Yup, another indictment.

Twitter took the tweets below down.

2:38"support our Capitol police and law enforcement,"
"they are truly on the side of our country. Stay peaceful!"

3:13 "remain peaceful"

4:17 "But you have to go home now ... We have to have peace. We have to have law and order. ... So go home. We love you, you're very special. ... I know how you feel. But go home and go home in peace,"

I believe that was the last tweet ever from Trump at 4:17. All successfully removed from history for the likes of you.

 

Whatever fantasies you need to sell yourself.

 

You discussing yourself in the third party... yikes.

 

Still doesn't make sense. Are you suggesting that courts are somehow required to try cases that have no bases and shouldn't dismiss them?

 

Weak, my friend. Would you like some help with flaming?

 

1:45 Capitol perimeter was breached.
2:38 trump tweets
"support our Capitol police and law enforcement,"
"they are truly on the side of our country. Stay peaceful!"

Twitter took it down.

 

Nope. And the evidentiary basis of court trials is usually derived from depositions and subpoenas taken before trial.

 

You don’t know who she is, do you? You can google her.

 

REALLY? That’s a huge surprise to me!!

That’s discovery. People still testify and you still have exhibits, my good chum. That’s if the case gets past motion practice

 

Anyone else want to google the basics of civil cases and try to tell me how they work?

I’ve tried well over 100 cases.

 

I have told you who she is. You said she was not a normal Russian..................prove she was an abnormal one then.

You don't even know what they told her to do with the story she tried to peddle them do you?

 

LOL! She gets an audience with Dumb Jr. abd assorted dimwits and you’re claiming she’s just an everyday shmo?

 

Like what!!!! And yes the claims have been of a dereliction of duty, what official act could he have taken, should have taken but that he didn't? Tell me for what he can be held legally on the matter? Hey don't vote for him, but this is about sanctions and actions against him for something being claimed he could have and should have done that would have absolutely stopped the full blown riot that had broken out.

 

Then tell me exactly what is it you think I'm missing?

Do you agree there is nothing new here in the indictment, knowing we did not know previous of any additional materiality? If you disagree then please tell me what it is because I read the the indictment and it's all supposition, and conjecture and postulations about what Trump REALLY thought about what we already know what happened.

 

Really? Do you think Smith can get this forced into a quick and speedy trial so that the AMERICAN PEOPLE can REALLY learned what happened Jan 6? Do we THE PEOPLE have a right to a speedy trial so we know before we vote?

 

While Trump was still speaking and had just told people to protest peacefully. He didn't leave the event until almost 2 and had to go back to the White House from there.

It's the ONLY thing they got, as if all the rioters were sitting around watch TV's and Trump could have gone on and said stop and it instantly would have stopped. The violent rioters weren't listening to him. He had NO OFFICIAL role in quelling the riot, not authority to do anything about it but they still want to claim he could have somehow stopped it dead in it's tracks.

 

Youve not directly contradicted anything Ive said regarding legal matters. Just claims that you dont understand

 

That's what prosecutors want. Your orange hero won't testify.

 

We certainly do.
And to answer one of your ealier questions, no, the indictment doesn't tell us anything new: anyone who was awake and kept herself/himself informed about the events knew he has committed these crimes. The new aspect is that the FBI now has enough evidence and testimonies that he didn't only talk but he acted criminally.
He's not indicted for what he said or didn't say, he's indicted for what he did.

 

Your powers of description need work. And you're oversimplifying things to such a degree that they bear little resemblance to reality.

Trump's civil cases were dismissed on summary judgment because they were absurd.

 

She wasnt an everyday schmo. She had 2 meetings with the founder of Fusion GPS. She was well connected in DC lobbying circles.

 

They had all the evidence and testimonies 2 years ago. Factual details in the indictment have all been reported in the media.

 

Absurd in the courts eyes because of the immediate redress of the court requested by the plaintiffs, not the underlying facts or claims.

 

The prosecution, acting for the people, is in the process of securing a speedy trial.

 

They did?