Trump's indictment blocks out Biden's bad news

Apparently it's ok to lie to rig an election? But it's a felony to protest a rigged election?

Looks like that isn't Crazy Jack's only problem.

'Prosecutors “discovered” that a crucial video intended to be presented as evidence had not been appropriately processed and uploaded to the designated platform for the defense to review during the investigation.'

"Discovered" ehhh?

'This 'discovery' occurred just as they prepared to indict Carlos De Oliveira, the Mar-a-Lago property manager, for his alleged involvement in a conspiracy with Trump to delete surveillance footage from the estate. Trump denies the allegations and says the videos were “handed over to the thugs.”'

So, Crazy Jack is lying, too?

“The Government’s representation at the July 18 hearing that all surveillance footage the Government had obtained pre-indictment had been produced was therefore incorrect,” Smith’s team admitted in its recent filing.

Oh, so he got caught making a false submission to the Court.

His representation to the Court was a lie. He claimed: “All CCTV footage obtained by the government has now been given to the defendants, according to Smith’s team. The Brady rule requires prosecutors to disclose all evidence and information favorable to the defendant.”

This isn't the first time Crazy Jack has committed prosecutorial misconduct. He 'a record of prosecutorial misconduct, in addition to failing to achieve convictions against Democrats, has a history of distorting the law in order to achieve convictions against Republicans.'

Crazy Jack has been caught 'witness tampering and illegal wiretapping defense attorneys. Smith also led the prosecution against former Republican Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, but the case was poorly conducted and later overturned by the Supreme Court due to an overly broad interpretation of criminal acts.'

Hmmm! Seems like Crazy Jack is a slow learner! He makes up crimes that are unsupported by black letter law.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politi...y-have-doomed-his-case-against-trump-n1716160

 

The lawyers that view these prosecutions as political.

 

Thought so

If you couldn't name any (or if the ones you could name are just political hacks) just say so.

 

I can name some but I don't take work orders from strangers on the internet unless they are customers.

 

So, election fraud and destruction of evidence are not crimes in your book? Its weird, because he himself and his loyalists made a big stink about claiming there was fraud against him, but now that it turns out he was the only one guilty of it, its not a crime anymore.....IMO the fake electors and him ordering the evidence needs to be looked at.

 

Not an order, a request.
A request that you obviously could not fulfill.

But thanks for admitting you have nothing.

 

Request denied.

 

I would want each and every reported but uninvestigated example of fraud reported litigated in court.

 

So who would you want to see testify on Trump’s behalf?

 

Oh the friggin irony.




https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1687496195885735946?

 

Humor me. What’s the irony?

 

Where?

Now this?? THIS is (closer to) irony

Donald Trump says legal fees are restricting his campaign spend

https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-says-legal-fees-202022483.html

 

That may be because all you expose yourself to is RW lying fake news.

 

Nevertheless, I see dirty politics, not crimes.

 

Yeah! ….due to your lying sources! And you think that is fine. Sheesh

 

And how do you know that the reported cases of fraud were uninvestigated? Are you part of the government entity that would do the investigation? Do you have some kind of authority that the investigators have to report to you their findings?

 

Why are my sources liars and yours truth tellers? I already know. Partisanship. There are always two opposing truths in politics. Every time. Even when there should not be.

 

No, my only possible error may be my assumption that you listen to news at all. But the chance that you objectively looked into all this independently and came to the same false conclusions found in many RW media is vanishingly small. Trump has committed many crimes while in office, including just last night. Many are very obvious. And now the Judiciary is going to prove he did.

 

Since politics is entertaining for me I watch it on TV all the time. I hear both sides of every concept of political truth and I read it again here. I've seen it all and I disagree with the way you see it. Pretty simple.

 

If you hear both sides and the Democratic side was not something aired by a RW source, you would not be agreeing with Trump unless you suffered some problem with judgement and logic.

 

You would be incorrect about all of that. I don't agree with Trump. I agree with myself based on what I learn, how I interpret what I learn and common sense. It is not important that you don't like it.

 

we could begin with the over 60 courts who rejected the biggest challenges on 'standing' grounds. When one says the courts rejected the fraud cases, they mean exactly that. They said nothing at all about the actual challenges. They just danced around any issue that involved any actual responsibility for hearing the case.

 

Some... certainly not all and probably not even half

SNIP

• The lawsuits failed for various reasons. Some had errors in the filings, others lacked standing. Mainly, the allegations lacked proof.
  ENDSNIP

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...den-right-more-60-trumps-election-lawsuits-l/

Hard to believe you guys couldn't find SOMEBODY with standing, or SOMEBODY who could submit a filing without errors... or proof..

But not really....

 

OK, start there.

How many were rejected on "standings grounds"?