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.
![]()
![]()
![]()
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 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 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 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?
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.
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?
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.