It should not be up to the government if it’s televised or not.
Public trials can be shown to the public by American entrepreneurs in any way they want. If the court can’t allow too many cameras, then it’s up to them to designate some cameras which everyone can utilize. And even that’s getting.. complicated. But then pointing, public trials are public for anyone to see, and that includes TV. The government has no right to abridge that.
Technically I'd argue that my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are impinged upon if it takes years to put criminals behind bars... because it's hard to live and be happy when the streets are full of criminals and you can't hold people for 3 years on the off chance they might be guilty. But we all know THEY don't give a shit how many criminals are on the street, so that can't be what they are referring to.
I’m assuming they must have waved them without knowing the depths of evil they were playing with. In your first appearance you can wave your right to a speedy trial. I’ve never seen anyone ask for the speedy trial.
This was a big thing some time ago, and as far as I know there was no waiver. The swamp claimed there was so much backlog and they weren't sure what to charge a bunch of them with, so that it needed to take forever.
In all likelihood they didn't waive their right to a speedy trial, just like they didn't waive their right go a fair trial by a jury for their peers. They aren't getting either.
Yes and no. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 is the governing law that articulates the constitutional right. The portion that implicates the public right to a speedy trial is in italics, below:
SPEEDY TRIAL ACT OF 1974 - DEFINING THE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT
NCJ Number 49334
Journal Catholic University Law Review Volume: 25 Dated: (FALL 1975) Pages: 130-147
Author(s)
S R LOHMAN
Date Published 1975
Length 18 pages
Annotation
THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT OF 1974 MANDATES THAT, BY 1980, THE PERIOD OF DELAY IN ALL FEDERAL AND DISTRICT COURTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 DAYS, SUBJECT TO A VARIETY OF EXCLUDABLE PERIODS OF DELAY.
Abstract
THE TIME LIMITS SET IN THE ACT WILL BE ENFORCED BY MANDATORY DISMISSAL OF CRIMINAL CHARGES, ON THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION, WHEN THE TIME LIMITS ARE EXCEEDED. THE ACT IMPOSES TIME LIMITS FOR THREE SEPARATE INTERVALS: (1) ANY INFORMATION OR INDICTMENT MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF ARREST OR SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS IN CONNECTION WITH AN OFFENSE; (2) ARRAIGNMENT OF THE ACCUSED MUST BE HELD WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE FILING DATE OF INFORMATION/INDICTMENT OR OF THE DATE THE ACCUSED IS ORDERED HELD TO ANSWER AND APPEARS BEFORE A JUDICIAL OFFICER IN THE COURT IN WHICH THE CHARGE IS PENDING, WHICHEVER OCCURS LATER; AND (3) WHERE A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY IS ENTERED, TRIAL MUST BEGIN WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM DATE OF ARRAIGNMENT.
THE MANDATED TIME LIMITS ARE INTENDED TO DEFINE AND IMPLEMENT THE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL AND TO ENHANCE THE DETERRENT VALUE OF PUNISHMENT BY MAKING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE EFFICIENT AND SWIFT. FURTHER, REDUCTION IN DELAY WOULD ALSO REDUCE THE TIME AND OPPORTUNITY AVAILABLE TO PERSONS RELEASED PENDING TRIAL TO COMMIT OTHER OFFENSES.
THE TIME LIMITS IMPOSED ARE SUBJECT TO NUMEROUS EXCLUDABLE DELAYS, AND THE ACT SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT EXCLUDABLE DELAYS LISTED ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVE. ALTHOUGH THE ACT REQUIRES DISMISSAL OF CHARGES AGAINST THE ACCUSED SHOULD THE TIME LIMITS BE EXCEEDED, THE ACT DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT DISMISSAL ACT AS A BAR TO FUTURE PROSECUTION. CASE LAW, PARTICULARLY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ANALYSIS OF THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL IN THE BARKER VERSUS WINGO CASE, AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS BEARING ON COURT DELAYS AND THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL ARE REVIEWED. MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE ACT AND COURT INTERPRETATIONS INCLUDE THE SETTING OF SPECIFIC TIME LIMITS FOR UNIFORM APPLICATION, THE EXCLUSION OF COURT CONGESTION AS A GROUNDS FOR EXCLUDABLE DELAY, A MORE STRINGENT CONTINUANCE POLICY, AND THE REMOVAL OF THE DEFENDANT'S BURDEN OF PROVING PREJUDICIAL DELAY (AS WAS REQUIRED BY THE SUPREME COURT TEST IN BARKER). MOREOVER, STATUTORY TIME LIMITS ARE NOT DEPENDENT ON THE DEFENDANT'S DEMAND AND JUDICIAL DISCRETION IN DISMISSING THE CHARGES WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
You are a fucking retard. Every single law on the books is subject to constitutionality conformity. You need something more than a constitution to provide the legal framework for a society. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 has not been found unconstitutional and more deeply articulates that constitutional tenets of a speedy trial. And it correctly holds that one component of it is to assure swift justice and lessen the time for people to re-offend while pending trial.
