that Christie was involved. Why has that not yet happened? Edited March 28, 2014 by Chef Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts