Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

GUF, it is those DOJ officials testify in a real court it is the...

First 59 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
skint

5,851 Posts.

143

26/06/22

23:27

Post #: 62215958
Share

Originally posted by gumUnderfoot: ↑

Guf they were heard by the courts and rejected on procedural, jurisdiction, etc grounds, but no evidence was presented to juries.

As you know with the Sussmann case, the jury will be loaded with those who have children that go to school with Democrat gym instructors so they will be shown to be just as ridiculous as the courts announced.

This court action that people here are hoping for, is a criminal case, and will be in front of a jury. I really don't think the Democrats want this in front of a real jury, with real high end defense lawyers.

Sure!
The Department of Justice officials giving testimonies would not fall into the category of high end lawyers?

Trump is now a private citizen, and the Senate cannot prosecute him. The DOJ would have to do it.

That is looking likely.

There are plenty of aspects I feel sure the Dems do not want to see the light of day.

Plenty?
Like what?

This sham hearing is just an attempt to throw a shadow over Trump for the mid terms IMO.

Have you watched any of the hearings?
You do realise it is mostly Trump's own departments and staff throwing a shadow over Trump?

Expand

GUF, it is those DOJ officials testify in a real court it is the hostile cross examination by high end lawyers I would be interested in.
What they would not like to see- Maybe Pelosi's refusal to take help in advance when offered and recommended. Unarmed Ashley Babbit executed with no warning shot. Why there were no National Guard. etc.
Upvote

Reply