ADVERTISEMENT

Trump Witch Hunt

First hand accounts from the court room when Trump was indicted confirm that Smith quaked like a little school girl and would not dare look Alpha Don in the face while Trump was staring his bony @$$ down for extended periods.​

Attorney Reveals the “Exculpatory” Evidence Jack Smith Possesses that Exonerates President Trump​


By Cullen Linebarger Aug. 4, 2023 12:00 pm
Jack-Smith-President-Donald-Trump.jpg

It turns out that Special Counsel Jack Smith either failed to review evidence that exonerates President Trump and Mayor Rudy Giuliani or he ignored the findings altogether.
Tim Parlatore, the attorney for former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, told CBS News that Smith’s office has within thousands of pages of records turned over by Kerik that contains “exculpatory evidence.” The exact reason why Smith has not disclosed this critical information remains unclear.
According to CBS News, these documents were submitted to Smith on July 23.

Kerik’s legal team says that these materials, which include affidavits under oath from people raising concerns regarding the integrity of the 2020 presidential contest, demonstrate there was an honest effort to investigate voter fraud claims in the election.
7 Reasons to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Premium Beef Right Away
Yet Parlatore got “surprising” news when the special counsel’s office started asking him for documents which he had already handed over after they indicted Trump on Wednesday.
CBS News reported:
In an Aug. 2 email to Parlatore, reviewed by CBS News, a special counsel’s office prosecutor requested “responsive documents as to which the Trump campaign is no longer asserting a privilege,” referring to the Kerik records Parlatore said he previously provided.
Parlatore said he was “stunned” when, after the indictment came down, the prosecutor contacted him asking for the records he said he had already provided. Parlatore said the “records are absolutely exculpatory.
Here is the evidence should exonerate Trump according to Parlatore.
They (documents) bear directly on the essential element of whether Rudy Giuliani, and therefore Donald Trump, knew that their claims of election fraud were false. Good- faith reliance upon claims of fraud, even if they later turn out to be false, is very different from pushing fraud claims that you know to be false at the time.

In other words, Trump and Giuliani honestly believed the 2020 election was stolen. This conclusively proves that Trump is being prosecuted based on his opinions.
There is also other evidence to back up Trump’s claims of election fraud. The Gateway Pundit has extensively reported on the irregularities that occurred during the 2020 Presidential election.
Some examples can be found here and here.
CBS News notes that Parlatore served as a lawyer working for Trump in the Justice Department’s investigations into the 45th president, but left the legal team in May.
A spokesperson for the special counsel refused comment Thursday when asked by CBS News if they had reviewed the material.
 
ICYMI: Jack Smith LIED in Trump Indictment – PURPOSELY Omitted Trump’s Call for Supporters to Protest “Peacefully and Patriotically”
Everything Trump does is innocent. Everything the rest of the world does isn't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
"Free speech doesn't give you the right to engage in a fraudulent conspiracy."

- Bill Barr
All of a sudden conspiracy is a good word now for you dimwits. Guess yall are conspiracy theorists. LOL!!
 

This May Be The Darkest and Most Ridiculous Part of Biden DOJ’s Latest Trump Indictment​

August 5, 2023 (1d ago)

Last week Biden’s corrupt and weaponized DOJ just issued Trump’s third and most serious criminal indictment. The formal charges of “conspiracy to defraud the United States” do an underwhelmingly half-hearted job of disguising the obvious purpose of the indictment which is to codify the “disinformation” scam into criminal law generally, and specifically to criminalize what we might call “election denial”
Indeed, there’s a reason the indictment begins with the false, absurd and legally irrelevant claim that Trump made “knowingly false claims” about the 2020 election that “created an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger” and eroded “public faith in the administration of the election.”
Despite having lost, the defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, and the defendant knew that they were false. But the defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway— to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election”
Nevermind for a moment that questioning the legitimacy of an election is First Amendment protected speech. Let’s focus for now on the ridiculous insistence that Trump “knowingly lied” in his statements concerning the election. To say that Trump “knowingly lied” is to not only dispute his objective (and in our view entirely justified) questions concerning the election, it is to state that subjectively, privately in his own mind, Trump actually thought the election was legitimate, that he legitimately lost, but he lied anyway.

