Posted on 09/04/2019 1:16:02 PM PDT by Nero Germanicus
:-| <- This is my shocked face.
But . . Q . .
The Big Club always wins.
Home team advantage.
Democrats are rarely convicted in DC.
Greg Craig is always guilty. What’s with the jury?
You will NEVER EVER EVER EVER get a jury seated within 75 miles of Washington, DC to convict a Swampster of ANYTHING.
It’s a company town. And they know what side their bread is buttered on.
Uh, the DOH-J?
Boy, is this next wrist slap ever going to hurt!
“Home team advantage.”
Exactly and the problem with putting these dimoKKKRATS on trial in DC.
DC Jury.
Keep this trial in mind when you legal geniuses on here bitch and moan about every time they “decline to charge” some federal employee. You have to be able to convince a jury, not just make the charge.
DC Jury.
DC Jury.
Got it?
American government and American justice is a disgrace.
Just more motivation to make damned certain Democrats never take office ever again. He who says “DUH HEY ja ever think maybe he’s not guilty!? be damned.
Are they still trusting Sessions?
Become part of the political class, commit crimes, no sweat, because DC jury.
He lobbied for Ukraine, never registered as a foreign agent, and got away with it.
Manafort and Flynn, on the other hand, are Republicans and therefore guilty,
LOL!
Did anyone in the DOJ really believe that an Obama Democrat can be found guilty of a politically related crime in Washington DC?
This criminal charge was contrived by the Mueller Team and Deep State prosecutors at DOJ so they can publicly claim that they indicted an anti-Trump Democrat.
Article V Convention Amendment Proposal:
No current or former elected Federal office holder or Federal employee, being indicted for a Federal felony or misdemeanor, may be tried within a 150 mile radius of the District of Columbia nor may the jury pool contain any members residing in this area.
On a bit of a tangent...
The former SOEBARKAH DOJ #2 is the lead attorney for the Chinese spy company masquerading as a tech company.
U.S. effort to disqualify Huawei's lead lawyer goes to court
"U.S. prosecutors claim lead Huawei lawyer James Cole’s prior work as the No. 2 official in the Justice Department created “irresolvable conflicts of interest” that disqualify him as counsel for Huawei in the case.As deputy attorney general, prosecutors say Cole supervised and participated in aspects of an investigation related to the Huawei case which has not been made public.
“Cole had access to privileged and confidential information, including classified information, that he can use to the government’s detriment here,” prosecutors said in an August filing in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn.
Cole claims he has no recollection of matters referenced as the basis for him to be disqualified from the case, according to another court filing. He served as deputy attorney general until 2015."
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.