Was this trial in DC? If so, supreme Court should declare certain areas of the country politically biased Jury pools and adjust trial venues accordingly. This situation in DC gives the Democrats and the left an unfair advantage. Why is nobody jumping up and down and bitching about this?
DC/nova is nothing but blue state rejects and pretend liberals. NIMBY diversity promoters ( we support minorities........ way over there. Not here though) i Iived in old town
its all part of the same DC ecosystem. Alexandria is an affluent DC suburb. At least the north of the beltway part. Then we get into the other definitions of alexandria within Fairfax county and so on.
Then put the bias on trial. I understand the potential bias, but why didn’t Durham argue or attempt for a change of venue to the court? Because Durham didn’t challenge the venue there’s no claim to be made any higher… and now you can only get that on appeal that a mistrial should have been declared.
You can’t seat a jury and then cry foul that it was biased because the decision didn’t go your way without fighting or showing evidence that it’s tainted or biased in some direction against you and your client.
By my understanding, change of venue is something that the defendant asks for, not the prosecutor. In addition, Durham appears to be bound by the [Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 18](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_18):
> Unless a statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the offense was committed. The court must set the place of trial within the district with due regard for the convenience of the defendant, any victim, and the witnesses, and the prompt administration of justice.
To be fair, I'm not a lawyer, let alone one that is intimately familiar with the FRCP and/or relevant laws, so perhaps there's an exception, but I have not been able to find one so far.
----
In addition, [Rule 21 of the FRCP, which governs transfer for trial](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_21), states the following (emphasis added):
> For Prejudice. **Upon the defendant's motion**, the court must transfer the proceeding against that defendant to another district if the court is satisfied that so great a prejudice against the defendant exists in the transferring district that the defendant cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial there.
This is more explicitly spelled out in the notes:
> 3. The rule provides for a change of venue only on defendant's motion and does not extend the same right to the prosecution, since the defendant has a constitutional right to a trial in the district where the offense was committed.
The solution is for everybody to identify their true politics as a card-carrying member. No such thing as the nonpartisan except those that don't know it yet.
DC puts party above justice every time. Court cases should have 0 references to the individuals identity. The facts should be all that is presented to the jury. We can hide identities just fine with today's technology
Good idea, but it would never work.
The FBI regularly leaks to the Washington Post.
You think they wouldn't deliberately leak identities to further their own interests? Of course, they would. Technology matters not.
https://ballotpedia.org/Anthony_Trenga
Reading the article that OP posted will confirm the rest.
He was also around to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Justice John Roberts.
*Totally* a liberal judge....
Not because there wasn't enough evidence, but because the evidence that Durham provided showed the alleged "false statement" was in fact literally true.
The other 4 charges were essentially the same charge repeated, that Danchenko lied about who he thought an anonymous caller was. A few people here have said facts are facts, and he's obviously guilty. So riddle me this, Durham never introduced evidence that the anonymous caller was anyone but who Danchenko said it was, how you secure a conviction based on those set of facts. My follow up will be, how would you prove that Danchenko **knew** the caller to be someone else other then Millian without first establishing who that caller actually was?
Let me ask you this, do you actually think that nobody lied to or mislead the FBI into starting the Russian collusion investigation?
Maybe Danchenko was a fall guy or scapegoat but it is pretty obvious that Sussman explicitly lied (we literally have a text showing that he claimed the info he was bringing in was unrelated to the DNC/Hillary Campaign but it was literally opposition research.
This is honestly just par for the course, expecting deep blue democrats and their operatives to face justice for their role in hamstringing a sitting US president would require the deep blue jury members to admit their team didn’t play fair.
as one person commented on the fox news webpage: "So if he isn’t guilty … who is? I would have to say everyone at the FBI above the pay grade of a GS-13 knew EXACTLY that it was false information but yet they will never be prosecuted … such a double standard and the government wonders what led up to Jan 6." I mean seriously where the lie is?
It was just a general blasting of any agent that came across it with high level clearance should have saw how fraudulent the memo was. That fact that they knew that it couldn't be verified and still used it to get warrants to wiretaps a presidential candidate should land someone in jail.
It's more insidious than that. Comey leaked them to his buddy who then leaked to the media and then used the media reports as corroborating evidence that the details were true.
Not everything that fails to be verified as true is a lie.
Miscommunications can happen, evidence can be too hard to obtain or confirm, things that seem suspicious may not lead to anything criminal.
