- Messages
- 57,343
- Reaction score
- 8,065
Yeah, but Orange Man Bad........
- Thread starter Woodson Bible & Guns
- Start date
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
‘There Is No Smoking Gun’: Alan Dershowitz Says It’s Unlikely Jan. 6 Indictment Against Trump Will ‘Survive’
Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said Tuesday it was unlikely that Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Capitol-riot-related indictment of former Presidentconservativeplaybook.com
“This indictment strikes me as an amateurish joke. Frankly, Jack Smith, the special counsel, should be indicted for stupidity, it’s that bad,” Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett said. “But he has this disreputable habit of bringing politically-driven prosecutions by contorting the law and mangling the evidence.”
Smith prosecuted then-Republican Gov. Bob McDowell of Virginia over receiving gifts, and secured a conviction on multiple charges that the Supreme Court unanimously threw out in 2015.
“I’ve never seen an indictment this messy and sloppy in my life,” former acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker said. “Really at the end of the day, they are saying it is not, it should be a matter of what Donald Trump thought or didn’t think but instead, they tried to use a reasonable person test to suggest that because Director [of National Intelligence John] Radcliffe, Attorney General Barr and others had told president that he lost, somehow, no reasonable person would believe that.”
I thought the Alvin Bragg indictment was silly but this one is just insane. Smith indicted Trump and his lawyers for conspiracy to defraud the US Government because the discussed the possibility of sending alternate electors to the congress creating a scenario where two sets of electors present their votes and congress has the choice to throw both out, or accept one or the other. The problem for Smith is this tactic has been tried before. In 2000, Florida attempted to appoint a set of alternate electors but eventually were stopped by the Florida legislature. But the attempt was never considered unconstitutional, or a crime. No one was prosecuted for fraud. Also in 2000, Al Gore sued the Florida Secretary of State to delay the certification of the Florida vote totals.
Then rest of Smith's case based on reasonableness or Trump's frame of mind and is also nonsense. Regardless of what his advisors thought, or told him, Trump still has a right to have his own opinion, reasonable or not. Just because Mike Pence thought Trump lost is irrelevant. The fact is, there were other Trump advisors, including Rudy Giuliani, who were insisting there were problems with the election. On Jan 5th, Bernard Kerik sent Trump a memo highlighting some of the remaining issues with the vote count. This, along with affidavits, and other testimony, provides enough background to show a reasonable person could conclude the election was rigged. Remember, on Jan 6, many of the allegations of fraud had not been disproved. Even today polls show that about half of Americans think there were problems with the 2020 election. Are all those people unreasonable?
I don't think this case actually gets to court, and if it does, I don't think the judge will allow Trump to present evidence of voting irregularities. Of course this will be grounds to appeal, but the game they are playing is to tie Trump up until the election. They will get a conviction in DC where the judge is an Obama appointee and the jury pool will be 95% Trump haters. An appeal won't be heard until well after the election.
My question from months ago still stands, how can Trump get a fair trial anywhere in America? Who doesn't know Trump or have an opinion about him? Anyone claiming they don't is a liar.
- Messages
- 7,256
- Reaction score
- 4,123
This 110%. I was thinking the exact same thing and my question is......why not? Every American should be allowed to present a defense and election fraud would be/should be the center of that defense. I'd make the jurors watch 2000 Mules but it will never happen.
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
This is not going to be fair trial. The entire indictment is predicated on one thought. That Trump is lying when he claims there was voter fraud or the election was rigged. Of course, this is impossible to prove since only Trump knows if he is lying. Smith tries to use what other people told Trump to show he knew he lost but there are two problems with this. 1. Losing and losing because the other side cheated are two different things. Trump lost because Biden is in the White House. But this does not preclude Trump from thinking that he lost because Democrats cheated. 2. Trump will call advisors who told him that there was massive voter fraud, including Rudy Giuliani. Smith left this out of the indictment. My guess is the judge will not allow voter fraud claims into the trial. And since Trump's lawyers who sided with him on fraud were probably cited as co-conspirators, their testimony will be tainted.
The purpose of this trial is to obtain a conviction in DC period, which will give Dem states the legal grounds to remove Trump from the ballot. By the time Trump has his appeal heard, probably up to the Supreme Court, the election will be over. I think even Jack Smith knows this conviction in the end is a long shot.
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
An interesting argument in the Smith indictment f Trump for Jan 6 is Smith claims Trump lied about vote fraud to get states to investigate voter fraud claims he knew were not true.
What is interesting is Hillary lied about Russia collusion to get the DOJ to investigate Trump in the hopes they would publicize the investigation costing Trump the election. In fact, Hillary knew the Russia collusion accusations were false because they originated from her own campaign. She allowed the investigation to go on for 4 years and said nothing. Further, Jim Comey leaked notes from a meeting with Trump to a friend and instructed him to give the notes to the NY Times. Comey admitted he did this to get an special counsel appointed to investigate Trump. We now know that the FBI was aware that the Russia collusion allegations were false at the time Mueller was appointed. So again, Trump is indicted from what others had done before him.
