1 minute ago, tomazbodner said:

Suzy, you're back!

Ouch !  That hurts.

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

 

Well since I would have been aware that this case will drag out to 2025 anyway, I would not have seen this as a big priority. And given that there were two presidential election campaigns under way I would have thought it fairer not to interfere in that process. However, that's just me, as a fair minded individual. I'm not a Jack Smith, trying to make a career out of pleasing my Democrat employers.

 

Smith knows very well this case will drag on til 2025. Why would he have to bring the indictment now? Surely only because it's a political maneuvre to make Trump look bad, make him look like a criminal again. But this tactic is like howling at the moon. Pointless.

 

Expeditiously? Everyone knows it will not be before 2025 that this case is decided. Assuming Trump doesn't throw it out when he's in the White House.

Make him look bad , he’s an International Disgrace ffs 

2 hours ago, Cameroni said:

And of course Jack Smith, the Democrat appointee, brings this in the hot phase of the election campaign period.

 

The sole aim is to discredit Trump, but that card has been played too often. They should know by now Trump is immune to this.

Even Faux is done with Trump 

8 hours ago, Cameroni said:

He seems in an awful hurry to file that indictment.

 

I wonder why, lol.

 

jack was to quick ,in his first attempt of lawfare. It looks like the corrupt Smith is doing it again!

His rush to persecute won’t be ignored by the dems & their propaganda machine , msm.imop

 

Its all about the optics!imop

 

He is engaging to change public opinion.Its  sickening,Soviet style performance of persecuting political adversaries .

 

*Look what was said the first time when he eventually lost in court .

 His evidence was corrupted the first time(**documents dispute)eventually the court threw out Smith case

because he was illegitimately  hired .

 

Jack is at it again. 

 

 

*”Jack Smith is rushing to prosecute former President Donald Trump for the events of Jan. 6 so that the American people can have the benefit of his evidence, and the views of the jury, before they vote in November. This rush violates Justice Department rules. The Supreme Court now faces the question whether it too will be a party to this rush and, if not, how it will avoid it”. 

 

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-consequences-of-jack-smith's-rush-to-trial
 

**https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-revelations-florida-documents-trial-put-trump-offense-against-deranged-special-counsel

 

 

Edited August 28, 20241 yr by riclag

1 minute ago, riclag said:

 

jack was to quick ,in his first attempt of lawfare. It looks like the corrupt Smith is doing it again!

His rush to persecute won’t be ignored by the dems & their propaganda machine , msm.imop

 

Its all about the optics!imop

 

He is engaging to change public opinion.Its  sickening,Soviet style performance of persecuting political adversaries .

 

*Look what was said the first time when he eventually lost in court .

 His evidence was corrupted the first time(**documents dispute)eventually the court through out Smith 

because he was illegitimately  hired .

 

Jack is at it again. 

 

 

*”Jack Smith is rushing to prosecute former President Donald Trump for the events of Jan. 6 so that the American people can have the benefit of his evidence, and the views of the jury, before they vote in November. This rush violates Justice Department rules. The Supreme Court now faces the question whether it too will be a party to this rush and, if not, how it will avoid it”. 

 

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-consequences-of-jack-smith's-rush-to-trial
 

**https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-revelations-florida-documents-trial-put-trump-offense-against-deranged-special-counsel

 

 

 

Jack Smith was appointed by a Democrat appointed AG, Merrick Garland. Anyone who thinks Jack Smith's legal actions are not politically motivated doesn't know what time it is.

 

It does indeed resemble Soviet style appropriation of the judicial system. It's absolutely sickening. Democrats have no scruples and will stop at nothing.

10 hours ago, Cameroni said:

 

Well since I would have been aware that this case will drag out to 2025 anyway, I would not have seen this as a big priority. And given that there were two presidential election campaigns under way I would have thought it fairer not to interfere in that process. However, that's just me, as a fair minded individual. I'm not a Jack Smith, trying to make a career out of pleasing my Democrat employers.

 

Smith knows very well this case will drag on til 2025. Why would he have to bring the indictment now? Surely only because it's a political maneuvre to make Trump look bad, make him look like a criminal again. But this tactic is like howling at the moon. Pointless.

 

Expeditiously? Everyone knows it will not be before 2025 that this case is decided. Assuming Trump doesn't throw it out when he's in the White House.

Why would Smith have to bring the indictment now? Hmmm...that's a tough one. Just maybe, just possibly because of this:

Court sets Aug. 27 deadline for brief appealing Trump classified docs dismissal
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Trump's classified documents case last week.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-sets-aug-27-deadline-brief-appealing-trump/story?id=112270892

14 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Cannon is setting herself up to be removed from the case  by the Appellate Court.

There is absolutely no reason to think the entities that are corrupting SCOTUS will not do the same in the lower courts.

It is a shame that the second person of African descent to be appointed to SCOTUS turned out to be one of the worst things to happen to it.  So far.  Somebody has to tell Clarence what those White nationalist types think of the likes of him (and his White wife).

 

10 hours ago, placeholder said:

Why would Smith have to bring the indictment now? Hmmm...that's a tough one. Just maybe, just possibly because of this:

Court sets Aug. 27 deadline for brief appealing Trump classified docs dismissal
Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Trump's classified documents case last week.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-sets-aug-27-deadline-brief-appealing-trump/story?id=112270892

 

Errr, no. Jack Smith is not filing an "appeal". He filed a brand new indictment.