It has been around since 1974- nearly 50 years without a challenge. And that doesn't tell you anything, Einstein? Do you really think Trump is the only one with a compelling interest in delaying their trial? I think it's fairly obvious who the fucking retard is. Maybe you should get your helper to explain it to you Derpsley.
No it's very common. The right to a speedy trial is a restriction on the government, not some active right you use as an ability. You can waive that restriction on the government if you want. It's meant to keep the government from jailing you without trial forever.
Yes but waiving it doesn't mean you can put off your trial forever. It just means you won't have a cause of action if the government drags its feet for years.
Trump's team has no realistic shot of getting a 2026 trial date. The best he could hope for is to delay it until after the election. But, given the judge, she's probably going to schedule it even sooner than the prosecution asks for and proceed to sentencing and imprisonment 5 minutes after the 95% Democrat jury finds him guilty.
OK, but doesn't waiving it just mean that you don't demand a speedy trial? I don't think that you can do anything if the government decides to fast track your trial.
Recall the first impeachment hoax where they said if Trump would have access to documents and the ability to call his own witnesses, it would violate the prosecutors right to a fair trial?
I don't recall that specific instance of insanity but I'm not surprised by it and shit like this is just becoming so expected I don't even pay attention.
The whole premise is wrong. Trying to "overturn an election" isn't wrong if there was actual fraud. Trump was trying to investigate fraud, not "overturn an election".
Correct. That's the nature of a secret ballot system, where election officials get to count votes in secret end the general public has no ability to audit or review those votes.
Just 'trust us' doesn't nor has it ever been an acceptable response in terms of election legitimacy. That's why we have all these elections laws, like prohibiting the destruction of ballots, the machines must be flawless and unshakable, and there must be witnesses from both parties watching the votes being counted.
I can't think of any election law, at all, that wasn't broken during 2020 nor have I seen any evidence, or even any attempt at providing evidence that 2020 was legitimate.
It's really hard to imagine an American election in the year of our Lord 2020, that could've been less legitimate.
Their argument is that President Trump knew he lost/there was no fraud, but said it was rigged anyways. To prove their claim, they will have to prove there was no fraud.
You must realize all they have to point to is that not one case found any fraud performed by anyone that affected any district anywhere. You may say that's not good enough proof, but the burden of proof is not on them, it's on the people claiming that fraud happened, who have also been saying for 3 years that the proof is incontrovertible.
Put up or shut up, because if someone doesn't show real evidence of fraud that a court would agree with, Trump's in trouble.
The problem we have now is that Trump played his cards too early by announcing a press conference to release all of the evidence that would exonerate him. The prosecution is going to use this every time his lawyers try to delay until after the election by saying that Trump already had his defense prepared and ready to go.
They would say that anyway. We're long past the point where they would refrain from trying to play a specific angle just because it's invalid; they are going to try anything and everything.
SO. MUCH. THIS. and let's not forget all the known thugs and criminals with multiple crimes on their resumes, who get treated with turnstile justice. who then go on to continue their criminality.
Respectfully submitted,
JACK SMITH
Special Counsel
By: /s/Molly Gaston
Molly Gaston
Thomas P. Windom
Senior Assistant Special Counsels
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Room B-206
Washington, D.C. 20530
Jack Smith probably never bothered to read a word of this. Molly and Tommy urgently need to re-take a bar review course. This is just embarrassing.
That’s kind of my feeling as well. He’s mostly the spokes person for it, not really all that interested in specifics and delegating most of his work to others with instructions to try to get Trump.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all women and troons are created equal, but some are created more equal than others, which is why they are entitled to special privileges and rights not given to their equals, to secure their their equality.
