A Case Of Hope Over Experience: The J6 Referral Falls Short Of A Credible Criminal Case

A Case Of Hope Over Experience: The J6 Referral Falls Short Of A Credible Criminal Case

https://www.zerohedge.com/political...6-referral-falls-short-credible-criminal-case

This week the January 6th Committee voted to make criminal referrals to the Justice Department, including the proposed indictment of former President Donald Trump.

However, the Committee’s splashy finale lacked any substantial new evidence to make a compelling criminal case against former President Donald Trump. The Committee repackaged largely the same evidence that it has previously put forward over the past year.

Looks like after all of the evidence and all of the threats of conviction, this journalist thinks that everything falls short of an actual crime. Will it stop the DOJ or will they turn this into another Russian Collusion Hoax witch hunt?

 

The Jan 6 committee was nothing but a Kangaroo Court, start to finish.

 

I don't care what you think of Trump. If you cheer on the regime in power seeking to lock up their primary political opponent for treason - because a few hundred unruly demonstrators delayed the inevitable by a few hours - then you are cheering on descent into banana republic. - IT Guy

 

As predicted by everyone not on the far left. OMG TRUMP GOING to PRISONNN!

 

Twitter checkmarks and others are reacting to the J6 news and calling the United States a banana republic.

"A former US PRESIDENT was... Raided. Subpoenaed. Referred for criminal prosecution. All in a matter of months. All by his political opponents. All of it legal like in any Banana Republic. This on a person who before winning office didn't even get a parking ticket." - Y. Gestetner

 

Now its time to move on to the actual relevant investigations of "the big buy".

 

If "this journalist THINKS"...
^Wouldn't this be considered an OPINION Thread?
Anyway, as to the Actual Topic of that journalist's OPINION:
Anything is possible...
Garland (DOJ) probably has a lot of work to do before he even decides (or not) to File Charges (based on the referrals)..
An OPINION about what "might" happen, BEFORE charges are even filed, seems like a waste of time...
Obviously, the Elements of a Statutory Crime must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt...
And, if those elements can't be proven, then no case (or conviction)...

 

Democrats should pay back all the money they wasted on this nonsense.

 

Not a lawyer so unsure how prosecutable Trump is for his actions. It would be very nice to see the man finally held responsible for things he's done, but that can't be the basis for a prosecution if that basis didn't already exist anyway. Hopefully there is enough evidence there for a credible criminal charge, but if not, oh well. I do think it's important that this country sends the message to ALL future politicians that you can't just invent stolen election nonsense, use it to stoke up your supporters to clench their fists and open their wallets, eventually lead these folks who actually believe your lies into rioting, and then expect no one to hold you responsible. That's a very poor message to send, one that is also reminiscent of what government officials get away with in those banana republics the Twitter braintrust is currently referencing.

 

"the big buy"?
Like Black Frday? Cool...
Investigate Wal-Mart Price-Fixing during "the big buy"?
Not a bad idea...Wish I had thought of that...

 

Big guy is what Hunter Biden used to refer to his dad (Joe Biden) during his illegal operations....allegedly.

 

What evidence of crimes are you refering to prior to 1/6? As far as sending a message to all incoming politicians, the message will be clear: "If you are not a Democrat, We will use the full weight of the agencies and the law to ruin you and your family if you do not do as we say."

I would say out of anyone in the history of our country who has served as President, nobody has been treated so far below the rule of law, as Trump. Consequently, nobody has been untouchable or above the law as Obama/Biden/Hillary Clinton. The difference in crimes committed by this bunch for outweighs anything Trump ever did. By far.

 

History won't be kind to it either. How does one expect to be taken seriously when the committee was stacked against Trump to begin with?
#DCClownTown

 

Not looking good for Hunter and Joe with this trump nonsense being resolved.

 

It's all a big fat case of faux outrage to the nth! Where was their outrage when protestors attempted to break government barriers to get at Trump?

 

You might be on to something if that message wasn't being blurted out in defense of a man like Trump who, other than the Russian collusion claims, has actually been guilty of the things he's been accused of. You won't find me losing much sleep when cops harass the bad guys.

Must be nice to only focus on Democrats. No Nixon, Reagan, or G. W. Bush on your list?

 

That was last millennia.

 

What has he been guilty of that would warrant a conviction? As of right now, they have nothing to go after him for but 1/6. If they had any real crimes he would have been charged while still in office. They were dying to find something he was guilty of.

The crimes and abuses of Obama/Biden/Hillary Clinton go far beyond those you named.

 

alas, poor trump, treated so below the rule of law by the deep state .........

 

I don't think it's meant to stand on its own. I think it's just offering their input based upon what they found to the DOJ, which is already looking into these things. Just symbolic if the evidence isn't anything novel to the DOJ. And the DOJ is still digesting these things, so it's not time for either side to crow.

It's worth noting, though, that if an indictment comes it means they really expect to be able to get a conviction (as is usually the case from DOJ, but especially in a case like this). And if no indictment comes, it's not exoneration, just insufficient evidence for an airtight case.

 

I question your source. When I try to select Contributors from the menu, all I get is a blog list of some sort.

The article sounds like the author didn’t watch the proceedings. There is plenty of evidence on the four charges presented for referral.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/12/18/jan6-committee-deliver-judgment-trump-00074365

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...y-charge-trump-efforts-overturn-2020-election

https://www.newsweek.com/new-hope-h...ald-trump-january-6-criminal-referral-1768171

There's more. Google it.

 

The criminal referrals are clearly specious, hokey, and chicken ****. However, they might have legs with a weaponized DoJ.

 

It's a continuation of the Disinformation Campaign that began in 2015 when Trump announced that he was running.

Jonathan Turley Demolishes J6 Commission's Criminal Charges Referral Against Trump

'It is notable that Rep. Cheney began the discussion of evidence by focusing on Trump's delay in calling supporters to leave the Hill… — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) December 19, 2022 Which means the J6 committee and the Democrats know they have nothing that would be criminally chargeable under normal standards.'

The soon to be stripped of his committees, 'Schiff promised new evidence to support criminal charges' but all we got were rehashes of 'previously known evidence with network-quality videotapes.'

Notice how carefully they deny 'systemic fraud' rather than simply fraud. We all know that the 2020 election was fraud, and "systematic" is a weasel word we can fight over rather than the obvious, which was that election was a fraud and farce designed to expel the legitimate President, Trump and install the Farce, Biden.

'The J6 Committee failed to change many minds largely because of what was on display in the final public meeting. It was the same highly scripted, one-sided account repeated mantra-like for months. This hearing was billed as presenting the case for criminal charges. It missed that mark by a considerable measure.'

That's puts it nicely.

Deliberately and repeatedly omitted by the Committee, 'Trump told his supporters to go to the Capitol “peacefully” to support Republicans challenging the election.'

Some Dems want to criminalize anything they disagree with or don't like.

 

They have very solid evidence that Trump continually calls the election stolen (as democrats often do with elections), that Trump called for peaceful protests and a march of those peaceful protesters to the Capitol, and that Trump found a loophole in the Electoral Vote system that he tried to exploit, of which they are currently passing laws to fix since loopholes are not against the law. In addition to those findings, now they have proof that Trump legally paid few taxes during the last several years. They also have plenty of evidence that Trump called people names.

 

Funny, I don't see them storming the white house breaking and entering and roaming the halls, so sorry but not the same.