Notice Inmate P01135809 Indicted and indicated!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Aileen Cannon was confirmed by the Senate after Trump lost the 2020 election despite her lack of experience. She has previously shown herself to be a Trump acolyte, her rulings were not just overturned but denounced in blistering terms by higher court. She has said this case should not have been brought. She has power to dismiss outright, to disallow prosecution witnesses and evidence, and to stack jury with old white conservative Christians. Even if successfully appealed this takes time. Every Republican candidate has pledged to pardon Trump (except Hutchinson and Christie).
 
I finally got a chance to read the entire indictment.

How anyone can call it a witch hunt or political prosecution never read this. They have actual physical documents/surveillance/audio/texts of all of this, corroborated by people IN HIS CIRCLE.

If you still support t*ump... Like we knew you were on the wrong side of history, but now it's confirmed. Holy fuck.
 
Strenuus said:
I finally got a chance to read the entire indictment.

How anyone can call it a witch hunt or political prosecution never read this. They have actual physical documents/surveillance/audio/texts of all of this, corroborated by people IN HIS CIRCLE.

If you still support t*ump... Like we knew you were on the wrong side of history, but now it's confirmed. Holy fuck.
Click to expand...

Remember when he had the "perfect phone call", and his cultists would say "just read the transcripts" whenever someone would ask them about it?

And then the reporter would ask "so did you read the transcripts?"

"nope, I trust him".

The same applies here. NONE of them will read the transcripts.
 
julius said:
Remember when he had the "perfect phone call", and his cultists would say "just read the transcripts" whenever someone would ask them about it?

And then the reporter would ask "so did you read the transcripts?"

"nope, I trust him".

The same applies here. NONE of them will read the transcripts.
Click to expand...

And what's so strange is how he acts both in vocal and text form... For any decent human being that should be a turn off even if you support(ed) him. Then you got the racism, bigotry, et al. It's mind-blowing how clueless people are. Just being taken for a gaslit trip willingly at this point.
 
I also read it yesterday. His cult doesn't try to defend on substance, they just scream Hillary! Biden crime family! Weaponized justice department!
 
In doing a little research for the above clip of Ren (I already knew that John K was a dirty pervert), I just now realized I've been saying his name wrong all this time.

I always assumed it was John KriCKfalusi, but it's pronounced John KRISfalusi.

It's like I woke up in a parallel universe.
 
That codefendant is a Navy guy assigned to presidential detail who threw away his honor and career for Trump. Trump demands loyalty from others but has no loyalty to anyone. This guy has no wealth, fame, adoring cult. If he has independent counsel, I would bet my bottom dollar they are advising him to turn state's evidence.
 
Strenuus said:
I finally got a chance to read the entire indictment.

How anyone can call it a witch hunt or political prosecution never read this. They have actual physical documents/surveillance/audio/texts of all of this, corroborated by people IN HIS CIRCLE.

If you still support t*ump... Like we knew you were on the wrong side of history, but now it's confirmed. Holy fuck.
Click to expand...

The hitch is, lots of evidence for the indictment is based on the words of one of Trump's lawyers. Trump's new lawyer will likely ask Judge Cannon tomorrow to disclude that evidence, due to attorney client privilege and she likely will, throwing the case into disarray.
 
Chris Craig said:
The hitch is, lots of evidence for the indictment is based on the words of one of Trump's lawyers. Trump's new lawyer will likely ask Judge Cannon tomorrow to disclude that evidence, due to attorney client privilege and she likely will, throwing the case into disarray.
Click to expand...

What about the conversation between the two lawyers about what trump wants done?
 
There's also the video, surveillance, etc. Also the conversation with non lawyers and the book people. That stuff is fair game.

There's just too much evidence.
 
Chris Craig said:
The hitch is, lots of evidence for the indictment is based on the words of one of Trump's lawyers. Trump's new lawyer will likely ask Judge Cannon tomorrow to disclude that evidence, due to attorney client privilege and she likely will, throwing the case into disarray.
Click to expand...
The courts have already ruled on that.
 
The 11th district will not let Cannon oversee the trial, only the arraignment if that...she got caught breaking the law for Trump twice already. They expect her to be reassigned and recuse herself and if she doesn't, they'll assign her to another case...a case of this magnitude cannot have a weaponized judge. She was randomly selected but she won't be the judge of the trial according to the professionals who know about the process.
 
Last edited:
riverman said:
The 11th district will not let Cannon oversea the trial, only the arraignment if that...she got caught breaking the law for Trump once already. They expect her to be reassigned and recuse herself and if she doesn't, they'll assign her to another case...a case of this magnitude cannot have a weaponized judge. She was randomly selected but she won't be the judge of the trial according to the professionals who know about the process.
Click to expand...

And you know what'll be funny, the idiots, I mean gaslit morons, I mean Trump supporters will say "see it's weaponized" if she is reassinged/recused.
 
Strenuus said:
Can this happen during arraignment or is it after? Cause she won't (and shouldn't) be presiding over the trial.
Click to expand...

A magistrate judge not Cannon will oversee the arraignment. Apparently, Cannon is the lead judge though on the case. So, she will oversee the actual trial, unless she recuses herself or is removed from the case.

The arraignment judge can decide which evidence makes it to trial.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top