Posted on 07/28/2025 3:05:33 AM PDT by RandFan
![]() |
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
He didn't name anyone specifically but Maria suggested Brennan, Comey, Clapper.
We will see. These folks have been above the law since forever.
COVFEFE COVFAFO
‘CIA DIRECTOR: Indictments coming’
I’ll believe it when I see it.
Trump already passed on Hillary giving all her emails to China. He’s passing on Obama now. This crop will simply say they did what their boss, Barry, asked.
I understand the skepticsm but the administration are telegraphing indictments to the media. There’s a few articles about it now so let’s see....
Probably wont be Clinton, Obama or anyone “pardoned” so who does that leave? Almost certainly their underlings.
yup!
And the underlings will use the Barry-instructed-us defense.
That has never been a legal defense against breaking the law.
Heard I’ll before...all irrelevant until indictments, arrest, conviction and imprisonment. Anything less is unacceptable.
How'd that work out for ya, Oberst Eichmann?
It will be used in the context of having reason to doubt that the intel assessments were complete or correct.
But with it, they’ll cast doubt on their knowing that the intel reports were indeed false.
Indict Epstein’s clients.
That worked brilliantly for the Watergate defendants. This is MUCH more serious than Watergate. A lot will depend on venue. The chances of anyone getting a fair trial in Washington DC in a politically charged case asymptotically approach zero the closer to Obama or Trump you get. J6 defendants had about as much a chance of acquittal as Claus Stauffenberg. Russiagate defendants will have about as much chance of conviction in DC as OJ in Watts.
If indeed arrests and indictments are coming, the prosecution will need to move to change the venue out of the DC district courts. Their judges and 93% Democrat juries have zero interest in justice.They are just as slimy as the defendants in the dock
Separate juries can believe separate things. When you use contradictory defenses, “Obama made me do it” and “I was ignorant” the jury is entitled to infer that you are as guilty as Hell, and the prosecutor is entitled to remind the jury of the contradiction.
Asserting inconsistent defenses is tantamount to an admission of guilt.
“I dindu nuttin and the muffin-flucker was axing for it.” is not a brilliant defense.
Ratcliffe seemed to be saying that there are criminal referrals and the outcomes will be based on the information gathered. False alarm...”indictments will be coming” was not said.,more like the “possibility of indictments”,....Trump is doing payback...trying to force those creeps into defense mode..seeing how they react ...going to hound them as long as he can...maybe they will physically break...might be Trumps goal...let them squirm for a loooong time..in the meantime painting them as the slimebags they are...for all to remember
Yep.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.