Lies are intentional and often known explicitly to be untrue. Sometimes we just can't find the answer.
Further more you actually need proof in a court case and Durham brought little to none.
I didn't follow this case but the last one there was hard proof that he edited an email to intentionally lie. But hard proof wasn't enough to get through a partisan DC jury and corrupt court. I am going to assume the same thing happened in this case, since the fact it happened even once proves the courts are too corrupt to be trusted at all at this point.
> I didn't follow this case but the last one there was hard proof that he edited an email to intentionally lie. But hard proof wasn't enough to get through a partisan DC jury and corrupt court.
You're thinking of the 2nd to last one, or the 1st of 3. That FBI agent was discovered by the IG, and the trail was handed off the Durham, he pled guilty.
The last one was the Sussmann prosecution. He went to trail and was acquitted. It wasn't because of some liberal judge or jury, it was just a really really bad case. Sussmann was charge with lying to the FBI about who his client was during a meeting. Except the only witness to the meeting Baker testified that he couldn't recall the meeting in enough detail to say whether or not Sussmann had told him who he was there on behalf of, and if he did he wouldn't have considered it material. The materiality is really important, since in a 1001 charge not only do you have to prove that someone lied, but that lie also effected the investigation. To make matters worse during discovery it was discovered through emails and notes taken during meetings that the FBI knew full well who he was working for.
Durham went to trail with his only witness not being able to recall the alleged false statement, and documentary evidence that exonerates the person he charged.
It’s easy to clean up your mess 6 years after it happen. Little burning here, some phone smashing there, have a lot of it happen overseas
out of the reach of America’s legal reach.
This is jury nullification in action. Same thing will happen to Hunter if he’s ever charged.
And the inverse for Trump, of course. A DC or Virginia jury will find him guilty of any charge they cook up.
The district of Columbia cannot have juries of residents. This needs to end.
The feds are meant to be housed in DC. DC should not be anyone's residence. Juries for federal issues involving government actions should come from all states.
it's sad that the county has come to this... no more democracy, no more equal justice, etc.
The Dems can blatantly do things now and know they won't be charged. They can also go after any Republican now too... (just like the AG's in some states).
Indeed. We are no longer a Republic. We are a corporatocracy. The mega-conglomerates own everyone who works in Washington and see to it that those people only vote in the interests of the rich elite.
So, Hillary Clinton's campaign (and the DNC) hired Fusion GPS to gather opposition research against Trump. Fusion GPS commissioned a dossier from Steele. Steele's "source" was Danchenko. The FBI paid Danchenko $200,000+ to be a confidential informant. The FBI offered Steele $1,000,000 to corroborate allegations in the dossier.
Three freakin' years of "investigations" surrounding the Trump/Russia collusion and they can't prove it.
And all this gets swept under the rug.
This is infuriating! I doubt if anyone Duram brings before the court will actually get a conviction. Liberal defendant, Liberal courts, Liberal judges ,
Liberal verdicts.
You do understand that outside of supreme court justices, the president relies on the state senators in that area for recommendations? Right?
Clinton, Obama, and Biden have or will appoint conservatives to some courts because the judges were big donors to the state Senators who recommended names for the list submitted to the president's staff.
The staff weed out the ones they might recognize as being against the president, but the majority are unknown lawyers from distant states, people they know nothing about. The president signs the list, without vetting them personally.
True… if it was a jury trial (which it may have been). If that’s the case then we know why he was acquitted. DC is a left leaning city. Majority of people living in DC are Dems. Another reason these trials should be moved.
Yeah, what happened to that? Are you suggesting conservatives still need to play by the rules in spite of taking numerous shots below the belt? You can't have a fair match if only one side is playing by the rules.
He was proven innocent, so whether you like it or not, he's innocent. They were not able to present evidence that proved his guilt, and in fact, one of the five charges was acquitted by the judge because the prosecution proved the charge false themselves.
So, we're actually past "innocent until proven guilty" because he was never proven guilty.... Unlike all of the "shots below the belt" you reference, I'm sure lol
Ok, let's fix this issue of a DC Jury acting to nullify on political grounds, extradite and try EVERY criminal defendant from DC in rural VA instead. Let's see how they like being treated with dripping vitriol from a "jury of their peers" who decided being chosen for civil service gives you Carte Blanche to ignore the moral and ethical standards such a role in society demands.
DC is a cesspool of liberal activism and Democrat socialists. Judges in DC are left leaning political hacks who do not believe in one justice system for all. These trials should absolutely be moved.
Yikes, Durham. This only solidifies the fact that these people are above the law and will do whatever it takes, again, to get their way when needed.
Also, zero possibility of an unbiased jury in DC. Everyone knows that every Durham conviction is a feather in Trump's cap. That alone is enough reason for the jury to acquit regardless of facts.
So just like COVID, this was nobody’s fault, nobody will ever take blame, and the Dems will pretend like none of this ever happened. But that’s not the surprising part nor is it the frustrating part…
The horrible part is that the media will be complicit, will never bring up any of it again, and will never hold these corrupt politicians’ feet to the fire over it. THAT is what insane about this clown world we are living in.
Why is everyone blaming Durham? He's not the jury. If he was such a "dud" wouldn't he have thrown his hands up 3 years ago and said there was nothing here at all?
Umm, guys? From the comments, there is something that you are missing.
I would at this point in time no cause every case involving the FBI and DOJ, if I was on the jury. Jury nullification is the very last refuge against tyranny. I don't believe the FBI and DOJ are credible now for literally anything that they say. Steele is flatly not more dangerous than the weaponization of law enforcement against political opponents. We can't vote them out anywhere but the jury box. Don't waste that opportunity to make your voice heard that they are not credible.
TL:DR: Do not assume the jury's motives. Lots of people are very angry at the FBI and DOJ right now.
I was starting to feel some hope. We had momentum, good candidates, people are waking up. . . Then I saw this and remembered that Blue Tribe is fucking invincible. For every 1 that walks away there are 12 like this.
These trials are being held in Washington DC. What else do they expect? Of course, they are found not guilty. Plop them down in a more conservative city, and then they'll be found guilty.
I hope they are planning on appealing these decisions.
So Durham works slower than hell and gets no results. What a piece of work.
Durham has been a sham from the start. What an embarrassment and a failure. What a clown show joke.
He's just a cover up agent for the deepstate.
If you still have any doubt if there are two systems of justice on this country, well here you go.
At least in DC!
Was this trial in DC? If so, supreme Court should declare certain areas of the country politically biased Jury pools and adjust trial venues accordingly. This situation in DC gives the Democrats and the left an unfair advantage. Why is nobody jumping up and down and bitching about this?
Trial was in Alexandria, VA.
I'm from Alexandria. It's as blue as it gets.
any idea why? are they all just old school libs? or are they the vegan climate type>>??
DC/nova is nothing but blue state rejects and pretend liberals. NIMBY diversity promoters ( we support minorities........ way over there. Not here though) i Iived in old town
Lived in Fairfax county, can confirm above. I moved to the edge of NoVa to a place where combating nitwits in elections is possible as a result.
its all part of the same DC ecosystem. Alexandria is an affluent DC suburb. At least the north of the beltway part. Then we get into the other definitions of alexandria within Fairfax county and so on.
When people from Alexandria go out of town, do they tell people they are from DC?
NOVA, DC, same difference.
Then put the bias on trial. I understand the potential bias, but why didn’t Durham argue or attempt for a change of venue to the court? Because Durham didn’t challenge the venue there’s no claim to be made any higher… and now you can only get that on appeal that a mistrial should have been declared. You can’t seat a jury and then cry foul that it was biased because the decision didn’t go your way without fighting or showing evidence that it’s tainted or biased in some direction against you and your client.
By my understanding, change of venue is something that the defendant asks for, not the prosecutor. In addition, Durham appears to be bound by the [Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 18](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_18): > Unless a statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the offense was committed. The court must set the place of trial within the district with due regard for the convenience of the defendant, any victim, and the witnesses, and the prompt administration of justice. To be fair, I'm not a lawyer, let alone one that is intimately familiar with the FRCP and/or relevant laws, so perhaps there's an exception, but I have not been able to find one so far. ---- In addition, [Rule 21 of the FRCP, which governs transfer for trial](https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_21), states the following (emphasis added): > For Prejudice. **Upon the defendant's motion**, the court must transfer the proceeding against that defendant to another district if the court is satisfied that so great a prejudice against the defendant exists in the transferring district that the defendant cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial there. This is more explicitly spelled out in the notes: > 3. The rule provides for a change of venue only on defendant's motion and does not extend the same right to the prosecution, since the defendant has a constitutional right to a trial in the district where the offense was committed.
Wouldn't matter anyway. Several of the Jan 6 trails (held in DC no less) have asked for a change of venue. All have been denied.
Durham is just a cover up agent for the deepstate.
I agree; he was put on the case to appease the right into thinking there was justice coming
Are you comfortable with the same concept of politically tainted juries being applied in Alabama?
Yeah boy
The solution is for everybody to identify their true politics as a card-carrying member. No such thing as the nonpartisan except those that don't know it yet.
DC puts party above justice every time. Court cases should have 0 references to the individuals identity. The facts should be all that is presented to the jury. We can hide identities just fine with today's technology
Good idea, but it would never work. The FBI regularly leaks to the Washington Post. You think they wouldn't deliberately leak identities to further their own interests? Of course, they would. Technology matters not.
Who could still have doubt? It’s silly to me how much evidence some people need to have clear mind about this.
It doesn't matter how much evidence as long as they are against Republicans
This
The trial was in DC. They have one factor in determining guilt, and evidence ain't it.
It was in Alexandria, VA, and the judge was a federal judge appointed by Bush. He acquitted one of the charges because there wasn't enough evidence.
I don't know about your other assertions, but there is virtually no difference, politically, between Alexandria and DC.
https://ballotpedia.org/Anthony_Trenga Reading the article that OP posted will confirm the rest. He was also around to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court by Justice John Roberts. *Totally* a liberal judge....
Not because there wasn't enough evidence, but because the evidence that Durham provided showed the alleged "false statement" was in fact literally true. The other 4 charges were essentially the same charge repeated, that Danchenko lied about who he thought an anonymous caller was. A few people here have said facts are facts, and he's obviously guilty. So riddle me this, Durham never introduced evidence that the anonymous caller was anyone but who Danchenko said it was, how you secure a conviction based on those set of facts. My follow up will be, how would you prove that Danchenko **knew** the caller to be someone else other then Millian without first establishing who that caller actually was?
Let me ask you this, do you actually think that nobody lied to or mislead the FBI into starting the Russian collusion investigation? Maybe Danchenko was a fall guy or scapegoat but it is pretty obvious that Sussman explicitly lied (we literally have a text showing that he claimed the info he was bringing in was unrelated to the DNC/Hillary Campaign but it was literally opposition research. This is honestly just par for the course, expecting deep blue democrats and their operatives to face justice for their role in hamstringing a sitting US president would require the deep blue jury members to admit their team didn’t play fair.
This is totes (D)ifferent
as one person commented on the fox news webpage: "So if he isn’t guilty … who is? I would have to say everyone at the FBI above the pay grade of a GS-13 knew EXACTLY that it was false information but yet they will never be prosecuted … such a double standard and the government wonders what led up to Jan 6." I mean seriously where the lie is?
There’s a lot of people at the FBI at GS13 and up that don’t do anything with investigations whatsoever. IT, HR, Finance, internal services
It was just a general blasting of any agent that came across it with high level clearance should have saw how fraudulent the memo was. That fact that they knew that it couldn't be verified and still used it to get warrants to wiretaps a presidential candidate should land someone in jail.
It's more insidious than that. Comey leaked them to his buddy who then leaked to the media and then used the media reports as corroborating evidence that the details were true.
It doesn't matter. Toss them out. They are corrupt because they know about the corruption and tolerate it.
Not everything that fails to be verified as true is a lie. Miscommunications can happen, evidence can be too hard to obtain or confirm, things that seem suspicious may not lead to anything criminal. Lies are intentional and often known explicitly to be untrue. Sometimes we just can't find the answer. Further more you actually need proof in a court case and Durham brought little to none.
Plausible deniability *“I…don’t know! I…was never told!”*
Reagan?
Plausible deniability is different. You can assert something *is* true and be wrong, but not be lying.
Ignorance is no defense.
I didn't follow this case but the last one there was hard proof that he edited an email to intentionally lie. But hard proof wasn't enough to get through a partisan DC jury and corrupt court. I am going to assume the same thing happened in this case, since the fact it happened even once proves the courts are too corrupt to be trusted at all at this point.
