Jack Smith’s Documents Case Against Trump In Danger Of Being Tossed

Did I mention Tennis is gay?
Only everytime you have nothing to say and can't help yourself from lashing out.

There is nothing sexual about tennis, it's a sport. You are just stupid and ignorant, like in everything else.
 
Stuff that keeps turning out to be TRUE.

You Trumpy nutters on the other hand keep saying silly nonsense that doesn't pan out.
They are following their lead of their leader, the rapist, insurrectionist, sharer of classified information, who is the favorite to be their nominee in 2024. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MOMENT?
 
Nothing you have ever posted is true.
Oh?

Whats this idiot?


Then today we hear these will be the charges against Trump for the Insurrection

obstructing an official proceeding, conspiring to defraud the United States, conspiring to make false statements, and inciting an insurrection against the United States.

How abuut not?

Don't think prosecutors will go for that proposal.


You say no no no, but some times go by and we now have prosecutors bring 4 indictments with shitload of charges against Trump.
 
They are following their lead of their leader, the rapist, insurrectionist, sharer of classified information, who is the favorite to be their nominee in 2024. THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MOMENT?
Think about the fact that idiots like you can vote? I do. I worry about that every day.
 
Only everytime you have nothing to say and can't help yourself from lashing out.

Go read your buddies over at CNN panicking like school girls when they got nothing to wear to the prom.

They all know Biden's in deep shit and that Trump can beat him, you don't have to take it from me.

There is nothing sexual about tennis, it's a sport. You are just stupid and ignorant, like in everything else.

Or I was just joking, you fucking faggot.
 
Oh?

Whats this idiot?









You say no no no, but some times go by and we now have prosecutors bring 4 indictments with shitload of charges against Trump.
They won't allow us to bump old threads. If we were allowed we could make Republicans here look very foolish.

I bet I could find threads where Republicans said if Trump were found guilty they would no longer support him. Now we know that was a lie. Every person running against Trump said they'd vote or him even if he were a felon.

Republicans have come a long way from the days when they were offended if a president lied under oath about getting a bj. HE LIED UNDER OATH! they said.

But if Trump's found guilty of 100 crimes, it's all a witch hunt. Don't care about the evidence in front of my eyes.
 
They won't allow us to bump old threads. If we were allowed we could make Republicans here look very foolish.

I bet I could find threads where Republicans said if Trump were found guilty they would no longer support him. Now we know that was a lie. Every person running against Trump said they'd vote or him even if he were a felon.

Republicans have come a long way from the days when they were offended if a president lied under oath about getting a bj. HE LIED UNDER OATH! they said.

But if Trump's found guilty of 100 crimes, it's all a witch hunt. Don't care about the evidence in front of my eyes.
We already know that the juries in DC will find him guilty. They would convict a ham sandwich if it was registered as a Republican..
 
Go read your buddies over at CNN panicking like school girls when they got nothing to wear to the prom.

They all know Biden's in deep shit and that Trump can beat him, you don't have to take it from me.
WTF does any of that fluff have to do with your thread about how supposedly Smith's case against Trump is supposedly about to be tossed?

Here was my post on that:

When are you know nothing idiots going to stop posting clickbait nonsense already?


Code 1001 as it pertained to Trump had nothing with to do with being interviewed by FBI, it was for him lying to his lawyers who signed a legal statement that all documents were returned to NA.

Nauta was the one who was charged under 1001 for lying to investigators about moving boxes and concealing documents.


Not only that, False Statements are only part of many other charges against Trump.


Can refute even a word?
 
WTF does any of that fluff have to do with your thread about how supposedly Smith's case against Trump is supposedly about to collapse?

Here was my post on that:



Can refute even a word?

You idiots are always asking us to jump through hoops.

Not playing that game.

How about this: You go through the article I posted - ya know - the one this entire thread is actually based on; and refute it line by line.

And I will be checking your grammar too.

Then go fuck yourself, and get a life while you're at it.
 
You idiots are always asking us to jump through hoops.

Not playing that game.

How about this: You go through the article I posted - ya know - the one this entire thread is actually based on; and refute it line by line.

And I will be checking your grammar too.

