Nothing is fair about the Trump Indictments.
Jun 13, 2023 07:55:06 #
Title: Nothing is fair about the Trump Indictments. June 12, 2023
by Michael Charles Master (author of Trump the Disrupter at amazon.com)
Are you listening to the mainstream media about the 37 counts by Smith to indict Trump? Are you losing some faith in Trump? Are you growing some animosity towards Trump?
Well, that is exactly what the bad guys want you to do. They used the same strategy about the Russia h**x, about the 2 impeachments, about C***D, about J** 6 false accusations, about the Steele dossier, about Comey false claims, about Trump asking for an investigation about the Bidens and Burisma. It is all meant to cause you to lose faith in Trump and MAGA.
87% of Republicans think that all the indictments and court cases against Trump are politically motivated (Fox News poll). In fact, the Trump lead increased by 3 points in the primary polls over last weekend after the indictment. Why?
If you stole 2 pieces of candy at the same time from a candy store as a child, would that be one crime or 2? Well, this indictment of Trump has 37 listed supposed crimes. Many of those listed supposed crimes are obtained by dividing the supposed criminal activities into multiple crimes.
As stated by Smith, the prosecutor, he de-bundled the crimes for maximum charges and maximum penalties. Some accusations are considered individual crimes just as considering stealing those 2 pieces of candy as 2 crimes.
It is obvious that the prosecution is betting that a jury will find at least one conviction out of 37 accusations. It is the same strategy that Bragg is using in NY with his 33 accusations. Is that fair? Does that treat the same actions by others the same? of course not. But when you look at the 2 impeachments and the J** 6 C*******e, and the media bias during C***D, Americans have come to accept that Democrats are not fair. To Democrats, the end justifies the means and now their end game is to stop Trump and the MAGA movement.... by any means.
All of the cases against Trump are being pursued by Democrat AGs, DAs, DoJ, and FBI. All of them. Democrats are using the judicial system as a political weapon. Is that fair? Have Democrats just made it OK for Republican AGs, DAs, etc to do the same to Democrat leaders? Then what? Where does it all lead?
So the prosecutor alleges that Trump lawyers testified that Trump told them to take some documents off-site to remove damaging documents. That is the government's, Smith's, RICO accusation against Trump.
Think about that for a moment. According to Smith, Trump lawyers informed against Trump.
If true, what happened to attorney/client privilege? What? Only the client can waive it. So how did any such lawyers for Trump make such a statement? And if Trump actually made such a comment, but the lawyers advised him against it and the action never happened, then where is the crime? Since when does a conversation about alternatives with your lawyers become a crime?
RICO is clear. A criminal action must occur, then those who were part of planning such an action are at risk for RICO. If no criminal action, then no RICO. If the Trump lawyers did not take documents off-site to destroy them, then where is the crime that justifies RICO?
Smith de-bundled the items to get 37 indictments in hopes that at least one would stick with a jury. And made accusations like this RICO accusation that are blatantly false. He is throwing as much as possible against the wall to get something to stick. What if that happened to you? Is that fair? Or is that an abuse of the legal process?
Let's discuss fair for a moment. According to the dictionary, "fair" is marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism. Treating each same situation the same, each person the same.
So what happened to Hillary Clinton when she had her lawyers destroy evidence (RICO to delete emails, destroy cell phones, and bit clean servers), when she had classified documents on her personal server, when she lied to the FBI? What happened to Biden for having hundreds of classified documents that he stole as a senator in multiple unsecured locations for more than 20 years? Or to Sandy Berger for stealing classified documents and destroying them on behalf of the Clintons? Or to Bill Clinton? What happened to Joe Biden for his actions with Ukraine/Burisma when he was VP? Are these attacks against Trump fair when compared to how the same actions by Democrats were treated?
