Jack Smith — Special Counsel for Jan 6 and Mar-a-Lago inquiries

[Anonymous]

The “house of cards” won’t fall because no one has the b@lls to knock it down. Most Dems in office don’t want the blowback. The GOP aids and abets the criminals because they don’t care about law and order unless it’s applied to others. This is where our “democracy” is today. It’s run by the spineless and criminals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The “house of cards” won’t fall because no one has the b@lls to knock it down. Most Dems in office don’t want the blowback. The GOP aids and abets the criminals because they don’t care about law and order unless it’s applied to others. This is where our “democracy” is today. It’s run by the spineless and criminals.

Don't want the blowback or don't have the faith on how the press will report on it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “house of cards” won’t fall because no one has the b@lls to knock it down. Most Dems in office don’t want the blowback. The GOP aids and abets the criminals because they don’t care about law and order unless it’s applied to others. This is where our “democracy” is today. It’s run by the spineless and criminals.

Don't want the blowback or don't have the faith on how the press will report on it?

The press will only care if it’s an imploded sub of rich guys because that’s all that Americans care about… bread and circuses, everyone!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I honestly can’t keep up either. The front page of the Washington Post on my phone had at least three Trump crime/prosecution links and I couldn’t place which one went with which crime.

And this is who Republicans want heading up their party.

[Anonymous]

Is the gang all here yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Of course he is. He’s being paid to jail Trump for the rest of his life

[Anonymous]

Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

Citation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

Citation?

It was in a news report and similar news reports are now stating that the tape probably won’t be played for a jury. Why not? I mean it’s bombshell evidence sure to take Trump down, right? Am I going to spend hours (due to heavily biased search algorithms looking for that same article where the line was buried way down in paragraphs? No. But you can certainly do so.

They know if the jury hears that tape, the defense will call the witness who testified under oath. So they leaked it instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Of course he is. He’s being paid to jail Trump for the rest of his life

Do the crime, do the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

Citation?

It was in a news report and similar news reports are now stating that the tape probably won’t be played for a jury. Why not? I mean it’s bombshell evidence sure to take Trump down, right? Am I going to spend hours (due to heavily biased search algorithms looking for that same article where the line was buried way down in paragraphs? No. But you can certainly do so.

They know if the jury hears that tape, the defense will call the witness who testified under oath. So they leaked it instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

Citation?

It was in a news report and similar news reports are now stating that the tape probably won’t be played for a jury. Why not? I mean it’s bombshell evidence sure to take Trump down, right? Am I going to spend hours (due to heavily biased search algorithms looking for that same article where the line was buried way down in paragraphs? No. But you can certainly do so.

They know if the jury hears that tape, the defense will call the witness who testified under oath. So they leaked it instead.

Even if Newsmax did say such a thing, it doesn’t matter because you still can steal classified documents, you still can’t move them from place to place, you still can’t store them outside a SCIF.

You don’t know how any of this works. You thought Hillary was the devil for classified info storage issues (according to your side), but you haven’t seemed to grasp that what Trump did is the equivalent of the pope lifting his skirt, pulling down his underwear and shaking his genitals at the assembled crowd from the steps of St Peters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

Citation?

It was in a news report and similar news reports are now stating that the tape probably won’t be played for a jury. Why not? I mean it’s bombshell evidence sure to take Trump down, right? Am I going to spend hours (due to heavily biased search algorithms looking for that same article where the line was buried way down in paragraphs? No. But you can certainly do so.

They know if the jury hears that tape, the defense will call the witness who testified under oath. So they leaked it instead.

Well, if some article you can't find from some source you can't remember said it, it must be true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reported last night that a witness in the Trump tape (one of the people in the room) stated under oath that Trump did not show classified documents to them.

Citation?

It was in a news report and similar news reports are now stating that the tape probably won’t be played for a jury. Why not? I mean it’s bombshell evidence sure to take Trump down, right? Am I going to spend hours (due to heavily biased search algorithms looking for that same article where the line was buried way down in paragraphs? No. But you can certainly do so.

They know if the jury hears that tape, the defense will call the witness who testified under oath. So they leaked it instead.

It was a CBS article, I remember that much