- Thread starter Woodson Bible & Guns
- Start date
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,831
- Reaction score
- 2,215
What kills me is the excuse that use of deadly force is standard operating procedure. Really? Deadly force is an option for a documents search? No one considered the ramifications of deadly force when searching the residence of a former president of the US? Especially with Secret Service present and charged with protecting the president? Even if this is SOP, the gross incompetence of not considering the consequences of such a policy in this case is breathtaking. Imagine a shootout between the FBI and Secret Service. What a disaster that could have been.
The raid never should have been conducted that way in the first place. The FBI had been to Trump's residence before and should have coordinated a voluntary search of the premises. This was for the TV cameras, and a political stunt to embarrass Trump.
And, use of deadly force should not be SOP for every FBI search. Remember when the went to Roger Stone's house with guns drawn? And Paul Manafort's, holding his wife at gunpoint? This is not how the government in a free country should be operating.
touchdown
Defense Wins Championships
- Messages
- 5,722
- Reaction score
- 4,671
DON'T FORGET... The Gateway Pundit will Broadcast Live Today at President Trump's Bronx Rally - With Surprise Guest - Starting at 2 PM ET | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft
The Bronx is the bluest of New York City boroughs with a majority of Spanish voters.
www.thegatewaypundit.com
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,831
- Reaction score
- 2,215
So now the judge in Trump's NY case is saying the jury does not have to be in unanimous agreement on the predicate of Trump crimes! What does this mean? It means they don't have to agree on why he did whatever it is the prosecutor says he did, just that it is a crime. 
.
In an ordinary case, say a murder, the jury can conclude that a defendant is guilty of killing the victim, but they do not have to agree on why he committed the murder. Motive is not essential to the verdict.
But in Trump's case there are only 2 possibilities, Trump did whatever he is accused of because he wanted to hide the allegation from voters, or he didn't. Motive is critical to both the fraud charges and whatever the underlying election violation is. Because if Trump did not do it because of the election, there is no crime. In reality there is no crime anyway, but the DA and judge are trying to convince the jury there is a crime. In this case motive is everything.
Of course this is grounds for appeal, but it seems the judge just wants a guilty verdict. The appeal will come too late to change much before the election.
. In an ordinary case, say a murder, the jury can conclude that a defendant is guilty of killing the victim, but they do not have to agree on why he committed the murder. Motive is not essential to the verdict.
But in Trump's case there are only 2 possibilities, Trump did whatever he is accused of because he wanted to hide the allegation from voters, or he didn't. Motive is critical to both the fraud charges and whatever the underlying election violation is. Because if Trump did not do it because of the election, there is no crime. In reality there is no crime anyway, but the DA and judge are trying to convince the jury there is a crime. In this case motive is everything.
Of course this is grounds for appeal, but it seems the judge just wants a guilty verdict. The appeal will come too late to change much before the election.
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
Of course it was. The whole thing was 100% a bad Hollywood production. The incident itself was mostly staged and planned and the entire J6 "hearings" were produced by Hollywood.
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
He also ordered that Trump cant speak to the fact that the FBI was granted use of deadly force against him in his family in the "raid", even though again, it's a known 100% fact now.So now the judge in Trump's NY case is saying the jury does not have to be in unanimous agreement on the predicate of Trump crimes! What does this mean? It means they don't have to agree on why he did whatever it is the prosecutor says he did, just that it is a crime.
In an ordinary case, say a murder, the jury can conclude that a defendant is guilty of killing the victim, but they do not have to agree on why he committed the murder. Motive is not essential to the verdict.
But in Trump's case there are only 2 possibilities, Trump did whatever he is accused of because he wanted to hide the allegation from voters, or he didn't. Motive is critical to both the fraud charges and whatever the underlying election violation is. Because if Trump did not do it because of the election, there is no crime. In reality there is no crime anyway, but the DA and judge are trying to convince the jury there is a crime. In this case motive is everything.
Of course this is grounds for appeal, but it seems the judge just wants a guilty verdict. The appeal will come too late to change much before the election.
