The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Wildest part of SCOTUS immunity opinion is that indictments were never discussed
| https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 07/01/24 |
| Hollywood Hogan | 07/01/24 |
| https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK | 07/01/24 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: July 1st, 2024 5:10 PM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK Not on xo, not anywhere. Everyone discussed indictments, but not these ones. The indictments at issue in this case mirror the Georgia indictments, which allowed the media to make reference to them without being specific about the fact that they weren't brought by Georgia, they were brought by Jack Smith. Moreover, Jack Smith filed these indictments two weeks after he announced the Mar-a-lago charges, so they barely got reported at all.
Here's one of the better articles I could find:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-indicted-jan-6-grand-jury-2020-election-rcna95199 |
 |
Date: July 1st, 2024 5:39 PM Author: Hollywood Hogan What? Everyone knew about this. They just haven't been taken seriously because they won't go to trial until after the election and the legal theories are bullshit. It has always been reported that there were 4 seperate cases:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-indictments-details-guide-charges-trial-dates-people-case/ |
|
Date: July 1st, 2024 6:10 PM Author: https://imgur.com/a/o2g8xYK Reporting on these indictments is scant, <0.01% the level of reporting on Mar-a-lago charges. Do a Google search for "Trump election charges" and you'll only get hits that describe the Georgia and New York cases. Do a search on "Trump federal prosecution" and all the Google results will be about the Mar-a-lago shit. Even the link you posted talks about a bunch of unrelated prosecutions.
That's a fact, glowie. Eat shit. |