There is no First Amendment right to overturn an election

[Tinkerpeach]

Smith is subject to the exact same rules Durham was subject to.
Smith is certainly moving much faster than Durham did when it comes to indictments.


The standard for a special counsel is to prevent an appearance of a conflict of interest. Trump is running for the office of President. The President is head of the executive branch. The DoJ is part of the executive branch.
The appointment of a special counsel is to prevent the appearance of the current President being the one indicting Trump.

I know why they are appointed.

It's a broad interpretation.

The fact that Biden's DOJ was investigating a former president from the opposite party is more than enough reason to appoint special council to avoid a conflict of interest.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

There is NO conflict in Garlands DoJ prosecuting citizen Trump who is not running for office again.

There is a conflict in Garland's DoJ prosecuting POTUS opponent Trump running against Garland's boss, Biden, when Garland stands to personally benefit if Biden wins again.

That Tinker says ''who cares Garland should not care about and should have just done that regardless' is just the stupidity that Tink shows constantly. Tink is not Garland's boss, nor does Garland care that Tink is fine with the issue of conflict.

That is Garlands decision to make and it is well founded practice to not sit over a trial or investigation where you are conflicted and to not recuse if you are not conflicted.

Bullshit.

Trump is still a citizen.

Besides, Trump has been very politically active since he lost the election, that is more than enough reason to hire a special council.

 

[QP!]

Bullshit.

Trump is still a citizen.

Besides, Trump has been very politically active since he lost the election, that is more than enough reason to hire a special council.

Not bullshit.

it is just not your usual stupidity.

Trump is still a citizen correct. But more importantly is that he became a direct rival for POTUS running against Garland's boss. The first thing does not matter. The second really does.

Being politically active is meaningless. Lots of politicians get arrested and charged by DoJ all the time. So political activity is not the factor that matters.

Again. be less stupid.

Garland stood to gain a direct benefit by helping Biden beat Trump, so he could maintain his job and help his boss.

That conflict of interest only came into existence when Trump declared his run.

 

[QP!]

I know why they are appointed.

It's a broad interpretation.

The fact that Biden's DOJ was investigating a former president from the opposite party is more than enough reason to appoint special council to avoid a conflict of interest.

Why?

What is the conflict when Garland nor Biden have nothing to gain in a citizen Trump persecution where Trump is never running again?

Explain very specifically what you think the 'conflict' is?

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Why?

What is the conflict when Garland nor Biden have nothing to gain in a citizen Trump persecution where Trump is never running again?

Explain very specifically what you think the 'conflict' is?

Because he was very active politically and speaking out against Biden's administration.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Not bullshit.

it is just not your usual stupidity.

Trump is still a citizen correct. But more importantly is that he became a direct rival for POTUS running against Garland's boss. The first thing does not matter. The second really does.

Being politically active is meaningless. Lots of politicians get arrested and charged by DoJ all the time. So political activity is not the factor that matters.

Again. be less stupid.

Garland stood to gain a direct benefit by helping Biden beat Trump, so he could maintain his job and help his boss.

That conflict of interest only came into existence when Trump declared his run.

Trump was endorsing candidates all around the nation which would have been a direct threat to Biden's hold on congress.

How do you not consider that a direct threat to Biden's power?

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

No there are more than one but they all rely on the same argument.

There are 31 charges relating to either conspiracy or obstruction in just the Florida case, or is it the Washington case, I get them confused because there are so many now.

Oh, it's the Washington case that's right.

Here is the problem with Smith's case.

They are filed under the Espionage Act which is not a broad law, it's very specific.

This means his burden of proof will be even higher.

However, if he filed the charges under anything else he knew they wouldn't stick, it's a long shot but the only shot he had.

ROFLMAO.
You are confused? That's the understatement of the year.
There are 2 indictment documents. They are easy to tell apart because they cover crimes in different parts of the country.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Trump was endorsing candidates all around the nation which would have been a direct threat to Biden's hold on congress.

How do you not consider that a direct threat to Biden's power?

Considering Trump was mostly endorsing candidate in safe districts and the candidates he endorsed not in safe areas were losing, what was the threat to Biden's power.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Considering Trump was mostly endorsing candidate in safe districts and the candidates he endorsed not in safe areas were losing, what was the threat to Biden's power.

Biden wouldn't have known that prior to the election hence the need for special council to avoid conflict.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Biden wouldn't have known that prior to the election hence the need for special council to avoid conflict.

ROFLMAO. You have to be one of the silliest people.
Trump's tendency to select people heavily favored to win was well known. Even Biden isn't that clueless.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

ROFLMAO. You have to be one of the silliest people.
Trump's tendency to select people heavily favored to win was well known. Even Biden isn't that clueless.

Is that why so many of his endorsements lost?

 

[Into the Night]

The officials testified to it. No informants are needed. Pence is coming clean too. Trump did his crimes on the phone and repeated them at rallies. No secret info is required when you brazenly commit crimes in public and brag about them. His ex-lawyer ,Ty Cobb said openly about what he was told to do and what Trump did. The charges are absolutely sure things.

No crime, Nordbutt. It is not a crime to make a phone call or to hold a rally.

 

[Into the Night]

No shit Sherlock

Apparently YOU never figured it out!

You must have never admitted exactly what the evidence shows

No crime.

Trump is totally fucked

No crime.

He told Pense he was too honest when pense refused the fake electors plan

No such thing as a 'fake elector'. There is no 'fake elector plan'. Buzzword fallacies.

Pense told him it was not legal

Pence violated the Constitution.

Trump merely replied
You are too honest
That is the testimony of Vice Presidents testimony under oath

A testimony of buzzwords??

Every fucking witness to be called in this case are top tier republicans

What is the crime?

The evidence mainly comes from their phones, texts, emails and personal testimony

Evidence of what?

Trump is utterly fucked

No crime.

He’s going to die in prison unless he dies before the cell door clangs shut

No crime.

 

[Into the Night]

I just told you

Blatant lie. You never specified any crime.

 

[Into the Night]

Why do you believe he can’t do it? You don’t believe he thought about what he can prove before getting the indictments?

You do know most of the evidence is yet to be disclosed. Why do you assume he can’t prove what he alleges?

Jack Smith doesn't care what he can prove. He's just throwing spaghetti at the walls to see if it sticks.
No crime.

 

[Into the Night]

Informed Americans know that experienced prosecutors don't press charges unless they know they can win. After 3 years of investigation, I'm betting that Jack has all of his ducks in a row. LOL

They do it all the time, Sock.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Is that why so many of his endorsements lost?

Read slowly. Mouth the words if you need to. If you don't understand a word, ask someone.

Considering Trump was mostly endorsing candidate in safe districts and the candidates he endorsed not in safe areas were losing, what was the threat to Biden's power.

 

[Into the Night]

What evidence do you have that it’s purely political.

RQAA. That question has already been answered by several people. Stop being mindless.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

They do it all the time, Sock.

Bulverism. Bigotry.

Bulverism fallacy. Bigotry.

Bulverism. Bigotry. False Authority.

bigotry, bulverism,

 

[Dutch Uncle]

RQAA....mindless.

RQAA

RQAA

RQAA.