What is interesting is Hillary lied about Russia collusion to get the DOJ to investigate Trump in the hopes they would publicize the investigation costing Trump the election. In fact, Hillary knew the Russia collusion accusations were false because they originated from her own campaign. She allowed the investigation to go on for 4 years and said nothing. Further, Jim Comey leaked notes from a meeting with Trump to a friend and instructed him to give the notes to the NY Times. Comey admitted he did this to get an special counsel appointed to investigate Trump. We now know that the FBI was aware that the Russia collusion allegations were false at the time Mueller was appointed. So again, Trump is indicted from what others had done before him.
- Messages
- 57,343
- Reaction score
- 8,065
If the only case they have is predicated on "Trump lied about voter fraud" I am pretty sure the Trump people could call any of millions and millions of US Citizens to testify they believe there was mass election fraud and a rigged election (not once but twice). And me believing there was voter fraud and a rigged election (twice) has nothing to do with anything Trump said publicly.
So are Jack Smith and the fraud DOJ going to then say millions and millions of people should be jailed for lying too?
This is 100% a freedom of speech issue and if it goes to the SCOTUS Smith and the DOJ and Biden people will get their asses handed to them, and they know it.
Ultimately you are right, they just want to get a kangaroo court conviction, but I'm relatively sure Trump could be successful in getting it expedited to the SCOTUS based on the urgency, and he'd win. Some are already calling for him to demand it go before the SCOTUS already.
It could very well be Biden and Dems already know this is how it would play out, and perhaps their "solution" would be to declare some sort of emergency and try to postpone the election.
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
Some constitutional lawyers are suggesting whether Trump lied or really believed his claims of fraud is irrelevant. It is not a crime to lie, especially for politicians. There is a legal precedent stating politicians cannot be held liable for the lies they tell when campaigning. Maybe congress should fix that going forward, but right now the courts say it is not a crime. But regardless, to be fraud, the defendant has to believe he is committing fraud. Even if Trump thought that what Sidney Powell was saying, for example, was total BS, he still has a right to follow her line of reasoning just in case she is on to something.
- Messages
- 3,556
- Reaction score
- 735
- Messages
- 5,616
- Reaction score
- 4,431
Washington Post Fact Checker Rewinds Clock to Slam Biden with 4 Pinocchios for Hunter Claim from 3 Years Ago
www.thegatewaypundit.com
WaPo Fact Checker Rewinds Clock to Slam Biden with 4 Pinocchios for Hunter Business Claim from 3 Years Ago
There are credible claims the Biden name has been used overseas for years for the family to cash in on its power.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
- Messages
- 3,556
- Reaction score
- 735
Source:
LUBBOCK, Texas — A Texas man who advocated for a mass shooting of poll workers and threatened two Arizona officials and their children has been sentenced to 3 1/2 years in federal prison, prosecutors said Friday.
Frederick Francis Goltz, 52, of Lubbock, pleaded guilty earlier this year to interstate threatening communications. Goltz was sentenced Thursday by U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, who also ordered three years of supervised release following the prison term.
The U.S. saw a proliferation of threats against elections officials after former President Donald Trump falsely claimed that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Such threats contributed to an exodus of election officials across the country, and made recruiting poll workers difficult.
Trump, a Republican, was indicted on felony charges earlier this week for working to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the violent U.S. Capitol riot by his supporters.
Prosecutors say court documents showed that Goltz threatened several people — including a lawyer with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and a Maricopa County elections official — on far-right social media platforms.
Texas man who threatened poll workers and Arizona officials is sentenced to 3 1/2 years
LUBBOCK, Texas — A Texas man who advocated for a mass shooting of poll workers and threatened two Arizona officials and their children has been sentenced to 3 1/2 years in federal prison, prosecutors said Friday.
Frederick Francis Goltz, 52, of Lubbock, pleaded guilty earlier this year to interstate threatening communications. Goltz was sentenced Thursday by U.S. District Judge James Wesley Hendrix, who also ordered three years of supervised release following the prison term.
The U.S. saw a proliferation of threats against elections officials after former President Donald Trump falsely claimed that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Such threats contributed to an exodus of election officials across the country, and made recruiting poll workers difficult.
Trump, a Republican, was indicted on felony charges earlier this week for working to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the violent U.S. Capitol riot by his supporters.
Prosecutors say court documents showed that Goltz threatened several people — including a lawyer with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and a Maricopa County elections official — on far-right social media platforms.
- Messages
- 5,616
- Reaction score
- 4,431
Federal court rules clearly prohibit photography or video broadcasting of criminal cases. But 38 House Democrats are urging administrators of the federal judiciary to make an exception...
NO, CRY HARDER !!!!
abcnews.go.com
NO, CRY HARDER !!!!
