Yeah, right. You're one of those idiots who claims there is no evidence that Biden took bribes.You lose again, fucking moron.
You have no proof there were phony ballots.
And no one is saying contesting an election is fraud. You're out of your fucking mind.
Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
If you are really serious about these. . . "crimes?"
You don't hand over all this, "evidence," on the former president of the United States, on such a serious & so-called-weighty subject as this?
To a bunch of second rate lawyers & paralegals to sift through while the fate of the nation awaits?
. . . to be adjudicated a day or two before Super Tuesday?
nah. . .
It's called discovery . The evidence must be provided to what ever lawyers the defendent designates. The fact that T-Rump can now only get 2nd rate layers is not the goverments problem. And it is not going to be "adjudicated" a day before super tuesday. That is when jury selection begins. But I do agree with one thing that you said.....It is about the fate of the nation
Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
If you are really serious about these. . . "crimes?"
You don't hand over all this, "evidence," on the former president of the United States, on such a serious & so-called-weighty subject as this?
To a bunch of second rate lawyers & paralegals to sift through while the fate of the nation awaits?
. . . to be adjudicated a day or two before Super Tuesday?
nah. . .
www.fairtrials.org
This. . . makes the assumption that the federal judge will have no bias in the Voir Dire?!
www.telegraph.co.uk
apnews.com
Misuse of state power - Fair Trials
States should not use criminal justice powers to oppress people, suppress political dissent or undermine our human rights. Misuse of state power can include mass surveillance, the abuse of police powers and the privatisation of criminal justice.
So. . . you don't think, that state rushing this trial, against the wishes of the declared statements of the defense, has anything to do with politics, when the judge and venue are clearly opposed to the politics of the defendant?
So. . . you don't think, that state rushing this trial, against the wishes of the declared statements of the defense, has anything to do with politics, when the judge and venue are clearly opposed to the politics of the defendant?
"States should not use criminal justice powers to oppress people, suppress political dissent or undermine our human rights.. . . "
Of course you don't, I know your politics.
It obviously is. The true criminals are prosecuting Trump.
Of course you don't, I know your politics.
Don't sit there and try to gas-light the forum, you lack integrity if you really believe, a single defense attorney in charge of the entire defense, could give adequate counsel on this.
Your, "agreement," or "disagreement," is irrelevant,, and just playing politics.
THE CHALLENGE, do what Alan Dershowitz requested of this judge;
Find one other federal case, with fourteen million documents in discovery to go through, from arraignment, to trial start. IN SIX MONTHS!
If you can't? It doesn't matter what you bleev, you are being a disingenuous partisan. You just don't give a shit about the justice system, or America. You are putting politics before the nation.
The less time they have to prepare, the more chance of a successful trial, you couldn't give a shit if it is fair.
For most folks on the left, as MSNBC even admitted, this is about making sure Trump can't run, it isn't about "justice." I loath folks that won't just be honest, and show some integrity.
. . . and once we go down this road?
OTH? I believe a 2026 trial date that the defense wanted, is yes, excessive. Somewhere in the middle would be more appropriate.
The same laws everyone else broke but they are not being prosecuted. That makes it persecution.
It's happening because Trump apparently broke the law.
The Judge is a separate issue. She does lean left but there is no reason to believe that she will not be fair and give the defence the opportunity to present their case. At the end of the day, the jury decides. No judge is going to blatently favor one side or the other. They know that if they do, the case can be overturned on appeal and no judge wants to have that happen based on their conduct on the banch.This. . . makes the assumption that the federal judge will have no bias in the Voir Dire?!
Tanya Chutkan: The Obama-appointed judge who could send Donald Trump to prison
US District Judge Tanya S Chutkan often handed down sentences in Jan 6 riot cases that were harsher than prosecutors recommended
The judge assigned to Trump's Jan. 6 case is a tough punisher of Capitol rioters
Judge Tanya Chutkan often has handed down prison sentences in Jan. 6, 2021, riot cases that are harsher than what Justice Department prosecutors recommended.
States have sent alternate electors numerous times in the past.
Oh nooo's, you disagree with me.
Whatever shall I do??
Regardless, the job can get done in time.
Nice to see you admit what this is really about. . .