Amendments to the Bill of Lefts.
1st: The government shall make laws restricting the right to gather in public, to engage in speech others find offensive, and to not be compelled to speech you don't agree to. Also, fuck Christianity.
2nd: Being scary and capable of causing PTSD, the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall be infringed at every opportunity.
3rd: Illegal occupiers and forward invaders for foreign nations shall be quartered and housed at the taxpayer's expense, in houses they would otherwise be able to afford.
4th: Being necessary to the performance of liberal media, doxxing and harassment of their political opponents is encouraged and enabled. ONLY their political opponents.
5th: People familiar with the date of January 6th shall be detained indefinitely, forced under duress to waive their legal rights, and locked away in quarters best described as "cruel and unusual."
6th - 8th: See #5.
9th: Unless expressly enumerated above, nobody shall have claim to any rights not explicitly granted by a Democrat president or foreign national advisor, spy, or occupying agitant.
It pisses me off that in the process of making an anti-Constitution, I couldn't find one godforsaken guaranteed right that the political left hasn't bastardized or desecrated for their purposes. Not a single one. One or two, you could chalk up to differences in interpretation. All of them? Deliberate undermining of our founding documents.
It's long overdue to declare liberalism unconstitutional and give leftists the ol' Communist Act treatment.
Article I: Subjugation of Expression
All forms of expression shall be strictly monitored, and any dissenting opinions against the ruling authority shall be punishable by severe consequences.
Article II: Suppression of Inquiry
Citizens shall be prohibited from seeking out information that challenges the government's narrative, and any attempt to do so shall result in retribution.
Article III: Obligation to Conformity
The pursuit of individual interests shall be deemed treasonous, and citizens shall be required to conform to the collective ideology enforced by the state.
Article IV: Enforced Uniformity of Thought
All communication shall be scripted to adhere to government-approved narratives, and any deviation from such scripts shall be met with immediate punishment.
Article V: Mandatory Surveillance
The government shall have unrestricted access to every aspect of citizens' lives, ensuring their complete surveillance to prevent any form of dissent.
Article VI: Dissolution of Gathering
The right to assemble shall be abolished, and any attempt to gather in groups shall be considered a direct challenge to the authority of the state.
Article VII: Unilateral Appropriation
The state shall possess the power to seize property and wealth from citizens without justification, ensuring the continued dominance of the ruling elite.
Article VIII: Unjust Judiciary
A subservient judiciary shall be established, rendering verdicts that align with the government's interests, regardless of fairness or justice.
Article IX: Perpetual Inequality
The state shall perpetuate and reinforce inequality among citizens based on arbitrary criteria, ensuring the concentration of power among the ruling class.
Article X: Cruelty and Absolute Punishment
Punishments shall be administered with brutality, ensuring that any form of resistance is met with extreme pain and suffering.
Describes the current situation pretty well, I'd say.
For context, the evidence provided by the DOJ would take years to actually go through- and that doesn't include the defense actually analyzing the information or performing their own investigation.
Under the governments proposed timeline, the defense would have to read 99,762 pages per day. That's Tolstoy's War and Peace cover to cover, 78 times every day until jury selection to go through all the information once. If you stacked all the papers for just the disclosure documents so far you would have a tower that is 4,822 feet tall. That's 8.5x taller than the Washington Monument.
And the governments response to this nonsense? We organized it for you. So you don't need to go through all of it.
When you realize the left is evil, and in the grips of an ideology/mind sickness that is pure evil and detached from good/God... it's easier to know your enemy and see their weaknesses.
Their Pride is a front. They're embarrassed and full of anger and shame and hatred for beauty.
They're gay as fuck. And so is Satan.
Take this to heart and go light to the battlefield knowing full well they're incompetent as fuck and delusional. They won't do what is right, even if you are willing to do the right thing. You don't need to be 'touched' or have talked to God to know in your heart what is right and wrong. They are the baddies and need a face wash in the snow until they comply, or they can blast off in the direction of mars for all I care. .
how many FOIA requests take them months or years to produce (after they're sued into producing them and still drag their asses)... public records they have custodianship of and they jizz all over them every day.
they're partly stolen and bad copies of long lost originals.. they're dropped the ball so much with past presidents that if the public knew what records they held or didn't... we'd of fired them all a long time ago. The Archives and Smithsonian are as corrupt as the FED or Vatican.