Calls for Trump's election interference trial to be televised part of long debate
Congressional Democrats are urging the federal judiciary to change rules for camera access to televise Donald Trump's trials.
abcnews.go.com
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
Smoking gun number 42. One of the characteristics of liberals I have noticed over the years is they are incapable of processing two pieces of data simultaneously to draw a conclusion. The chase the shiny object. Obama exploited this constantly with them.
Consequently, they use the Johnny Cochran defense style when protecting their own, like Biden and Hillary. Each piece of evidence is independently attacked as if that one piece is the crux of the case. Of course this only works with people also incapable of processing two pieces of information. In our legal system there is a term, "preponderance of evidence", which refers to the sum of the the evidence considered at once.
It is not Devon Archer, or the FBI's confidential human source, or the Hunter laptop, or the FBI and IRS whistleblowers. It is all of them together. The preponderance of evidence is the emails, text messages, testimony, CHS, whistleblower statements, foreign bank accounts in the names of Biden's grandchildren, brother, daughters-in-law, etc. This is a circumstantial evidence case, but most legal cases are. In financial cases there is no DNA or fingerprints. There is circumstantial evidence. The preponderance of evidence in this case draws a picture of Joe Biden allowing his son to sell influence to benefit the Biden family. Joe didn't have to take any money, even if his kids and grandkids benefited he is still guilty of a crime.
I suggest that the really smoking gun evidence is in Ukraine where Ukrainian officials know exactly what happened with Victor Shokin and Burisma. I suspect they know where all the bodies are buried, bodies that prove Biden's influence peddling. But as long as Biden keeps sending money and weaponry to Ukraine, those bodies will remain buried.
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
Trump's lawyers want this too.Federal court rules clearly prohibit photography or video broadcasting of criminal cases. But 38 House Democrats are urging administrators of the federal judiciary to make an exception...
NO, CRY HARDER !!!!
Calls for Trump's election interference trial to be televised part of long debate
Congressional Democrats are urging the federal judiciary to change rules for camera access to televise Donald Trump's trials.
View attachment 11847
yimyammer
Quality Starter
- Messages
- 9,776
- Reaction score
- 3,497
I agree with the Democrats, put that shit on TV so we can finally see some cross examination and witnesses for the defence unlike whatever that concoction was known as the Jan 6th congressional hearingsFederal court rules clearly prohibit photography or video broadcasting of criminal cases. But 38 House Democrats are urging administrators of the federal judiciary to make an exception...
NO, CRY HARDER !!!!
Calls for Trump's election interference trial to be televised part of long debate
Congressional Democrats are urging the federal judiciary to change rules for camera access to televise Donald Trump's trials.
View attachment 11847
- Messages
- 5,616
- Reaction score
- 4,431
FLASHBACK: Former Reddit CEO Ellen K. Pao posted on Twitter in 2020 that she was at a party with Ghislaine Maxwell and everyone there knew Maxwell trafficked underage girls for sex and no one did anything about it.
She deleted the post, set her account to private and blocked everyone who shared it.
@GeneralMCNews
She deleted the post, set her account to private and blocked everyone who shared it.
@GeneralMCNews
- Messages
- 7,256
- Reaction score
- 4,123
You are a sage my friend. I was going to post about a nutty interaction I had with a relative the other day. He's been part of the victim class his whole life but I've never put it into a political or ideological perspective/context. He hates Trump and started throwing out things like he's a criminal and a rapist. That he was best friends with Epstein and was raping little girls. Not sure where he got this but he completely disregarded any Clinton connection to Epstein. Just Trump. Then he told me how much more humid it was in comparison to years past. Strange comment since it was 73 and sunny outside with not a drop of humidity. And then went into the polar caps melting. I realized real quick he was the primary target audience for leftists; people who could not think for themselves and are easily manipulated.
The fool told me how he gets his information from multiple sources and reads to educate himself. So I realized the lunacy of what I was dealing and backed off for a while but then I asked him if he'd ever heard of Devon Archer. The fool thought it was a high school buddy we knew from back in the day and thought he recognized the name. The biggest story next to the Trump indictments and this guy, who reads multiple news sources, has no clue. He then said if Biden was guilty, the FBI would charge him, just like they did Trump.
You can't make this stuff up and the conversion to the dark side is complete with these fools. They can't reason....they can't think.....they can't pivot. They've been completely brainwashed because they're weak minded. It's kind of sad, really......
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,802
- Reaction score
- 2,168
I am lucky in that most of my closest family and friends are conservatives and although some go off on wild conspiracies, most are down to earth independent thinkers. However, I do have some fierce liberals in my family, including my college educated daughter. I do not engage in political discussions with these folks. I love them, but I know I cannot change their minds or educate them with facts. They do not see how brainwashed they are or what conformists they are. They bring up Fox News all the time, which I do not watch, but they source all their thinking from CNN and MSNBC.
One thing that does disturb me greatly though is that most of the liberals I know are extremely ignorant of our founding and our history before and after the revolution. I realize they were never taught Americas true history or about the genius of the founding fathers. The younger ones never read Orwell's "1984" which was mandatory reading when I was in school. And empty brain is easy to manipulate with lies, I guess.