How on earth would Biden’s Corrupt DOJ presume to know that? The answer is they don’t. To prove that Trump “knowingly lied” the DOJ resorts to one of the darkest and most ridiculous slight-0f-hand tricks imaginable: assuming that Trump must have known better because supposed “experts” told him the election wasn’t stolen. Yes, you read that right. The basis of the DOJ’s allegation that Trump actually believed he lost the election despite his public statements is the fact that other individuals, in many cases individuals in the intelligence community, told him so. If that isn’t absurd enough, take a look at the experts whom the DOJ deems so unimpeachably authoritative that for them simply to tell Trump “oh no the election was fair and square, nothing to see here” is enough to assume Trump believed them:



According to the DOJ, Trump knew his election claims were false because he had been advised otherwise by “people in the best position to know the facts,” and those people include Mike Pence, Senior DOJ officials, Director of National Intelligence, DHS’ CISA, and others. In other words, Trump must have believed his claims of election fraud were false because he was told otherwise by people he should have trusted, like the very same establishment snakes and intelligence community operatives who had demonstrably worked to sabotage his Presidency since day one. That’s one hell of a theory!

The DOJ’s decision to invoke CISA as an authority is especially outrageous given that this agency was recently exposed for engaging in and then attempting to cover up rampant unconstitutional censorship leading up to the 2020 election.

“CISA pulled a fast one on the American public by setting up a social media censorship division in the name of fighting foreign influence, but then quickly seizing long-arm jurisdiction over domestic opinions online as well,” Benz told Fox News Digital. “CISA officials knew they lacked the legal authorization to do what they did. Now, CISA appears to be burying the evidence of its domestic censorship activities, right as oversight of potential malfeasance is heating up.” [Fox News]

CISA’s glaring misconduct was the subject of a major report by the House’s Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal government:

Although the investigation is ongoing, information obtained to date has revealed that the CISA has facilitated the censorship of Americans directly and through third-party intermediaries. The report also details how:
  • CISA considered the creation of an anti-misinformation “rapid response team” capable of physically deploying across the United States.
  • CISA moved its censorship operation to a CISA-funded non-profit after CISA and the Biden Administration were sued in federal court, implicitly admitting that its censorship activities are unconstitutional.
  • CISA wanted to use the same CISA-funded non-profit as its mouthpiece to “avoid the appearance of government propaganda.”
  • Members of CISA’s advisory committee agonized that it was “only a matter of time before someone realizes we exist and starts asking about our work.”
  • In response to mounting public scrutiny, CISA scrubbed its website of references to its domestic surveillance and censorship activities. [House.gov]

To get an even better sense of what this in-house government censorship agency was all about, consider the following facts about CISA’s founding director, Chris Krebs


Now we are in a better position to appreciate the utter Orwellian absurdity of the DOJ’s position. According to them, Trump must have been lying in his claims about election fraud, because other unimpeachably authoritative sources told him the election was all above board, and one of these sources is an organization recently exposed for violating the Constitution in aggressively pushing for censorship leading up to the 2020 election, and then exposed additionally for maladroitly covering it up. This is an organization led by a man who defended government pressure to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story and didn’t care that all of the intelligence community officials were wrong in attributing the hack to the Russians—these are the same intel agencies Trump is supposed to consider as so authoritative that for him to deviate from their position is tantamount to lying.

It is interesting to note that his same ridiculous tactic appears in a civil context in Ray Epps’ recent lawsuit against Fox News for Tucker Carlson and Revolver’s Darren Beattie’s reporting on Epps’ involvement in January

Again, the legal civil complaint against Fox in this case makes the ludicrous assertion that Tucker knowingly lied in his reporting on Epps and January 6th. On what basis can Epps’ legal team purport to divine Tucker’s thought process? Well for one Epps’ lawyers claim that Tucker acted with reckless regard for the truth because he didn’t take the January 6th committee’s word for it when they claimed Epps was not a Fed. That’s right, to not accept the verdict of Adam Kinziger and Liz Cheney’s corrupt and partisan January 6 Committee, is tantamount to displaying reckless regard for the truth. You just can’t make this up!



As for the cherry on top, the legal complaint imputes that Tucker acted with reckless regard for the truth by citing and amplifying the reporting of Revolver News’ own Dr. Darren J. Beattie! The argument goes that if you rely on Darren Beattie’s reporting, you are effectively lying because Beattie is a discredited conspiracy theorist—just ask CNN and the New York Times!



Far from being a discredited conspiracy theorist, Beattie’s reporting at Revolver News that has changed the national conversation on January 6th has been confirmed time and time again. Months after Revolver’s first January 6th report, the New York Times was even forced to admit the presence of government informants on January 6th. The former public face of the January 6 pipe bomb investigation largely substantiated the suspicions raised in Revolver’s extensive and detailed reporting on this darkest of Fedsurrection hoaxes. And most recently, a leaked interview between Tucker and former Capitol Police head Steven Sund reveals that Sund finds suspicions regarding Epps absolutely legitimate.