Then go fuck yourself, and get a life while you're at it.
Thats a very long way of saying no.

Trump wasn't charged with lying to FBI, so when you source claims that Trump was never interviewed by FBI and therefore couldn't commit that crime you can know damn well that they are full of bs.

Games? Hoops? Only for idiots who don't want to understand a very straight forward concept.
 
Last edited:
Thats a very long way of saying no.

That's your very brief way of ignoring my request.

It's easy to debunk your BS argument, you're acting as if the reporter is implying a charge that doesn't exist, when really the answer has more to do with tangential procedural violations - the two are unrelated.

But you didn't answer me.

I can't count how many times on these threads you stupid Lefties go into interrogation mode in a desperate attempt to obfuscate the main issue.

So I'll ask you again:

Please read the article I posted and go line by line - with receipts - to refute each and every point.

It's the least you can do after the hoops I've been jumping through for you morons over the past year.

We'll wait for you to issue your report.

OK, run along now.
 
Oh?

Whats this idiot?









You say no no no, but some times go by and we now have prosecutors bring 4 indictments with shitload of charges against Trump.
Note that you avoid saying you have this little thing called actual proof of your bullshit charges. Because you have none. Smith is in true danger of his while case getting tossed, Fani is being investigated for actual RICO violations, Fat Alvin is running scared and can’t even state what crime was committed.
 
Now I'll be the first to admit I'm not exactly a fan of the whole "anonymous sources" shindig.

But let's remember, before the Leftist MSM completely degraded the whole concept, protecting sources via anonymity used to be a valid journalistic approach that produced some of the greatest stories and critiques of power over the course of the twentieth century - much like before the entire "whistleblower" dynamic was equally cheapened by Leftist shenanigans. (To put it lightly.)

Furthermore, a RealClear Investigations reporter being the author of this brief definitely raised my eyebrows.

As the investigative arm of the well renowned RealClear Politics website, it delegates an air of legitimacy to what is being alleged here.

But enough of my yappin', here's what we got folks:










It's not a "Conspiracy Theory".

It's not even FAKE NEWS.

It's called journalism, which the Left once used to dabble in from time to time, prior to their Orange Man induced full frontal lobotomies.

And I, for one, am hoping this has merit.
The story certainly ring true. It fits very well into the approach of the prosecutors in all four indictments. That approach is to accuse Trump of things which are not even against the law, without even identifying the specific behavior they are talking about.

Yes, hoping that just by naming an action an inflamed jury will find Trump guilty even though they never named the law he supposedly broke nor the action that supposedly broke it. I know they will not be able to do that, because of how many times I've asked the very wise Democrat posters on here to do it and watch them find excuse after excuse not to.
 
The story certainly ring true. It fits very well into the approach of the prosecutors in all four indictments. That approach is to accuse Trump of things which are not even against the law, without even identifying the specific behavior they are talking about.

Yes, hoping that just by naming an action an inflamed jury will find Trump guilty even though they never named the law he supposedly broke nor the action that supposedly broke it. I know they will not be able to do that, because of how many times I've asked the very wise Democrat posters on here to do it and watch them find excuse after excuse not to.
Even Bragg can’t name the “underlying crime” he wants to charge Trump with. Likely because he can’t find one and hopes a full liberal jury in NYC would just ignore that inconvenient fact.
 
Note that you avoid saying you have this little thing called actual proof of your bullshit charges.
The relavant fact is that Trump was in indicted.

What you think of that fact is irrelavant to the point....but that doesn't prevent you from accusing me of avoiding your deflection.


Ok, lets address your deflection - case against Trump is solid:

FBI raid found many documents Trump claimed were returned

Trump is on tape showing top secret documents to uncleared reporter.

His lawyers say he fooled them into signing false statements.

his IT guy says Trump ordered erasure of video evidence.


...and there is more.
 
Last edited:
The relavant fact is that Trump was in indicted.

What you think of that fact is irrelavant to the point....but that doesn't prevent you from accusing me of avoiding your deflection.

Jesus dude, your throw away takes and hapless analysis could at least come with correct spelling.

Invest in a spell check.

Otherwise you're just "irrelavant".
 

Forum List

Back
Top