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
Apparently they are already prepping Biden for a national TV event to comment on the "verdict"So now the judge in Trump's NY case is saying the jury does not have to be in unanimous agreement on the predicate of Trump crimes! What does this mean? It means they don't have to agree on why he did whatever it is the prosecutor says he did, just that it is a crime.
In an ordinary case, say a murder, the jury can conclude that a defendant is guilty of killing the victim, but they do not have to agree on why he committed the murder. Motive is not essential to the verdict.
But in Trump's case there are only 2 possibilities, Trump did whatever he is accused of because he wanted to hide the allegation from voters, or he didn't. Motive is critical to both the fraud charges and whatever the underlying election violation is. Because if Trump did not do it because of the election, there is no crime. In reality there is no crime anyway, but the DA and judge are trying to convince the jury there is a crime. In this case motive is everything.
Of course this is grounds for appeal, but it seems the judge just wants a guilty verdict. The appeal will come too late to change much before the election.
Yeah, this isnt 100% staged at all.
People in America are fucking stupid, and the Libtards know it.
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,831
- Reaction score
- 2,215
I didn't see that. I know Jack Smith asked the judge in Florida to gag Trump, but I don't think he is going to win that battle. At this point, I think Smith is just maneuvering to make the judge, Eileen Cannon, appear biased against him. I don't think she will gag Trump since he made no direct threats and he is only repeating what has been reported. Also, the names of the FBI agents who raided MAL are under seal already. The fact is the FBI did have deadly force authorization when they raided MAL. Whether it is SOP or not, it is a fact they were armed and they were authorized to use their weapons. Imagine if the Secret Service prevented them from entering the Trump household. It could have escalated into a bloody mess.
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,831
- Reaction score
- 2,215
I have said from the beginning this trial is fixed. They hand picked this trial judge instead of assigning him randomly which it eh normal procedure, and I believe the judge made sure a anti-Trump biased jury was selected as well. This is why I am surprised Trump's legal team did not put up a bigger fight with pre-trial motions on everything from venue, to the selection of the judge, to his gag order. They should have challenged the jury selection too. I am hoping they didn't think there was no way they could lose this case so they chose to get it over with rather than fight it out. They cannot win this case until they get is out of NY and into the federal courts. The Supreme Court has almost begged Trump to get something in front of them and so far he has not taken them up on it. I hope he is not thinking that a conviction will only make him more popular.
yimyammer
Quality Starter
- Messages
- 9,967
- Reaction score
- 3,756
What? I'm no attorney but thought it was SOP to have the prosecution go first then the defense and then the prosecution gets a final shot..am I watching to many movies?
Creeper
UDFA
- Messages
- 1,831
- Reaction score
- 2,215
You are correct, this is the normal procedure:
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/...ion_network/how_courts_work/closingarguments/
However, the judge has the discretion to reverse the order. But it is unusual. The judge seems to be working with the prosecution to present behaviors that are not crimes to the jury as crimes. I think this clearly shows the judge doesn't care about an appeal, only about getting a conviction. I also think this judge knows the NY appellate court is not going to give Trump a reversal. This rigging is not isolated to this court and this judge.
I think this is why Democrats are in the process of attacking Alito and Thomas again. They know this will get reversed by the supreme court after the NY courts refuse an appeal. Democrats are going to discredit the SCOTUS now so when they reverse this verdict Democrats will claim the conservative court acted unlawfully to save Trump. What we are watching is 10 times worse than what Trump did on Jan 6. We are watching basically the destruction of our legal system for political purposes. 2
yimyammer
Quality Starter
- Messages
- 9,967
- Reaction score
- 3,756
what did he do?
- Messages
- 57,895
- Reaction score
- 8,668
I was going to mention that and you beat me to it.
Trump did absolutely NOTHING and one of my unhinged libtard friends was called onto the carpet for that by me, and once again when I asked for specific examples of what Trump did all I got was "he tried to overthrow the government and incited a riot"....I said ok, how did he do that exactly? And I got crickets again. Kind of like the "Trump is a racist!!!!!" garbage they all whine about about but can never give any specifics of.