It is important that we not allow ridiculousness of such charges overshadow their danger. The strategy described above is both subtle and exceedingly dark, and effectively amounts to the government saying that if you pay credence to sources not approved by the regime, you are guilty of “reckless disregard for the truth” and punished accordingly; similarly, if you don’t take the word of the demonstrable liars in the intelligence community and criminal organizations like CISA, you are guilty of “knowingly lying” and criminally liable, as in the case of the Trump. With this legal innovation deployed on the civil side in the Ray Epps lawsuit and on the criminal side against Trump, we have descended into sub-Orwellian territory in which not bowing to regime approved experts, no matter how malicious or discredited, will land one in bankruptcy, jail, or worse.
 
This articles details some examples of this woke communist judicial field soldier and how she makes a joke of true law and order as well as any semblance of adherence to the constitution. She will stick it to Trump in a biblical way without a doubt if allowed to keep the case. It should be moved from DC.


BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Corrupt Obama Judge Overseeing President Trump’s Case Has a History of Outrageously Corrupt Rulings Crushing Conservatives and Letting Liberals Off Scot-Free​

By Guest Contributor Aug. 6, 2023 5:40 pm
This exclusive report originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission.
Tanya_Chutkan_U.S._District_Court_Judge.jpg

When Joe Biden, Merrick Garland and Jack Smith’s BS case against President Trump came out last week we soon learned that the case was being assigned to a corrupt Obama judge.
There is a pattern of key cases always being assigned to corrupt Obama judges.

One of the many problems with Smith’s BS case against President Trump in DC is that corrupt Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan was assigned to the case.
7 Reasons to Stock Up on Long-Term Storage Premium Beef Right Away
The judge assigned Tuesday to handle special counsel Jack Smith’s 2020 election case against former President Donald Trump poured thousands of dollars into Barack Obama’s campaign coffers, records show.
Trump faced an indictment at the hands of a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday on four new charges related to his alleged efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election and incite the Jan. 6 riot on Capitol Hill in 2021. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will handle the case, was an Obama appointee in 2014 and contributed roughly $4,300 to his presidential campaign and victory fund combined between 2008 and 2012, according to campaign finance disclosures reviewed by the Washington Examiner.
Chutkan’s donations were made while she worked at Boies Schiller Flexner, a major law firm with over a dozen offices across the United States. She also in 2008 gave $250 to the campaign for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), though the Federal Election Commission database doesn’t list her backing any federal candidates after September 2012.
Obama Judge Tanya Chutkan has a horrible record. She oversaw Mueller gang’s corrupt Butina case.
In 2019, Judge Chutkan was given the Mueller gang’s case against Russian Martina Butina.
On July 18, 2018, the New York Times reported the following in an article entitled “Maria Butina, Suspected Secret Agent, Used Sex in Covert Plan, Prosecutors Say”
Maria Butina was sentenced to 18 months in prison after pleading guilty to conspiring to act as a foreign agent, admitting that she was part of a Russian effort to influence U.S. politics. But she was hardly a shadowy figure. Here’s what her online profile revealed.
For four years, a Russian accused of being a covert agent pursued a brazen effort to infiltrate conservative circles and influence powerful Republicans while she secretly was in contact with Russian intelligence operatives, a senior Russian official and a billionaire oligarch close to the Kremlin whom she called her “funder,” federal prosecutors said on Wednesday.
But this was a lie and setup.
Judge Chutkan told the DOJ to provide Brady material to the defense in the case. But the DOJ said there was nothing to provide. Butina’s attorney’s specifically mentions Patrick Byrne specifically as being connected to the DOJ and yet this information was never provided to the defense team.
Judge Chutkan apparently didn’t care. She also was apparently fine with Butina being placed in solitary confinement. Patrick Byrne came out and shared that he didn’t think Butina was a spy of any sort but this didn’t matter to the Chutkan court. Butina was sentenced to 18 months in prison.
Judge Chutkan also oversaw the Pakistani spy ring case and gave those spies no time in prison because they were connected to the Democrats.
In 2020, TGP reported that a Pakistani spy ring had infiltrated the House Dems and that this was one of the biggest scandals in US history. Yet, this entire egregious breach of security went unpunished, because Democrats were involved.

