Apeals court: Release Jack Smith’s report

you’ll get a couple Bacons from the cult here, but your spot on..

 

Like the hunter Biden case where the informant was just sentenced for giving MAGA the Russian misinformation they desperately wanted to hear?

 

So the guy that got the largest percentage of black votes in half a century which helped push him over the top, benefitted from white privilege? It’s alive and well that the left feels they can control language thus control narrative. Just not so any longer.

Donald Trump won more Black voters than any Republican in 48 years—analyst

 

Get ready to hear supporters of a traitor criminal now explain that crime (from someone they worship) is actually OK.

 

LOL.

"So how could those 27 different allegations against Trump of sexual assault and rape be True if lots of women voted for him!!? It's impossible!"

Logic, in MAGA-land, has died a sad and lonely death.

 

Smith: "Trump would have been convicted."

Somewhere John Edwards is experiencing uncontrollable laughter.

 

6 days

 

Is this the count down until a traitor felon is inaugurated? You're excited about that?

Jeez, man....seeing that, one would think you'd get all excited if a rapist were to be inaugurated into office as POTUS.

Oh, wait......

 

Lawfare: any verdict by a jury of your peers that doesn't agree with maga. Pathetic.

 

Yep, waiting for them take it a step further and make it so if a maga defendant is accused of a crime, only a maga investigator can look into it and if charges are brought, only a maga jury and a maga judge can try the case.

 

So if Jack Smith is charged with a crime by the Trump DoJ in Ft. Pierce and ends up getting convicted, it is not lawfare?

 

How could one determine that without any knowledge of the purported crime, circumstances, or evidence? All we see is maga crying lawfare in cases where actual evidence is weighed by lawful judges and juries. Significant difference.

 

Would you say selective prosecutions would likely be a tell tell sign on Lawfare?

To be clear, can we agree that Trump has only been found guilty of a crime by one jury?

 

Great bar of conduct for a US President. But yes, that is true. Can we also agree that he only faced a jury in that one single criminal trial, and thus was not exonerated by a jury in any of the other cases?

 

We can agree that Trump was not exonerated in the other cases.

Do you think Judge Merchan pushed to have Trump sentenced ahead of his inauguration in order to ensure that Trump can be called a convicted felon?

 

of course they can and of course he did

 

No because that is not true. Jean Carroll and the state of NY prosecuted the felon by jury trials. We can agree that for many years including 2024, Trump has with great expense delayed trials, thrown up dirt on judges, juries, witnesses etc to escape numerous cases keeping himself out of court.

 

No. I think he allowed Trump to delay the sentencing as long as possible. There were I more impediments to sentencing, there were no more. Lawful reasons to delay it any further. I think he felt it was in the best interest of everyone to sentence him now, and to do so with not even a slap on his wrist. Trump was found guilty by a sitting jury in the State of New York. It would be an injustice to them to not have the sentencing take place. The case is over, other than appeals. He handled it well, even if the sentence was unprecedented in its leniency.

 

Jean Carroll case was a civil case, not a criminal case. Neither was NY AG's case against the Trump organization.

 

Do you think that if the sentence was so unprecedented in its leniency that Merchan would have been better off waiting until Jan 21st, 2028 to impose a harsh penalty?