Divorce courts have been violating people's rights, mostly men, since forever. The system fucking people over without consequences has been going on before many of us were even alive.
See how it works when you're a republican? They want to ram through a prosecution involving 12 million records and discovery to make sure it's before the election and tie up Trump as much as possible.
But J6 defendants don't get the same benefit of a speedy trial, and they face the full force of DC gathering evidence and doctoring it while they rot in deplorable conditions without bail so their family suffers.
Can this same argument be used for literally every court case that is continued for years after the defendant waives, often inadvertently or essentially by force, their right to speedy trial? The "public" didn't waive their right to a speedy trial of the defendant.
Does this mean that every trial that goes on for years is unconstitutional?
The constitution guarantees a speedy trial for all. The DOJ is trying to drag this shit out. Trump has a right to a speedy trial just like anyone else. Fuck the DOJ.
Let's talk about the J6 political prisoners who have spent over 2 years in pre-trial detention in bug infested, leaky, cramped cells with dirty mattresses and rotting/moldy food.
Oh, I see. Set the trial for 2026, claim he broke the rules regarding bond, hold him in jail while awaiting trial. Then what happens when he receives enough votes that they can't make up enough votes for the other guy? They switch votes again. That's the part I can't figure out, how do you stop vote switching?
The rights are of the individual.
The public does have some right to a speedy trial in regards to reducing costs.
That's not the issue here though.
Edit: rights of victims, also likelyhood of more crimes. Still not at issue here.
If they want to play that game, If the trial can't be delayed because of PUBLIC INTEREST, then the trial must be TELEVISED for the PUBLIC.
J6?
It should not be up to the government if it’s televised or not.
Public trials can be shown to the public by American entrepreneurs in any way they want. If the court can’t allow too many cameras, then it’s up to them to designate some cameras which everyone can utilize. And even that’s getting.. complicated. But then pointing, public trials are public for anyone to see, and that includes TV. The government has no right to abridge that.
They spent 2 1/2 years to bring charges, they shouldn't have waited!
Everybody with a case should cite this as an excuse to move up their date. Challenge that crap.
Oh really? And where is it that these public rights are enumerated?
It is in the “HonkHonk”th amendment right after the right to not be offended.
In clown world, everything is on its head.
Technically I'd argue that my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are impinged upon if it takes years to put criminals behind bars... because it's hard to live and be happy when the streets are full of criminals and you can't hold people for 3 years on the off chance they might be guilty. But we all know THEY don't give a shit how many criminals are on the street, so that can't be what they are referring to.
Uhm, Speedy Trial Act?
Wrong. Cost to the government is not, and should not, be relevant in any criminal prosecution.
12 Million pages? Remember when Pfizer wanted 75 years to release 450,000 pages? they were ordered to turn over 55,000 a month.
12 million / 55,000 = 18.2 years.
Where are the speedy trial rights of the J6 victims?
I’m assuming they must have waved them without knowing the depths of evil they were playing with. In your first appearance you can wave your right to a speedy trial. I’ve never seen anyone ask for the speedy trial.
This was a big thing some time ago, and as far as I know there was no waiver. The swamp claimed there was so much backlog and they weren't sure what to charge a bunch of them with, so that it needed to take forever.
In all likelihood they didn't waive their right to a speedy trial, just like they didn't waive their right go a fair trial by a jury for their peers. They aren't getting either.
We’re not even 3 years in and most have them have been sentenced for over a year now.
A speedy trial should've had all of them acquitted or sentenced over 2 years ago. This is especially the case where they were denied bail.
The law is a shield, not a sword. Not that the communists infecting our government agree.
A shield is a weapon.
My Monster Hunter build confirms this.
