Jack Smith moves to dismiss case sgainst Trump

Does this mean the witch hunt is over ?

 

Yes adding that in the case the witch was real and he managed to outsmart the hunters.

 

The one positive of Jack Smith's decision to move for dismissal of the cases against Trump now is that he will be forwarding his report to the Merrick Garland the current AG who almost certainly will release the report in its entirety with probable redactions of classified information and evidence against defendants whose cases are still pending. If the charges were dismissed much later it would up to Pam Bondi to decide whether or not to release the report of the special counsel and she would either release parts of the report selectively or bury it in its entirety.

 

Not holding my breath on it ever seeing the light of day. It may get tied up in court until Bondi can bury it.

 

It would’ve been a shame if democracy was overthrown by a handful of politically motivated prosecutors.

 

Ah yes, you care so much about democracy. So much so that you voted for a felon who tried himself to overthrow it. In a democracy where no man is king, running for office shouldn't insulate you from the consequences of your criminal behavior. Shouldn't being the key word.

Then again, Henry Cuellar also won reelection while under indictment. The DOJ needs to dismiss his case too, right? The people have spoken.

As always, there is no justice system in this country. There is a legal system. One that doesn't remotely treat people equally. But I've known that for years. Trump is just a bright, shining example of the system at its worst.

 

Hold on … Okeechobee said you people voted Trump because of “lawfare.” It couldn’t be the economy, or the border, could it?

 

So … you’re actually in favor of “lawfare,” as long as it targets democrats?

 

The obstruction charge when dealing with the classified documents case was a legitimate case that the DoJ could make and was a meat and potatoes case. I think Smith fell into the trap of a lot of people that when after Trump in that they tried to go above and beyond what they really needed to do and that ended up backfiring on them.

 

LOL. It's actually embarrassing to think that something is smart because a lot of people agree with it. You don't realize how dumb that sounds.

And here's the kicker; those people who agree with you are..... Trump voters!!!!! People who are shown to be the least educated, least informed people in our country!!
People who make an active effort to not know anything about their hero.*

Just hilarious.

Sorry, ma'am, you're dwelling in your own made-up Bizarro world. The amount of people in it with you doesn't make it any less hilarious to watch.









*Just look at yourself; "It was 40 years ago. LOL - Time magazine."

 

I agree that Trump won the election, and by extension his pending criminal cases. However, I em to recall from my civics classes, plus law school, that our criminal Justice system is not democratically” decided. It is based on laws, and a determination of whether the laws have been broken, based upon a review of actual evidence by a fact finder, who applies the facts to the law. Elections do not serve this purpose under our laws.

Except for MAGA.

 

Do you think there is anything that Smith currently has that has not been used in court filings against the defendants in this case?

 

You’re not alone, obviously. But, have you read the indictments? Have you read any of the internal documents which are publicly available through the January 6 Committee (I’m not talking about their findings, I am only talking about the Trump Teams’s internal memos)? If not, what objective information, of any, formed your conclusions?

 

I wouldn't mind a lawyer explaining to me what I may not understand.

Paraphrasing the principles of the law;

- "a sitting President cannot be prosecuted" shouldn't mean "someone who is indicted for crimes committed while President should never face a trial."

It seems insane that someone doesn't even face a rational inquiry (trial) into alleged crimes for which they were indicted by a grand jury. EVER.

 

Then they voted for the wrong candidate because Trump’s dipshit tariffs are going to skyrocket the price of everything for Americans. It’s always fascinating to me that Trump supporters think a guy who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth actually gives even a 1% shit about them.

 

I think you’re mixing apples and oranges. The DOJ won’t prosecute a sitting president for any crime. The Supreme Court just granted a president almost total immunity for acts during the scope of the presidency. Thus, for a crime committed outside the scope of the presidency, the DOJ won’t prosecute a sitting president during the presidency. For crimes committed during the presidency, the DOJ won’t prosecute because the president is immune from those crimes (unless the crime was committed outside the scope of the presidency, at which point the DOJ would need to wait until after the presidency concludes to prosecute).

And now I need a drink.

 

Jeez man, do you read or know anything about this stuff?

Just....where do you get these ideas from? What "information" is going into your head? It's time to seriously re-evaluate, that's for sure......




Meme Rehashes Old, False Claim That J6 Committee Destroyed Evidence - FactCheck.org


The claim that the committee destroyed evidence appears to be a reprise of a talking point we wrote about last year. Republican Rep. Barry Loudermilk, of Georgia, had told Fox News in a story published on Aug. 8, 2023, that the committee hadn’t adequately preserved some documents, data and video depositions.

The same day, Trump took that argument further, posting on his social media platform: “The January 6th Unselect Committee got rid of EVERYTHING! Discarded, Deleted, Thrown Out. A Flagrant Violation of the law.”

So, the meme shared by Trump’s eldest child and Posobiec appears to be a rehashed version of this old claim. In reality, the evidence collected by the committee is still publicly available on a government website.

 

Lawfare???

For going through the guy who actually waged lawfare's communication --she is his successor mind you--she'd be entitled to access to same, IF he doesn't destroy them.

That's categorically NOT targeting. That is literally, performing an internal audit, and IF the predecessor did (aa many of us suspect)--specifically target Trump with references to the eelection--seems to me, corrective measures would be in order.

....in order to preserve--or rather, seek to restore--the integrity of the office.

I mean, AG is the highest *LAW ENFORCEMENT* office in the land.

If we hold our street cops to a higher standard, how much higher ought we hold THAT office?