The vapors...or re: CNN legal (Spokane)

First of all. Take 10 deep breaths. It's obvious you have a case of the vapors.

Second, it's erred not errored, Moron

Third, list the ways in which "your kangaroo court" "errored". This should be entertaining. (Btw, who's "your" refer to?). It's not mine or "yours" numbnuts

In the meantime...

Do you actually understand what constitutes an opinion? Honig expressed an opinion*. And he's just one. Plenty of other more experienced, qualified and credible former prosecutors disagree.

The key facts (including clear cut documentation of the conspiracy scheme) as well as key testimony from actual tRump insiders, went essentially uncontested by the defense. That was their strategic choice. For better or worse. Btw, do you understand why they chose NOT to cross examine these witnesses? Take a guess.

The law and how it applied to the facts of the case were actually pretty clear. (At least to anyone who paid attention to the trial).

Oh, and by the way, tRump's own defense counsel approved the final jury pool. Were you not aware of that? Or did you just conveniently forget that crucial fact?

And again, that very same jury of 12 jurors reached a unanimous verdict of guilty on all 34 counts.

Now fair debate concerns whether or not the case should have been pursued in the first place. But here's a reality check. A grand jury found probable cause and handed down the indictment. Not the prosecutors.

More importantly, you can bet that due to the predictable political consequences of an aquittal, prosecutors would not have even touched this case unless they felt extremely confident of a grand jury indictment, followed by a successful jury trial.

Can you imagine the verbal tRump & Magaloid diarrhea this country would have had to endure if he had been acquitted?

Finally, the system allows an appeal should he choose to pursue that option.

So you can unwad your Mango colored Maga panties now.

* Full article here...

post id: 7760141464



best of [?]