James Comey overstepped his authority when he refused to provide the evidence concerning Hillary Clinton to the government prosecutors. He claimed no prosecutor would bring charges against Clinton, but refused to give those government prosecutors the evidence so they could make the decision. His logic was that Clinton did not have criminal "intent." So in all "fairness," what is the criminal intent that Smith has on Trump? Was Trump providing USA secrets to our enemies as per the requirements of the Espionage Act that Smith is using? Comey established: If no criminal intent, then no crime. So that should also apply to Trump. That is only "fair."
BTW: that is the same James Comey who used the false Steele dossier to justify the FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign and then lied that the FBI was not spying. Instead, the complicit media condemned (as usual) Trump for calling out Comey and the FBI for the spying.
Trump support continues because MAGA believers did not fall prey to the deep state/Democrat/establishment strategy to stop Trump and the MAGA movement. Yes, the bad guys will eventually find something to convict Trump of something/anything. They can do that to anyone, at any time, including to you. But that does not make Trump wrong about how to make America great again.... and that is really what the bad guys are trying to k**l.
Fair Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fair
a. : marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism. Treating each same situation the same, each person the same.
by Michael Charles Master (author of Trump the Disrupter at amazon.com)
Are you listening to the mainstream media about the 37 counts by Smith to indict Trump? Are you losing some faith in Trump? Are you growing some animosity towards Trump?
Well, that is exactly what the bad guys want you to do. They used the same strategy about the Russia h**x, about the 2 impeachments, about C***D, about J** 6 false accusations, about the Steele dossier, about Comey false claims, about Trump asking for an investigation about the Bidens and Burisma. It is all meant to cause you to lose faith in Trump and MAGA.
87% of Republicans think that all the indictments and court cases against Trump are politically motivated (Fox News poll). In fact, the Trump lead increased by 3 points in the primary polls over last weekend after the indictment. Why?
If you stole 2 pieces of candy at the same time from a candy store as a child, would that be one crime or 2? Well, this indictment of Trump has 37 listed supposed crimes. Many of those listed supposed crimes are obtained by dividing the supposed criminal activities into multiple crimes.
As stated by Smith, the prosecutor, he de-bundled the crimes for maximum charges and maximum penalties. Some accusations are considered individual crimes just as considering stealing those 2 pieces of candy as 2 crimes.
It is obvious that the prosecution is betting that a jury will find at least one conviction out of 37 accusations. It is the same strategy that Bragg is using in NY with his 33 accusations. Is that fair? Does that treat the same actions by others the same? of course not. But when you look at the 2 impeachments and the J** 6 C*******e, and the media bias during C***D, Americans have come to accept that Democrats are not fair. To Democrats, the end justifies the means and now their end game is to stop Trump and the MAGA movement.... by any means.
All of the cases against Trump are being pursued by Democrat AGs, DAs, DoJ, and FBI. All of them. Democrats are using the judicial system as a political weapon. Is that fair? Have Democrats just made it OK for Republican AGs, DAs, etc to do the same to Democrat leaders? Then what? Where does it all lead?
So the prosecutor alleges that Trump lawyers testified that Trump told them to take some documents off-site to remove damaging documents. That is the government's, Smith's, RICO accusation against Trump.
Think about that for a moment. According to Smith, Trump lawyers informed against Trump.
If true, what happened to attorney/client privilege? What? Only the client can waive it. So how did any such lawyers for Trump make such a statement? And if Trump actually made such a comment, but the lawyers advised him against it and the action never happened, then where is the crime? Since when does a conversation about alternatives with your lawyers become a crime?
RICO is clear. A criminal action must occur, then those who were part of planning such an action are at risk for RICO. If no criminal action, then no RICO. If the Trump lawyers did not take documents off-site to destroy them, then where is the crime that justifies RICO?
Smith de-bundled the items to get 37 indictments in hopes that at least one would stick with a jury. And made accusations like this RICO accusation that are blatantly false. He is throwing as much as possible against the wall to get something to stick. What if that happened to you? Is that fair? Or is that an abuse of the legal process?
Let's discuss fair for a moment. According to the dictionary, "fair" is marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism. Treating each same situation the same, each person the same.