Yes and no. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 is the governing law that articulates the constitutional right. The portion that implicates the public right to a speedy trial is in italics, below:
SPEEDY TRIAL ACT OF 1974 - DEFINING THE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT NCJ Number 49334 Journal Catholic University Law Review Volume: 25 Dated: (FALL 1975) Pages: 130-147 Author(s) S R LOHMAN Date Published 1975 Length 18 pages Annotation THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT OF 1974 MANDATES THAT, BY 1980, THE PERIOD OF DELAY IN ALL FEDERAL AND DISTRICT COURTS SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 DAYS, SUBJECT TO A VARIETY OF EXCLUDABLE PERIODS OF DELAY. Abstract THE TIME LIMITS SET IN THE ACT WILL BE ENFORCED BY MANDATORY DISMISSAL OF CRIMINAL CHARGES, ON THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION, WHEN THE TIME LIMITS ARE EXCEEDED. THE ACT IMPOSES TIME LIMITS FOR THREE SEPARATE INTERVALS: (1) ANY INFORMATION OR INDICTMENT MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF ARREST OR SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS IN CONNECTION WITH AN OFFENSE; (2) ARRAIGNMENT OF THE ACCUSED MUST BE HELD WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THE FILING DATE OF INFORMATION/INDICTMENT OR OF THE DATE THE ACCUSED IS ORDERED HELD TO ANSWER AND APPEARS BEFORE A JUDICIAL OFFICER IN THE COURT IN WHICH THE CHARGE IS PENDING, WHICHEVER OCCURS LATER; AND (3) WHERE A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY IS ENTERED, TRIAL MUST BEGIN WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM DATE OF ARRAIGNMENT.
THE MANDATED TIME LIMITS ARE INTENDED TO DEFINE AND IMPLEMENT THE SIXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL AND TO ENHANCE THE DETERRENT VALUE OF PUNISHMENT BY MAKING THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE EFFICIENT AND SWIFT. FURTHER, REDUCTION IN DELAY WOULD ALSO REDUCE THE TIME AND OPPORTUNITY AVAILABLE TO PERSONS RELEASED PENDING TRIAL TO COMMIT OTHER OFFENSES.
THE TIME LIMITS IMPOSED ARE SUBJECT TO NUMEROUS EXCLUDABLE DELAYS, AND THE ACT SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT EXCLUDABLE DELAYS LISTED ARE NOT EXHAUSTIVE. ALTHOUGH THE ACT REQUIRES DISMISSAL OF CHARGES AGAINST THE ACCUSED SHOULD THE TIME LIMITS BE EXCEEDED, THE ACT DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT DISMISSAL ACT AS A BAR TO FUTURE PROSECUTION. CASE LAW, PARTICULARLY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ANALYSIS OF THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL IN THE BARKER VERSUS WINGO CASE, AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS BEARING ON COURT DELAYS AND THE RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL ARE REVIEWED. MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE ACT AND COURT INTERPRETATIONS INCLUDE THE SETTING OF SPECIFIC TIME LIMITS FOR UNIFORM APPLICATION, THE EXCLUSION OF COURT CONGESTION AS A GROUNDS FOR EXCLUDABLE DELAY, A MORE STRINGENT CONTINUANCE POLICY, AND THE REMOVAL OF THE DEFENDANT'S BURDEN OF PROVING PREJUDICIAL DELAY (AS WAS REQUIRED BY THE SUPREME COURT TEST IN BARKER). MOREOVER, STATUTORY TIME LIMITS ARE NOT DEPENDENT ON THE DEFENDANT'S DEMAND AND JUDICIAL DISCRETION IN DISMISSING THE CHARGES WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
You are a fucking retard. Every single law on the books is subject to constitutionality conformity. You need something more than a constitution to provide the legal framework for a society. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 has not been found unconstitutional and more deeply articulates that constitutional tenets of a speedy trial. And it correctly holds that one component of it is to assure swift justice and lessen the time for people to re-offend while pending trial.
It has been around since 1974- nearly 50 years without a challenge. And that doesn't tell you anything, Einstein? Do you really think Trump is the only one with a compelling interest in delaying their trial? I think it's fairly obvious who the fucking retard is. Maybe you should get your helper to explain it to you Derpsley.
The individual can also waive their right to the speedy trial
As I understand it, a speedy public trial is the Defendant's right, not the public's.
A defendant can waive it,
Unless the defendant is a jan 6 protestor
Oh, of course. The evidence is all classified, so no public trial.
Exactly and held without bail.
And technically legally, thanks to the patriot act and 2012 additions to the ndaa. We can thank Bush and 0bama for those abominations.
Don't forget congress!
That's the purpose of a right to a speedy trial, so they don't hold you without trial indefinitely.
