Posted on 11/28/2023 4:04:21 AM PST by PJ-Comix
BOMBSHELL video evidence of bias and misconduct of Justice Engoron’s Law Clerk, Allison Greenfield, just uncovered. MISTRIAL INCOMING!!!
While attending an October 2022 Democrat Fundraiser, Greenfield can be heard saying Biden is the “best President in the history of the United… pic.twitter.com/EIvS8TdNkE— Judicial Protest (@JudicialProtest) November 6, 2023
(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...
Wow, great video...it is amazing the illegal lawfare going on in this case.
“Biden is the best President in the history of the United States.”
Are these employees of the court required to take random drugs tests? They have to be, right?
“Biden is the best President in the history of the United States.”
The only kind of moron who would say something like that, is someone that supports the destruction of the United states which includes our constitution and our system of justice. And this is what is acting as a law clerk, unbelievable.
Leftist judges...
“Yeah? So, what’s wrong with her saying that? We agree...”
I’m no lawyer, but it doesn’t take more than two brain cells to understand that the bias is off the charts. Trump’s attorneys have to be salivating. What do the words “fair and impartial” really mean to these people? Or do those words mean anything at all?
As much as I would like to catch her and the judge with something that discredits them, this event is not it. It is not a bombshell, it is not even a smoking gun. Trump is not even mentioned. What she said EVERY democrat in the nation says.
This kind of unsubstantial false sensationalism makes us look foolish. Let the democrats twist stuff into something it is not. We should not lower ourselves to their standards and do the same.
To them it means they will not execute him immediately. They will have the show trial first.
Great, another bombshell. I love bombshells.
When Engoron has this trial terminated by a higher court because of the many things wrong with it and Engoron is dis-barred, can Engoron be made to repay PDJT’s legal and other expenses?
Seems only fair ...
Blonds or brunettes?
This is a trial without a jury, thus dependent upon the unbiased assessment of the judge. He is clearly biased, and that this woman is his primary law clerk is objective evidence of this. Outing this serves a purpose.
“What she said EVERY democrat in the nation says.”
Yes, but in a court of law, there cannot be a thread of venomous bias against the defendant by the judge and it takes a foolish person to think this makes “us” look foolish.
This is the Law according to “Tish..” It is disgusting.
Will be no mistrial. Judge already decided Trump is guilty. His best hope is the appellate system.
You state, “This kind of unsubstantial false sensationalism makes us look foolish. Let the democrats twist stuff into something it is not. We should not lower ourselves to their standards and do the same.”
You obviously don’t understand that we are at war. What appears to you to be unsubstantial happens to be crucial to many observers.
I watched. And, then, I watched again.
Not everything is a dadgummed ‘bombshell’, and this is a perfect example.
This is nothing more than the dhimmicraps doing what the dhimmicraps do...sniffing each others’ backsides and proclaiming they’ve found the TRUTH...
Yawn...
If she had directly spoke against trump then it would absolutely be substantial and straight up bias. What you are implying is that court officers and judges are not allowed to even belong to or support a political party as individuals off the clock. I know we would be completely against this perspective if the tables were turned and the dems were claiming this against a Republican judge and Republican court officer based on this very same “evidence” that is not at all “solid” enough to be substantial. Unfortunately they are allowed individual freedom of speech rights also just as we would expect for ourselves in the same situation.
I’m just saying that before we yell bombshell or smoking gun it really needs to be an irrefutable bombshell or smoking gun or we are just making ourselves look foolish and sensationalistic... Being selective and sensationalistic against freedom of speech is what the communists do. This is what they are trying to do to Trump by gagging him. But give them enough rope without sensationalistic fanfare and sooner or later they will indeed become overconfident and utter words that are truly substantial and irrefutable.
If it were the judge, then the grounds for a mistrial based on bias would be clear. But the clerk? I’m not sure how the clerk can influence the outcome of the trial. Sincere question here…. What does a court clerk do that can affect the outcome?
“Yes, but in a court of law”
Key words here... “In a court of law”. It was not said in a court and it was not a court in session. Just as republican judges and court officers are allowed, unfortunately off the clock they still have certain individual rights and freedom of speech.
Again, if she had actually mentioned Trump’s name plus bias speech against him it would absolutely be substantial for sure. Until then it is just an effort to make a mountain out of a molehill. It is a historic low bar liberal practice to do this and we should not lower ourselves down to their standards.
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.