So what happened to Hillary Clinton when she had her lawyers destroy evidence (RICO to delete emails, destroy cell phones, and bit clean servers), when she had classified documents on her personal server, when she lied to the FBI? What happened to Biden for having hundreds of classified documents that he stole as a senator in multiple unsecured locations for more than 20 years? Or to Sandy Berger for stealing classified documents and destroying them on behalf of the Clintons? Or to Bill Clinton? What happened to Joe Biden for his actions with Ukraine/Burisma when he was VP? Are these attacks against Trump fair when compared to how the same actions by Democrats were treated?
James Comey overstepped his authority when he refused to provide the evidence concerning Hillary Clinton to the government prosecutors. He claimed no prosecutor would bring charges against Clinton, but refused to give those government prosecutors the evidence so they could make the decision. His logic was that Clinton did not have criminal "intent." So in all "fairness," what is the criminal intent that Smith has on Trump? Was Trump providing USA secrets to our enemies as per the requirements of the Espionage Act that Smith is using? Comey established: If no criminal intent, then no crime. So that should also apply to Trump. That is only "fair."
BTW: that is the same James Comey who used the false Steele dossier to justify the FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign and then lied that the FBI was not spying. Instead, the complicit media condemned (as usual) Trump for calling out Comey and the FBI for the spying.
Trump support continues because MAGA believers did not fall prey to the deep state/Democrat/establishment strategy to stop Trump and the MAGA movement. Yes, the bad guys will eventually find something to convict Trump of something/anything. They can do that to anyone, at any time, including to you. But that does not make Trump wrong about how to make America great again.... and that is really what the bad guys are trying to k**l.
Fair Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fair
a. : marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism. Treating each same situation the same, each person the same.
Jun 13, 2023 09:37:59 #
slatten49
Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
Be honest. If you saw the evidence, you would have indicted Trump, too.
Opinion by EJ Montini, Arizona Republic
He also shared the information to people without security clearances.
Donald Trump calls indictment a 'political hit job', after lading in legal trouble again.
No one wants to believe bad things about a personal hero.
I’ve heard from a number of Arizona residents over the past couple of days who see former President Donald Trump as an icon, as their savior, and believe the only explanation for the more than 30 felony counts he faces related to his handling of classified documents is an evil conspiracy by “radial l*****ts,” or “the out-of-control Biden administration,” or “George Soros,” or “the media” (including me).
To which I say one thing: Read the indictment.
Just read it.
It is not particularly long. There is not a preponderance of legalese in it. It features excerpts of interviews and recordings, brief transcripts of online exchanges, photographs and more.
In other words, prosecutors brought receipts.
If you read the Trump indictment, you'll agree.
The grand jury, in turn, listened to witnesses, considered the evidence and v**ed in secret to charge Trump (and an aide) with some very serious crimes.
It does not mean he’s guilty.
It just means the evidence could not be ignored and the case should be prosecuted.
If you read the indictment – actually read it – you’ll agree.
Prosecutors point out how Trump stored classified documents in boxes at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, in unsecured places that included a ballroom, office, storage area and even a bathroom.
Trump's classified documents included info on weapons, strategy.
There is audio of Trump sharing classified information with, as the indictment reads, “a writer, a publisher, and two members of his staff, none of whom possessed a security clearance.”
There are reports that Trump told individuals, including his attorney, to “falsely represent” to the FBI that he didn’t have documents, and that he wanted his people to hide them.
And what type of documents are we talking about?
The indictment says they included “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack.”
Former Attorney General Bill Barr: 'If even half of it is true, then he's toast'
Nuclear programs? Potential vulnerabilities? Plans for retaliation?
Trump’s former Attorney General William Barr condemned his old boss. He said in part, “The government acted responsibly. And it was Donald J. Trump who acted irresponsibly,” adding, “(They’re) solid counts. ... If even half of it is true, then he's toast.”