Democrat US Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz employed Pakistani IT staffers and brothers who were paid over $4 million dollars over the course of their employment even though they were accused of a cyber-security breach.
DOJ Prosecutor J.P. Cooney was the government official who made this odd plea deal.
TGP reported in February 2020 that:
In July 2018, criminal Pakistani IT worker, Imran Awan pleaded guilty to making a false statement on a loan/credit application.
The Feds subsequently shut down everything else related to the Pakistani House IT scandal.
In a hearing in August 2018, Tanya Chutkan, an Obama-appointed federal judge, gave Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s Pakistani IT staffer Imran Awan no jail time because he had already “suffered enough.” Awan only served 3 months of supervised release.
Imran Awan’s lawyer Chris Gowan, who is a former aide to Hillary Clinton, trashed president Trump and other Republicans in a letter after the case was closed.
Chutkan has been horrible in prosecuting Trump supporters from Jan 6 who walked in the Capitol, punishing them with some of most egregious sentences.
Newsweek was apparently happy to see Judge Chutkan over the case in DC. Their report ignores Chutkan’s obvious bias and horrible record. Instead, Newsweek shares:
Chutkan, who was appointed to the Washington, D.C., district court in 2014 by former President Barack Obama, was chosen to oversee Trump’s criminal trial. Among legal experts, her presence has been deemed a major blow to Trump and a major boon for the DOJ, given her recent history of handing out some of the harshest punishments to participants in the January 6, 2021, Capital riot. Additionally, she has already denied the Trump legal team’s request for an extended deadline to respond to a protective order that could limit what the former president and his legal team can share publicly about the case.
 

NO WAY I CAN GET A FAIR TRIAL, OR EVEN CLOSE TO A FAIR TRIAL, IN WASHINGTON, D.C. THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR THIS, BUT JUST ONE IS THAT I AM CALLING FOR A FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF THIS FILTHY AND CRIME RIDDEN EMBARRASSMENT TO OUR NATION, WHERE MURDERS HAVE JUST SHATTERED THE ALL TIME RECORD, OTHER VIOLENT CRIMES HAVE NEVER NEEN WORSE, AND TOURISTS HAVE FLED. THE FEDERAL TAKEOVER IS VERY UNPOPULAR WITH POTENTIAL AREA JURORS, BUT NECESSARY FOR SAFETY, GREATNESS, & FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE!
 

NO WAY I CAN GET A FAIR TRIAL, OR EVEN CLOSE TO A FAIR TRIAL, IN WASHINGTON, D.C. THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR THIS, BUT JUST ONE IS THAT I AM CALLING FOR A FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF THIS FILTHY AND CRIME RIDDEN EMBARRASSMENT TO OUR NATION, WHERE MURDERS HAVE JUST SHATTERED THE ALL TIME RECORD, OTHER VIOLENT CRIMES HAVE NEVER NEEN WORSE, AND TOURISTS HAVE FLED. THE FEDERAL TAKEOVER IS VERY UNPOPULAR WITH POTENTIAL AREA JURORS, BUT NECESSARY FOR SAFETY, GREATNESS, & FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE!


F25HV7jasAA9MDt
 
Last edited:
Playing all the classics like: - It’s a Hoax - Russia, Russia, Russia - Witch hunt And all 12,934 versions of: - It’s rigged, it’s all rigged All new tunes too such as: - I’m being indicted FOR YOU - Deranged Jack Smith And currently burning up the charts: - If you go after me, I’m coming after you

 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374

NO WAY I CAN GET A FAIR TRIAL, OR EVEN CLOSE TO A FAIR TRIAL, IN WASHINGTON, D.C. THERE ARE MANY REASONS FOR THIS, BUT JUST ONE IS THAT I AM CALLING FOR A FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF THIS FILTHY AND CRIME RIDDEN EMBARRASSMENT TO OUR NATION, WHERE MURDERS HAVE JUST SHATTERED THE ALL TIME RECORD, OTHER VIOLENT CRIMES HAVE NEVER NEEN WORSE, AND TOURISTS HAVE FLED. THE FEDERAL TAKEOVER IS VERY UNPOPULAR WITH POTENTIAL AREA JURORS, BUT NECESSARY FOR SAFETY, GREATNESS, & FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE!

And you think it's just fine that a candidate is saying he wants the Federal Government to "takeover" a US city? No problems with that all all?
 
And you think it's just fine that a candidate is saying he wants the Federal Government to "takeover" a US city? No problems with that all all?
That would require him caring about the country more than one man, but that's what it's come to. They want that one man to take a wrecking ball to the country while they sit back, eat popcorn and laugh about all the pain he causes to their fellow countrymen. Peace and unifying the country is very low priority. Retribution is the rallying cry!
 
  • Like
Reactions: yoshi121374
Playing all the classics like: - It’s a Hoax - Russia, Russia, Russia - Witch hunt And all 12,934 versions of: - It’s rigged, it’s all rigged All new tunes too such as: - I’m being indicted FOR YOU - Deranged Jack Smith And currently burning up the charts: - If you go after me, I’m coming after you

Who is Jo Jo Mc-ho ?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT