I consider your overall argument that Trump had been under investigation for January 6th from the very start to be thoroughly refuted at this point
Nope
UsernameHere
joined 8 months ago
Here is your claim:
Trump was not a target of the DOJ investigation until *after* Jack Smith was brought on board
Here is what even your sources states:
the investigation had expanded to examine Donald Trump's inner circle, with the Justice Department impaneling several federal grand juries to investigate to investigate the attempts to overturn the election. Later in 2022, a special counsel (Jack Smith) was appointed.
Don’t you read your own sources?
This is obvious gaslighting
The immediate part is the section you left off:
to continue two investigations initiated by the Justice Department (DOJ) regarding former U.S. President Donald Trump
Almost all of the folks convicted stated otherwise.
Their statements don’t prove Trumps intent in court. Especially to a judge who favors Trump.
Doesn't sound any more difficult than a nationwide manhunt for someone who defended our nation against a mass murderer... And they seemed to be able to get that wrapped up pretty quickly.
Luigi wasn’t the president. I’m surprised that needs to be explained to you.
I would have loved, had they tried. Garland, however, did not want to launch a case against a fellow neocon.
They did try. Trump blocked the case using his judge. This is the part you’re ignoring for your conspiracy theory.
It must suck to be the AG... Or, perhaps, Biden should have appointed someone up tot he task. Meanwhile, they were investigating thousands of insurrectionists, convicted a bunch, who all stated they were following Trump's orders.
He was up to the task. Trump blocked the case using his judge. This is the part you’re ignoring for your conspiracy theory.
The other insurrectionists didn’t own any judges to block their cases until they became president again.
Yes, I would have LOVED to see him even try to do so... However, he did not want to sic the hounds on a neocon darling like Trump.
They tried to prosecute. Trump blocked the case using his judge. This is the part you’re ignoring for your conspiracy theory.
What exactly are you referring to that was publically broadcasted?
Because the argument that Trump used was that he didn’t incite the insurrection and that the people who stormed the capital acted on their own.
So to prosecute Trump, the DOJ had to prove beyond doubt that Trump intentionally incited the insurrection.
Not prove it to you or me. But prove it to a Judge appointed by Trump.
While managing the thousands of cases and investigations against the insurrectionists.
Proving intent beyond a doubt to a Trump appointed judge would require hard evidence and could still be ruled in favor of Trump by the judge he appointed.
I provided a source for my information. It comes with citations.
What’s the source for your claims?
Garland started multiple investigations. And did all the things necessary to prosecute a President. Trump delayed that prosecution using his judges.
Then you claim Garland didn’t start the investigations or try to prosecute Trump. And you blame Trumps enemies for Trumps actions.
Garland can’t just lock up the president of the US without due process.
Trump blocked that due process and has sworn revenge on people like Garland.
Now you’re trying to blame Garland for Trumps actions But why? To manufacture consent for Trumps revenge? To vilify Trumps enemies?
Jack Smith was brought in to continue two investigations on Trump that had already been started long before.
Again you’re spreading misinformation.
So you don’t have any proof of your conspiracy theory?
view more: next ›
It’s easier to block the truth than accept it.