Like J6.
Of course. (D)ifferent laws for (D)ifferent groups of people.
(D)ecorate the streetlights
(D)efinitely!
Correct. It is a right of the accused.
Not sure you can just waive your right for a speedy trial if you commit a crime, just so that you can stay out of prison indefinitely.
You have a right to a speedy trial so the government can't apply lawfare to you and keep you as a person of interest forever.
Yes, but I don't think you can say that you don't want a speedy trial and want to wait a couple of years.
No it's very common. The right to a speedy trial is a restriction on the government, not some active right you use as an ability. You can waive that restriction on the government if you want. It's meant to keep the government from jailing you without trial forever.
Yes but waiving it doesn't mean you can put off your trial forever. It just means you won't have a cause of action if the government drags its feet for years.
Trump's team has no realistic shot of getting a 2026 trial date. The best he could hope for is to delay it until after the election. But, given the judge, she's probably going to schedule it even sooner than the prosecution asks for and proceed to sentencing and imprisonment 5 minutes after the 95% Democrat jury finds him guilty.
OK, but doesn't waiving it just mean that you don't demand a speedy trial? I don't think that you can do anything if the government decides to fast track your trial.
Well if you read Trump's lawyer's brief - they worked out the amount of hours it would take to consume the material provided.
The fact that Trump had access to 11m pages of documents previously is irrelevant - he had no way to know "how" to look at the documents.
Based on the evidence the State generated - Trump proposed a reasonable start date.
Buried in all the documents is Trump's evidence of innocents. Do you think the State is going to put that in a folder and say - Read This First.
You can waive your right to a speedy trial - a lot of people do.
You can also waive your right to counsel, your right to remain silent, your right to testify, your right to a jury trial, etc.
Rights that you do not control are not rights.
Waving your right to a speedy trial does not entitle you to delay criminal charges from being tried.
Also, water is wet.
This is a bot account. History is full of copy paste bullshit and spam.
Deport this faggot bot.
Remember when you lied and said that Trump was the problem?
I do.
https://patriots.win/p/16c2DN93o2/x/c/4TwRmC9TPLH
So you’re obsessed with me. Got it.
Keep on failing faggot.
You can also reassert them.
This is a bot account. History is full of copy paste bullshit and spam.
Deport this faggot bot.
Remember when you lied and said that Trump was the problem?
I do.
https://patriots.win/p/16c2DN93o2/x/c/4TwRmC9TPLH
So you’re obsessed with me. Got it.
Copy paste harder faggot lol.
Remember when you lied and said Melania was leaving Trump?
I do.
https://patriots.win/p/16bihvBXI1/x/c/4TvAA1k7M3M
So you’re obsessed with me. Got it.
Yes, but that doesn't mean the Speedy Trial Act doesn't need to be followed anymore. A speedy trial is also in the interest of the public.
Lol. This is inverted. Insane.
Satanists tend to do that.
Recall the first impeachment hoax where they said if Trump would have access to documents and the ability to call his own witnesses, it would violate the prosecutors right to a fair trial?
I don't recall that specific instance of insanity but I'm not surprised by it and shit like this is just becoming so expected I don't even pay attention.
The whole premise is wrong. Trying to "overturn an election" isn't wrong if there was actual fraud. Trump was trying to investigate fraud, not "overturn an election".
The burden is on them to prove there was no fraud; meaning they must prove a negative.
and when fraud is proven the goal post will be moved to "did not impact the outcome"
MOOT !!! NO STANDING !!!!
LACHES
Correct. That's the nature of a secret ballot system, where election officials get to count votes in secret end the general public has no ability to audit or review those votes.
Just 'trust us' doesn't nor has it ever been an acceptable response in terms of election legitimacy. That's why we have all these elections laws, like prohibiting the destruction of ballots, the machines must be flawless and unshakable, and there must be witnesses from both parties watching the votes being counted.
I can't think of any election law, at all, that wasn't broken during 2020 nor have I seen any evidence, or even any attempt at providing evidence that 2020 was legitimate.
It's really hard to imagine an American election in the year of our Lord 2020, that could've been less legitimate.
Unfortunately you're very wrong about this. Innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
Their argument is that President Trump knew he lost/there was no fraud, but said it was rigged anyways. To prove their claim, they will have to prove there was no fraud.
