@SusannB Maybe... but you bring nothing to this debate but your bent view of DT
So go ahead... address the "Crime" in this indictment... prove to me he didn't believe he had been robbed
Show me the mens rea
noun
LAW
the intention or knowledge ofwrongdoingthat constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.
"a mistaken belief in consent meant that the defendant lackedmens rea"
So I'll do this slowly so even you can get it
You ask = "oh yeah trump the biggest loser won the election what is your proof"
Answer....For this matter, I dont have to prove he was robbed...I dont have to give you squat to justify if it's true...it can be false and a lie. None of that matters. Were allowed to lie. 1A says so
What you have to do is: a. prove he didnt truly believe he was robbed and b. then fraudulently acted knowingly Then prove the legal advice he chose to use was illegal and against the law which it wasn't. It certainly ran contrary to the other legal advice he was given to suck it up and accept the L...but he was given other legal advice that he felt melded with his view he was robbed and chose to run with. Again not illegal
