- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Jack Smith has done it again. He did not consider exculpatory evidence at all.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:56 pm to Diamondawg
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:56 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
Seems like the grand jury should have been made privy to that evidence.
He doesn’t have to present it to the grand jury, but he absolutely has to review and consider exculpatory evidence. To flat out ignore it is a breach of his duty.
This post was edited on 8/4/23 at 2:57 pm
2
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:57 pm to Warboo
quote:
The SCOTUS is licking their chops to smack that idiot again. He already took a 9-0 beating there. Setting up nicely to have round two.
It’ll be at least 6-3 this time. Trump has 3 votes against him built in.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:58 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Bernard Kerik says special counsel may not have reviewed records before indicting Trump
quote:
Special counsel Jack Smith's office may not have fully reviewed thousands of pages of records turned over by former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik before seeking an indictment of former President Donald Trump Tuesday, says Kerik's attorney, Tim Parlatore.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:59 pm to FriscoTiger1973
quote:
He will be convicted and have to appeal to the USSC.
Seems unlikely
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:59 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
He doesn’t have to present it to the grand jury, but he absolutely has to review and consider exculpatory evidence. To flat out ignore it is a breach of his duty.
In too big of a hurry to get that ham sandwich.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 2:59 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Parlatore said the "records are absolutely exculpatory."
Just because one person says they are doesn't mean they are.
But Smith is required to review Exculpatory Evidence.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:01 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
He doesn’t have to present it to the grand jury, but he absolutely has to review and consider exculpatory evidence. To flat out ignore it is a breach of his duty.
I’m sure he ignored that Bernard Kerik and pals really think they believed spyder.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:02 pm to Green Chili Tiger
quote:m
Bernard Kerik says special counsel may not have reviewed records before indicting Trump
Ah. Got it. They are making the inference because they believe anyone that has read all
Of the exculpatory evidence would not in good faith pursue an indictment. So at least in their opinion, either Jack Smith is breaching his duty and bringing an indictment on a case he knows he shouldn’t or he breached his duty and refused to consider exculpatory evidence. Not sure which option makes smith look worse.
This post was edited on 8/4/23 at 3:04 pm
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:04 pm to cwill
quote:
I’m sure he ignored that Bernard Kerik and pals really think they believed spyder.
There is no doubt. What are your thoughts on the indictments. Politically motivated or nah?
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:06 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
Ah. Got it. They are making the inference because they believe anyone that has read all
Of the exculpatory evidence would not in good faith pursue an indictment. So at least in their opinion, either Jack Smith is breaching his duty and bringing an indictment on a case he knows he shouldn’t or he breached his duty and refused to consider exculpatory evidence. Not sure which option makes smith look worse.
Either way he is a joke.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:09 pm to MightyYat
quote:
It's why I don't understand either side getting worked up over any of this. It's all for show. Nothing more
That's exactly why one side is getting all worked up over it.
The media gets their anti-Trump headlines, the population of sheeple eat it up, the damage is done, then they quietly retract their story and move straight on to the next fabricated tale.
...with no consequences.
It's worth being worked up about.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:22 pm to Warboo
It won’t be 9-0.
There are 3 AA appointees.
The two fence sitters will be pressured.
It’ll be 5-4. Which way? We’ll see.
There are 3 AA appointees.
The two fence sitters will be pressured.
It’ll be 5-4. Which way? We’ll see.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:55 pm to Deplorableinohio
he's a dirty lawyer for sure
Posted on 8/4/23 at 3:56 pm to Deplorableinohio
quote:
There are 3 AA appointees.
Sure, but Thomas is pretty conservative despite being picked for his skin color.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 4:15 pm to cwill
quote:
I can’t believe smith didn’t consider that trump et al would claim they were in good faith in their cockamamie beliefs or provide affidavits or present witnesses saying same. He’s totally fricked.
another useless post from an a-hole lacking the guts to ever come out FOR anybody
Posted on 8/4/23 at 4:17 pm to Green Chili Tiger
quote:
That's not what the article you linked says
only in the first God damned sentence
You think that hack reviewed the thousands of pages of documents?
Who is the gullible idiot again?
Posted on 8/4/23 at 4:20 pm to Timeoday
The evidence better not be hidden from a jury.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 4:30 pm to MilwaukeeKosherDills
quote:
The evidence better not be hidden from a jury.
That would be kind of hard, since Trump's team already has it.
This post was edited on 8/4/23 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 8/4/23 at 4:33 pm to rhar61
quote:
only in the first God damned sentence
The first god damned sentence:
quote:
Washington — Special counsel Jack Smith's office may not have fully reviewed thousands of pages of records turned over by former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik before seeking an indictment of former President Donald Trump Tuesday, says Kerik's attorney, Tim Parlatore.
Posted on 8/4/23 at 4:37 pm to Green Chili Tiger
Then why did they ask for the records after indicting him?
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News