Barr said the attempts to label the indictment of Trump a witch hunt are “ridiculous.”
The things Trump was indicted for doing land people in prison.
Questioning Trump's charges mean you're willfully ignorant. This month, a retired U.S. Air Force intelligence officer got three years in federal prison for keeping classified documents at his home and other places.
Will Biden pardon Trump? If Donald Trump is convicted, President Biden should pardon him. Really.
If the name on the indictment was anything but Trump, there would be no question – none – that the charges are justified.
Read it. You’ll see.
The former president, like every defendant, must be presumed innocent.
If convicted, he is, as Barr said, toast. Until then, he is not officially guilty of a thing.
But those who choose to willfully ignore the facts of Trump’s case … are.
Opinion by EJ Montini, Arizona Republic
He also shared the information to people without security clearances.
Donald Trump calls indictment a 'political hit job', after lading in legal trouble again.
No one wants to believe bad things about a personal hero.
I’ve heard from a number of Arizona residents over the past couple of days who see former President Donald Trump as an icon, as their savior, and believe the only explanation for the more than 30 felony counts he faces related to his handling of classified documents is an evil conspiracy by “radial l*****ts,” or “the out-of-control Biden administration,” or “George Soros,” or “the media” (including me).
To which I say one thing: Read the indictment.
Just read it.
It is not particularly long. There is not a preponderance of legalese in it. It features excerpts of interviews and recordings, brief transcripts of online exchanges, photographs and more.
In other words, prosecutors brought receipts.
If you read the Trump indictment, you'll agree.
The grand jury, in turn, listened to witnesses, considered the evidence and v**ed in secret to charge Trump (and an aide) with some very serious crimes.
It does not mean he’s guilty.
It just means the evidence could not be ignored and the case should be prosecuted.
If you read the indictment – actually read it – you’ll agree.
Prosecutors point out how Trump stored classified documents in boxes at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, Florida, in unsecured places that included a ballroom, office, storage area and even a bathroom.
Trump's classified documents included info on weapons, strategy.
There is audio of Trump sharing classified information with, as the indictment reads, “a writer, a publisher, and two members of his staff, none of whom possessed a security clearance.”
There are reports that Trump told individuals, including his attorney, to “falsely represent” to the FBI that he didn’t have documents, and that he wanted his people to hide them.
And what type of documents are we talking about?
The indictment says they included “information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the United States and foreign countries; United States nuclear programs; potential vulnerabilities of the United States and its allies to military attack; and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack.”
Former Attorney General Bill Barr: 'If even half of it is true, then he's toast'
Nuclear programs? Potential vulnerabilities? Plans for retaliation?
Trump’s former Attorney General William Barr condemned his old boss. He said in part, “The government acted responsibly. And it was Donald J. Trump who acted irresponsibly,” adding, “(They’re) solid counts. ... If even half of it is true, then he's toast.”
Barr said the attempts to label the indictment of Trump a witch hunt are “ridiculous.”
The things Trump was indicted for doing land people in prison.
Questioning Trump's charges mean you're willfully ignorant. This month, a retired U.S. Air Force intelligence officer got three years in federal prison for keeping classified documents at his home and other places.
Will Biden pardon Trump? If Donald Trump is convicted, President Biden should pardon him. Really.
If the name on the indictment was anything but Trump, there would be no question – none – that the charges are justified.
Read it. You’ll see.
The former president, like every defendant, must be presumed innocent.
If convicted, he is, as Barr said, toast. Until then, he is not officially guilty of a thing.
But those who choose to willfully ignore the facts of Trump’s case … are.
Jun 14, 2023 14:16:45 #
eagleye13 wrote:
Title: Nothing is fair about the Trump Indictment... (show quote)
I never listen to their propaganda.
Jun 16, 2023 12:28:32 #
slatten49 wrote:
Be honest. If you saw the evidence, you would have... (show quote)
slatten49; At least asmit that the Hildabeast has been protected/given a pass by the "Justice" Department.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.