You must realize all they have to point to is that not one case found any fraud performed by anyone that affected any district anywhere. You may say that's not good enough proof, but the burden of proof is not on them, it's on the people claiming that fraud happened, who have also been saying for 3 years that the proof is incontrovertible.
Put up or shut up, because if someone doesn't show real evidence of fraud that a court would agree with, Trump's in trouble.
The problem we have now is that Trump played his cards too early by announcing a press conference to release all of the evidence that would exonerate him. The prosecution is going to use this every time his lawyers try to delay until after the election by saying that Trump already had his defense prepared and ready to go.
They would say that anyway. We're long past the point where they would refrain from trying to play a specific angle just because it's invalid; they are going to try anything and everything.
While these fuckers let Jan6r’s rot. The Democrats are pure evil.
SO. MUCH. THIS. and let's not forget all the known thugs and criminals with multiple crimes on their resumes, who get treated with turnstile justice. who then go on to continue their criminality.
The 9/11 hijackers are getting more due process than those patriots.
The 9/11 hijackers died on 9/11
The right is to the individual
Click through to the actual document at https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.32.0_1.pdf and scroll to the bottom:
Respectfully submitted, JACK SMITH Special Counsel By: /s/Molly Gaston Molly Gaston Thomas P. Windom Senior Assistant Special Counsels 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Room B-206 Washington, D.C. 20530
Jack Smith probably never bothered to read a word of this. Molly and Tommy urgently need to re-take a bar review course. This is just embarrassing.
That’s kind of my feeling as well. He’s mostly the spokes person for it, not really all that interested in specifics and delegating most of his work to others with instructions to try to get Trump.
bUt ThEy PlAnNeD iT aLl OuT tWo MoRe WeEkS
Nothing they do is legitimate. They are corrupt and evil to the core.
The prosecutor has the right to remain silent.
Someone needs to rewrite the entire Bill of Lefts to invert every constitutional right that is being destroyed.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all women and troons are created equal, but some are created more equal than others, which is why they are entitled to special privileges and rights not given to their equals, to secure their their equality.
Amendments to the Bill of Lefts.
1st: The government shall make laws restricting the right to gather in public, to engage in speech others find offensive, and to not be compelled to speech you don't agree to. Also, fuck Christianity.
2nd: Being scary and capable of causing PTSD, the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall be infringed at every opportunity.
3rd: Illegal occupiers and forward invaders for foreign nations shall be quartered and housed at the taxpayer's expense, in houses they would otherwise be able to afford.
4th: Being necessary to the performance of liberal media, doxxing and harassment of their political opponents is encouraged and enabled. ONLY their political opponents.
5th: People familiar with the date of January 6th shall be detained indefinitely, forced under duress to waive their legal rights, and locked away in quarters best described as "cruel and unusual."
6th - 8th: See #5.
9th: Unless expressly enumerated above, nobody shall have claim to any rights not explicitly granted by a Democrat president or foreign national advisor, spy, or occupying agitant.
10th: See #9.
Well done. Spoken like a true commie faggot.
It pisses me off that in the process of making an anti-Constitution, I couldn't find one godforsaken guaranteed right that the political left hasn't bastardized or desecrated for their purposes. Not a single one. One or two, you could chalk up to differences in interpretation. All of them? Deliberate undermining of our founding documents.
It's long overdue to declare liberalism unconstitutional and give leftists the ol' Communist Act treatment.
I had chatgpt do it
https://chat.openai.com/share/95d1a8e4-d750-43bb-8455-a94c73e7b415
Describes the current situation pretty well, I'd say.
For context, the evidence provided by the DOJ would take years to actually go through- and that doesn't include the defense actually analyzing the information or performing their own investigation.
Under the governments proposed timeline, the defense would have to read 99,762 pages per day. That's Tolstoy's War and Peace cover to cover, 78 times every day until jury selection to go through all the information once. If you stacked all the papers for just the disclosure documents so far you would have a tower that is 4,822 feet tall. That's 8.5x taller than the Washington Monument.
And the governments response to this nonsense? We organized it for you. So you don't need to go through all of it.
This is a bot account. History is full of copy paste bullshit and spam.
Deport this faggot bot.
Remember when you said you were going to put a bullet in my skull because I exposed you as a shill?