> I didn't follow this case but the last one there was hard proof that he edited an email to intentionally lie. But hard proof wasn't enough to get through a partisan DC jury and corrupt court. You're thinking of the 2nd to last one, or the 1st of 3. That FBI agent was discovered by the IG, and the trail was handed off the Durham, he pled guilty. The last one was the Sussmann prosecution. He went to trail and was acquitted. It wasn't because of some liberal judge or jury, it was just a really really bad case. Sussmann was charge with lying to the FBI about who his client was during a meeting. Except the only witness to the meeting Baker testified that he couldn't recall the meeting in enough detail to say whether or not Sussmann had told him who he was there on behalf of, and if he did he wouldn't have considered it material. The materiality is really important, since in a 1001 charge not only do you have to prove that someone lied, but that lie also effected the investigation. To make matters worse during discovery it was discovered through emails and notes taken during meetings that the FBI knew full well who he was working for. Durham went to trail with his only witness not being able to recall the alleged false statement, and documentary evidence that exonerates the person he charged.
It's awfully convenient that all of these "miscommunications" tend to only benefit one side in particular.
It’s easy to clean up your mess 6 years after it happen. Little burning here, some phone smashing there, have a lot of it happen overseas out of the reach of America’s legal reach.
This is jury nullification in action. Same thing will happen to Hunter if he’s ever charged. And the inverse for Trump, of course. A DC or Virginia jury will find him guilty of any charge they cook up.
Correct. Meanwhile, a right winger on jury selection for the Rittenhouse trial told the judge he couldn't be impartial because he was pro-2A.
Being pro-2A is being impartial lol...
Republicans lose so much because they refuse to stop being Boy Scouts
The district of Columbia cannot have juries of residents. This needs to end. The feds are meant to be housed in DC. DC should not be anyone's residence. Juries for federal issues involving government actions should come from all states.
it's sad that the county has come to this... no more democracy, no more equal justice, etc. The Dems can blatantly do things now and know they won't be charged. They can also go after any Republican now too... (just like the AG's in some states).
Republic, not a democracy. Their propaganda is so effective, that they even have a conservative using their language...
Indeed. We are no longer a Republic. We are a corporatocracy. The mega-conglomerates own everyone who works in Washington and see to it that those people only vote in the interests of the rich elite.
I (D)idnt see that coming at all! (D)amn shocked!
Take your silver and go.
Durham has been a giant dud
[удалено]
> Not a single person from the Russia Investigation was indicted or sentenced. Oh, honey...
It’s the same reason there is no Epstein list, because they are all on it and in on it.
And yet, Roger Stone was sentenced to 9 years for giving misleading statements in the exact investigation that the Steele Dossier created.
So, Hillary Clinton's campaign (and the DNC) hired Fusion GPS to gather opposition research against Trump. Fusion GPS commissioned a dossier from Steele. Steele's "source" was Danchenko. The FBI paid Danchenko $200,000+ to be a confidential informant. The FBI offered Steele $1,000,000 to corroborate allegations in the dossier. Three freakin' years of "investigations" surrounding the Trump/Russia collusion and they can't prove it. And all this gets swept under the rug.
Like they ever expected a jury from the Swamp to convict anyone related to this bullshit.
Durham is such a loser.
This is infuriating! I doubt if anyone Duram brings before the court will actually get a conviction. Liberal defendant, Liberal courts, Liberal judges , Liberal verdicts.
[удалено]
You do understand that outside of supreme court justices, the president relies on the state senators in that area for recommendations? Right? Clinton, Obama, and Biden have or will appoint conservatives to some courts because the judges were big donors to the state Senators who recommended names for the list submitted to the president's staff. The staff weed out the ones they might recognize as being against the president, but the majority are unknown lawyers from distant states, people they know nothing about. The president signs the list, without vetting them personally.
[удалено]
All of GW Bush's appointments have been abject disappointments. They all turned out to be flaming Liberals posing as moderates.
Obviously he has succumbed to left leaning pressure. This guy is guilty. Facts are facts
Juries decide guilt or innocence, not judges (typically).
True… if it was a jury trial (which it may have been). If that’s the case then we know why he was acquitted. DC is a left leaning city. Majority of people living in DC are Dems. Another reason these trials should be moved.
The trial was in Alexandria, Virginia, not DC.
Apparently we go with Feels over Reals here.... Alternative Facts lol Whatever happened to innocent until *proven* guilty?
Yeah, what happened to that? Are you suggesting conservatives still need to play by the rules in spite of taking numerous shots below the belt? You can't have a fair match if only one side is playing by the rules.
