AG nominee Pam Bondi has said that the bad prosecutors at the DOJ will be prosecuted

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

So what? They deliberately misinterpreted Federal Election Law and interfered in a Federal election.
Mr. Trump's Constitutional rights were violated by their obvious Lawfare.

You can't prove misinterpretation.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Federal civil rights case.....It's not just for blacks you know.

Manipulating state laws to persecute anyone is a civil rights issue and falls under fed jurisdiction.

Good luck with that.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

They interfered with a NATIONAL election.

Man, you are stupid.

Try proving that in a court of law.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Ah the dread pirate fishing expedition. He just pleads the Fifth. Of course to you special counsels are now illegal. HAHAHAAHAH
Now tell us the indictments.

Which means he is fully entitled to the defense I stated. I hope Trump enjoys testifying.

Humor me. name five. They can make Trump testify too.

You cannot force a sitting President to testify on anything and there is this little thing called the 5th Amendment.

Why are you such a legal nincompoop?

 

[Zincwarrior]

well the evidence didn't show that he attempted to hide them....he certainly had them, true, but the evidence shows he was working with NA to return them....unlike Joey Xiden, who was caught with them, going back years, and was not prosecuted. Which shows this was done as a political prosecution.

You clearly didn't read the indictments. I suggest you do so before making such statements.

No, it wasn't under the color of law, because it was illegal.

Thats under appeal. Further, thats means you can't go after him either.

Certainly, other people he conspired with did so under the color of law, members of the DOJ, that were legally appointed.....and that too is a crime :

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

www.law.cornell.edu

Yes, please. Try that. Lets see how it works out for Trump.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Same for the Georgia case.

Just FYI, I predict literally none of this will happen. Gym Jordan my try some stunt hearings but that will be it.

True, but the Georgia case is dead.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Malicious prosecution, election interference, conflict of interest.
Probably can get some bribery in there, too.

Since when is that illegal. Unethical yes, but not criminal.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Time to clean house at the corrupt DOJ/FBI cesspool. This is what we voted for.
No wonder there were early reports of panic among the DOJ lawyers, when Trump won.

Guess the libs are second guessing criticizing Gates

 

[Zincwarrior]

You cannot force a sitting President to testify on anything and there is this little thing called the 5th Amendment.

5th Amendment is not applicable as he cannot be prosecuted.

You can force a President to testify. He was a private citizen at the time. this does not relate to Presidential immunity.

President Clinton testifies before grand jury | August 17, 1998 | HISTORY

On August 17, 1998, President Bill Clinton becomes the first sitting president to testify before the Office of Indepe...

www.history.com

 

[Robert W]

Time to clean house at the corrupt DOJ/FBI cesspool. This is what we voted for.
No wonder there were early reports of panic among the DOJ lawyers, when Trump won.

Bondi is Honest. She will perform her duty as genuine AGs should do. Trump has been the victim of Politics by the Democrats. Time to see them in prison.

Guess who the View had on the program today, 12/3/2024? The criminal Adam Kinzinger. He was turned down by his constituents. And he is very happy he was against Trump on the Democrats select committee made up to get rid of Trump. They failed.

 

[The Duke]

Since when is that illegal. Unethical yes, but not criminal.

You ain't wrong, but it could warrant a hearing before the bar.

 

[Robert W]

What I would like to know is why the hell Garland is already looking for a plea deal? That shocked the shit out of me when I heard it. So apparently he knows he's committed some pretty serious shit.

This will be the next news. BIDEN PARDONS ALL PROSECUTORS WHO ILLEGALLY PROSECUTED TRUMP.

 

[struth]

You clearly didn't read the indictments. I suggest you do so before making such statements.


Thats under appeal. Further, thats means you can't go after him either.


Yes, please. Try that. Lets see how it works out for Trump.

Why? The indictments aren't evidence of anything, they are merely the illegally appointed Jack Smith's accusations.

No, it's not under appeal. The case is over.

I'll let you know how it works out for Jack Smith.....frankly, I expect another blanket pardon by Xiden for him before it's all over.

 

[justoffal]

This will be the next news. BIDEN PARDONS ALL PROSECUTORS WHO ILLEGALLY PROSECUTED TRUMP.

Prolly.... Hey what are you going to do?

You have to leave the presidential Powers alone... Even if they do get abused occasionally.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Bondi is Honest. She will perform her duty as genuine AGs should do. Trump has been the victim of Politics by the Democrats. Time to see them in prison.

Which ones. What charges?

Why? The indictments aren't evidence of anything, they are merely the illegally appointed Jack Smith's accusations.

They are evidence of a reasonable indictment. Arguing he was not legally appointed would not make HIM criminally liable. He was acting under color of law with the duties and powers given to him.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Do you have empirical data showing how Trump's tariffs in his first term increased prices?

Why do you ask?

 

[justoffal]

Why? The indictments aren't evidence of anything, they are merely the illegally appointed Jack Smith's accusations.

No, it's not under appeal. The case is over.

I'll let you know how it works out for Jack Smith.....frankly, I expect another blanket pardon by Xiden for him before it's all over.

The world is really going to end when the felonies get overturned. Hardly a piece is written by a lefty now without using the word felon. It's going to be a difficult adjustment.

 

[Robert W]

They are evidence of a reasonable indictment. Arguing he was not legally appointed would not make HIM criminally liable. He was acting under color of law with the duties and powers given to him.

Not according to the highest court in America.

 

[struth]

Which ones. What charges?

They are evidence of a reasonable indictment. Arguing he was not legally appointed would not make HIM criminally liable. He was acting under color of law with the duties and powers given to him.

No, they aren't evidence, they are accusations by an illegally appointed Jack Smith. No he was not acting under color of law, since he wasn't legally appointed. Do you know what "acting under the color of law" means? a police officer, judge, prosecutor all can act under the color of law, a regular citizen can't....moreover, as highlighted, violating someone's civil rights, even acting under the color of law, is still a crime.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Not according to the highest court in America.

It did not go to SCOTUS.

No, they aren't evidence, they are accusations by an illegally appointed Jack Smith. No he was not acting under color of law, since he wasn't legally appointed. Do you know what "acting under the color of law" means? a police officer, judge, prosecutor all can act under the color of law, a regular citizen can't....moreover, as highlighted, violating someone's civil rights, even acting under the color of law, is still a crime.

Based on the documents and witness testimony in the indictment. If you suddenly believe grand jury indictments are no longer valid you should immediately send your amicus brief to the Supreme Court.