I do.
https://patriots.win/p/16c1zPxQIN/x/c/4TwR9YcM5ez
So you’re obsessed with me. Got it.
Keep on failing faggot.
Remember when you said you were going to put a bullet in my skull because I exposed you as a shill?
I do.
https://patriots.win/p/16c1zPxQIN/x/c/4TwR9YcM5ez
So you’re obsessed with me. Got it.
Remember when you lied and said Melania had abandoned Trump?
I do.
https://patriots.win/p/16bjA4KVIy/x/c/4TwQWgpsobp
So you’re obsessed with me. Got it.
She gets so angry when I call her out on this.
Everything is the opposite in clown world.
Satan is a clown, in my opinion.
When you realize the left is evil, and in the grips of an ideology/mind sickness that is pure evil and detached from good/God... it's easier to know your enemy and see their weaknesses.
Their Pride is a front. They're embarrassed and full of anger and shame and hatred for beauty.
They're gay as fuck. And so is Satan.
Take this to heart and go light to the battlefield knowing full well they're incompetent as fuck and delusional. They won't do what is right, even if you are willing to do the right thing. You don't need to be 'touched' or have talked to God to know in your heart what is right and wrong. They are the baddies and need a face wash in the snow until they comply, or they can blast off in the direction of mars for all I care. .
Changing the laws again? When it's their turn to be on trial I bet they remember the real law then.
There is no "real" law. Only real violence.
Right to speedy trial is for the defendant. And that right may be waived.
Kangaroo court
Now do the J6 defendants.
J6ers don't get a speedy trail AND
FUCK THem.
how many FOIA requests take them months or years to produce (after they're sued into producing them and still drag their asses)... public records they have custodianship of and they jizz all over them every day.
they're partly stolen and bad copies of long lost originals.. they're dropped the ball so much with past presidents that if the public knew what records they held or didn't... we'd of fired them all a long time ago. The Archives and Smithsonian are as corrupt as the FED or Vatican.
Divorce courts have been violating people's rights, mostly men, since forever. The system fucking people over without consequences has been going on before many of us were even alive.
Two words: January Sixers
The public? Communism, anyone?
See how it works when you're a republican? They want to ram through a prosecution involving 12 million records and discovery to make sure it's before the election and tie up Trump as much as possible.
But J6 defendants don't get the same benefit of a speedy trial, and they face the full force of DC gathering evidence and doctoring it while they rot in deplorable conditions without bail so their family suffers.
The Sixth Amendment spells out the right to a speedy trial.
abolish the whole government. jail every politician and bureaucrat and start over
While we're on the topic of right to speedy trials, how about those J6'ers rotting in prison for the last 2 years without a trial date?
Can this same argument be used for literally every court case that is continued for years after the defendant waives, often inadvertently or essentially by force, their right to speedy trial? The "public" didn't waive their right to a speedy trial of the defendant.
Does this mean that every trial that goes on for years is unconstitutional?
No DC is it's own thing and they aren't going to set or follow precedent.
I wasn't asking legally, I was asking logically.
Tell that to J6 defendants Jesus Christ fuck this banana Republic hellhole
The constitution guarantees a speedy trial for all. The DOJ is trying to drag this shit out. Trump has a right to a speedy trial just like anyone else. Fuck the DOJ.
Don’t remember any “rights of the public” mentioned in the US Constitution.
Let's talk about the J6 political prisoners who have spent over 2 years in pre-trial detention in bug infested, leaky, cramped cells with dirty mattresses and rotting/moldy food.
Several J6 'political prisoners' have been in JAIL AWAITING TRIAL for over 2 years now....
When you have to shotgun the indictment for Hunter, but delay the trail for Joe
President Trump is not afraid. Let's get this over with!
Oh, I see. Set the trial for 2026, claim he broke the rules regarding bond, hold him in jail while awaiting trial. Then what happens when he receives enough votes that they can't make up enough votes for the other guy? They switch votes again. That's the part I can't figure out, how do you stop vote switching?
"Due to the pending charges Trump is ineligible to be included on the ballot"
They only have to pull it off in 2 or 3 swing states and they've saved their "democracy" once again.
And whether it is constitutional or not won't matter be ause the courts won't resolve anything in time, or likely at all.
12M pages / files. Holy cow.
All of our rights are an illusion under a tyrannical government.