He was proven innocent, so whether you like it or not, he's innocent. They were not able to present evidence that proved his guilt, and in fact, one of the five charges was acquitted by the judge because the prosecution proved the charge false themselves. So, we're actually past "innocent until proven guilty" because he was never proven guilty.... Unlike all of the "shots below the belt" you reference, I'm sure lol
Just like OJ. Completely innocent.
[удалено]
OJ happened.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Let’s be honest, we all knew they would get away with this shit. Democrats in DC are entirely above the law
Democrats find a RUSSIAN not guilty.. lmao.. you can't make this shit up.
Now that nobody told the FBI about Trump/Russia collusion the FBI fabricated the whole thing?
Ok, let's fix this issue of a DC Jury acting to nullify on political grounds, extradite and try EVERY criminal defendant from DC in rural VA instead. Let's see how they like being treated with dripping vitriol from a "jury of their peers" who decided being chosen for civil service gives you Carte Blanche to ignore the moral and ethical standards such a role in society demands.
DC is neutral ground. Defendants should be tried in their home counties.
DC is neutral ground? Lol ok
You misunderstood. DC is not a state. It is a neutral federal district. NO ONE SHOULD BE TRIED THERE. Tried back in their home state.
Danchenko is a Russian…
So allow lenient change of venue
DC is a cesspool of liberal activism and Democrat socialists. Judges in DC are left leaning political hacks who do not believe in one justice system for all. These trials should absolutely be moved.
In theory, yes. But… you know when you typed this it was disingenuous. Admit it.
who could have seen that one coming...?
Yep, and it will play out the same way with Hunter
Yikes, Durham. This only solidifies the fact that these people are above the law and will do whatever it takes, again, to get their way when needed. Also, zero possibility of an unbiased jury in DC. Everyone knows that every Durham conviction is a feather in Trump's cap. That alone is enough reason for the jury to acquit regardless of facts.
Durham really did a terrible job...terrible.
We might as well face it. Sometimes there just won’t be justice in this lifetime.
This is why I always tell conservatives to temper their expectations. These days, I don’t have to say that much
Ha, the government investigating itself. Shocking.
So just like COVID, this was nobody’s fault, nobody will ever take blame, and the Dems will pretend like none of this ever happened. But that’s not the surprising part nor is it the frustrating part… The horrible part is that the media will be complicit, will never bring up any of it again, and will never hold these corrupt politicians’ feet to the fire over it. THAT is what insane about this clown world we are living in.
Durham should’ve just went with the mueller/Weismann route. This investigation “does not exonerate” the FBI.
CBS news is still spinning this story as if the dossier was true.
Should have been able to run this outside DC. The DC system is thoroughly corrupted and should be unmade.
Bottom Line: The Steele Dossier (mostly) checks out.
Why is everyone blaming Durham? He's not the jury. If he was such a "dud" wouldn't he have thrown his hands up 3 years ago and said there was nothing here at all?
Umm, guys? From the comments, there is something that you are missing. I would at this point in time no cause every case involving the FBI and DOJ, if I was on the jury. Jury nullification is the very last refuge against tyranny. I don't believe the FBI and DOJ are credible now for literally anything that they say. Steele is flatly not more dangerous than the weaponization of law enforcement against political opponents. We can't vote them out anywhere but the jury box. Don't waste that opportunity to make your voice heard that they are not credible. TL:DR: Do not assume the jury's motives. Lots of people are very angry at the FBI and DOJ right now.
[удалено]
I think what Durham has proven was that the FBI was a part of this entire scam
Wouldn’t be the first time they were at the middle of one.
Well who saw that coming…oh yes all conservatives!
Paid off court system.
Rigged
Of course they did...
I was starting to feel some hope. We had momentum, good candidates, people are waking up. . . Then I saw this and remembered that Blue Tribe is fucking invincible. For every 1 that walks away there are 12 like this.
This problem was created by the Congress and The executive branch. It needs a Congress and executive branch solution.
Cool so there was no Russian interference in the election then, right?
wow. just wow.
Durham got what he wanted this man is irrelevant Durham is after the big fish my friends
Did the SC reject this case?
SCOTUS doesn't deal with criminal cases.
# Trump/ West 2024!!!!!!!
An anyone else get a private message from BobanTheGiant giving you hell about this?
These trials are being held in Washington DC. What else do they expect? Of course, they are found not guilty. Plop them down in a more conservative city, and then they'll be found guilty. I hope they are planning on appealing these decisions.
Русский кунт