Judge Smith's report concludes that President would have been convicted at trial

[Clipper]

He has never been right. Especially in the head.

Show us on the doll where Smith touched you, CLOWN.

 

[JimH52]

Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on former President Trump focused on allegations of criminal efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Smith concluded that Trump knowingly made false claims of election fraud and used these claims to undermine the democratic process2. The report also highlighted Trump's alleged attempts to pressure officials, including the Vice President, to delay the certification of the election results. However, the case was ultimately dismissed following Trump's re-election, as longstanding Justice Department policy prohibits prosecuting a sitting president 1.2. pbs.com and newsweek.com

The report by Special Counsel Jack Smith stated that the evidence against former President Trump was sufficient to secure a conviction at trial. However, the case was dismissed following Trump's re-election, as longstanding Justice Department policy prohibits prosecuting a sitting president2. 1.2. pbs.com and newsweek.com

The truth is that Trump knows that he's guilty and that history will judge him accordingly. He may be in the White House for a few years, but he'll be a felon forever.

trump sits as a criminal in the White House. A convicted felon is crashing our economy.

 

[Modern Messiah]

trump sits as a criminal in the White House. A convicted felon is crashing our economy.

And there ya go folks!
Another episode of lefties loosing it

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

MAGA elected a felon who is cracking our economy.

 

[Modern Messiah]

MAGA elected a felon who is cracking our economy.

It seems you don't even understand simple economics
It also appears that you don't know how the legal system works
Try educating yourself and come back later.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

It seems you don't even understand simple economics
It also appears that you don't know how the legal system works
Try educating yourself and come back later.

You would be your first student.

 

[justoffal]

I get he tried, he failed, which happens when you have no case

After losing he comes out with this “report” to try and continue to undermine the president and the rule of law

Completely unprecedented, political prosecution

Attila the Hun's mother-in-law finally came to the conclusion that Attila wasn't such a bad guy after all! Then she called Jack Smith and let him know that Trump probably would have been convicted! Jack, having a great deal of admiration for the old gal.... Was convinced.

 

[SeaMajor7]

"Judge Smith"

 

[hadit]

In more startling news, the sun shone on the Sahara Desert this morning. Who would have ever guessed that the prosecutor in a case would EVER say that the defendant would be found guilty? It's the first thing they say when the trial starts. To paraphrase, "During this trial we are going to present evidence that will prove the defendant committed the crime(s) of which he/she is accused". Let's hear from one of TRUMP!'s defense attorneys as to whether the President would have been convicted or not and give THAT equal authority.

 

[justoffal]

And now that Quid Pro Joe has shown the way, the President simply needs to issue a bunch of blanket pre-emptive pardons to prevent investigation and prosecution of anyone and everyone that could possibly have been involved in anything nefarious.

They always open the door and they hate it when someone else uses it.

 

[berg80]

In more startling news, the sun shone on the Sahara Desert this morning. Who would have ever guessed that the prosecutor in a case would EVER say that the defendant would be found guilty? It's the first thing they say when the trial starts. To paraphrase, "During this trial we are going to present evidence that will prove the defendant committed the crime(s) of which he/she is accused". Let's hear from one of TRUMP!'s defense attorneys as to whether the President would have been convicted or not and give THAT equal authority.

The report by Special Counsel Jack Smith stated that the evidence against former President Trump was sufficient to secure a conviction at trial.

None of you nitwits has offered any reason to believe Smith's opinion is wrong based on the evidence.

 

[hadit]

They always open the door and they hate it when someone else uses it.

And they're always caught by surprise when that happens. "How DARE they do what we just did. Why, it's not fair!!!"

 

[struth]

The report by Special Counsel Jack Smith stated that the evidence against former President Trump was sufficient to secure a conviction at trial.

None of you nitwits has offered any reason to believe Smith's opinion is wrong based on the evidence.

Other then then fact Smith couldn’t prove his case and had to dismiss the charges?

 

[hadit]

The report by Special Counsel Jack Smith stated that the evidence against former President Trump was sufficient to secure a conviction at trial.

None of you nitwits has offered any reason to believe Smith's opinion is wrong based on the evidence.

Don't have to because the prosecutor in a case will never admit his case would have failed, ever. If he really thought that he wouldn't say anything. The fact that Jack spoke up means absolutely nothing. Like I said, let's hear from one of TRUMP!'s defense attorneys. You'd have no problem believing them, would you?

 

[berg80]

Don't have to because the prosecutor in a case will never admit his case would have failed, ever.

If you desire any credibility on the topic then explain why, based on the facts presented in Smith's indictments, you believe trump is innocent.

 

[hadit]

If you desire any credibility on the topic then explain why, based on the facts presented in Smith's indictments, you believe trump is innocent.

I didn't say anything one way or the other about his innocence or guilt. I merely pointed out that the prosecutor's word in a case is not exactly the least biased one you can find. Let's hear from one of TRUMP!'s defense attorneys as to whether he would have been convicted or not. Or would that counter the narrative?

 

[berg80]

I didn't say anything one way or the other about his innocence or guilt. I merely pointed out that the prosecutor's word in a case is not exactly the least biased one you can find.

He's speaking about the evidence presented in his indictments. The original one and the superseding one. Have you read either one?

 

[Nostra]

Seems odd that a "judge" would chime in on guilt or innocence before a trial.

 

[Nostra]

He's speaking about the evidence presented in his indictments. The original one and the superseding one. Have you read either one?

Can you link us up to any attorney announcing that they would lose a case they filed?

OP is a moron.

 

[BackAgain]

Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on former President Trump focused on allegations of criminal efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Smith concluded that Trump knowingly made false claims of election fraud and used these claims to undermine the democratic process2. The report also highlighted Trump's alleged attempts to pressure officials, including the Vice President, to delay the certification of the election results. However, the case was ultimately dismissed following Trump's re-election, as longstanding Justice Department policy prohibits prosecuting a sitting president 1.2. pbs.com and newsweek.com

The report by Special Counsel Jack Smith stated that the evidence against former President Trump was sufficient to secure a conviction at trial. However, the case was dismissed following Trump's re-election, as longstanding Justice Department policy prohibits prosecuting a sitting president2. 1.2. pbs.com and newsweek.com

The truth is that Trump knows that he's guilty and that history will judge him accordingly. He may be in the White House for a few years, but he'll be a felon forever.

Judge Smith?

Asshole. He was just a special persecutor. Nothing more.