Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, ChiGoose said:

Too bad for you that he didn’t admit to taking documents intentionally and then obstruct the investigation into them. 

 

Right, he just had documents in his garage he visits every weekend, after they found other documents several months earlier in another location.  But "he didn't know he had them" is a lie, er, excuse that works for you.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Right, he just had documents in his garage he visits every weekend, after they found other documents several months earlier in another location.  But "he didn't know he had them" is a lie, er, excuse that works for you.


Or, and here’s the tricky part, you need actual hard evidence to prove that he knew about it. 
 

Here’s an example: let’s say that he says he didn’t know the documents were there but then when investigators look into it, they find several other documents or items dated after he left office mixed in. Or his signature or writing on the documents that can be shown to have been done after he left office. 
 

I’m sorry the law doesn’t contort to meet your expectations but I suppose if you just cry a lot maybe you can convince someone who doesn’t know any better that you’re right. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

 

 

 

Arresting Trump over Jan 6 was always the plan. Here’s how the corrupt DOJ set this up.

First, they criminalized speech. DHS & DOJ circulated internal documents saying you might be a “militia violent extremist” if you’re a patriot.

 

If speech isn’t speech, if speech is violence, the feds can crack down on it, right? They did.

DOJ convicted Stewart Rhodes—an unsavory character to be sure—over a text message. He didn’t commit violent, didn’t storm the Capitol, didn’t incite anyone, didn’t bring a firearm. He sent a bad text message. Guilty of seditious conspiracy for it. 18 years in prison.

 

DOJ also set a legal precedent of throwing people in jail for pre-trial detention on charges of obstruction of an official proceeding. Think Jacob Chansley & others.

 

So two legal precedents have been set: speech is now violence and if you obstruct a govt proceeding you’re so dangerous you’re deprived of due process.

 

Here’s how they’ll apply it to Trump. Three videos.

 

One, at the rally outside the WH on Jan 6, Trump told people to “peacefully and patriotically” march to the Capitol. DOJ will ignore the word peacefully and focus on patriotically which they’ve already defined in internal docs as being coded language for militia violent extremism.

 

Two, later on Jan 6, on Twitter, Trump tells people to stop the violence and go home. DOJ will ignore that & focus on Trump saying the protesters are good people. Again, it will be portrayed as coded language encouraging violence.

 

Third (and most important), the Trump Biden debate before the 2020 election in which Biden tells Trump to condemn the Proud Boys and Trump tells the Proud Boys from stage to “stand back and stand by.” DOJ will certainly argue that this is coded language and that Trump was directing the whole “insurrection” all along. Remember, during the Proud Boys trial, the prosecution showed that video of Trump as their opening statements.

 

This is why I constantly harp on Jan 6. We can’t simply “leave it in the past.” We can’t “move on.” There will be nothing to move on TO if the DOJ gets away with this.

 

They’ve been setting the stage for 2.5 years to indict & arrest Trump over Jan 6 even though Trump did nothing except question the outcome of the 2020 election. They want Trump in prison because they hate him. They hate him because he’s exposed their corruption & they fear their election tampering will be exposed.

 

They fear Biden will lose to Trump. So they want to arrest Biden’s primary political rival, put him in pre trial detention (for obstruction of an official govt proceeding) and lock him up for life (seditious conspiracy). This is third world banana republic stuff. It’s gross.

 

And no, I don’t care about Trump’s internal discussions with his legal team about possible avenues of recourse to delay the certification of the electoral college while they investigated the rigged election. He’s allowed to talk freely to his advisors. Speech is only a crime… if you’re a Republican. It’s a strange argument to claim these discussions make Trump a tyrant trying to subvert our constitution. What kind of dumb tyrant makes sure he’s operating within the law by exploring his *legal* recourse?

8:16 AM · Jul 19, 2023

·

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
Posted
On 7/18/2023 at 9:40 PM, ChiGoose said:


Or, and here’s the tricky part, you need actual hard evidence to prove that he knew about it. 
 

 

I’m sorry the law doesn’t contort to meet your expectations but I suppose if you just cry a lot maybe you can convince someone who doesn’t know any better that you’re right. 

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

 The King @ChiGoose believes this fully and completely. 

 

It's a perfect litmus test actually.  When the King of Kings eagerly swallows these massive loads of BS from his masters, that is when sane people can know for certain that corrupt law enforcement agencies are indeed lying.

 

 

Posted

Corrupt.

 

***** every last one responsible. 

 

***** every last person here who cheers the burning of our republic.

 

SaVInG oUr dEMoCrAcY!!!!

 

 

  • Agree 1
×
×
  • Create New...