Donald Trump's Trial For Election Interference Set To Begin In Time To Interfere With Election
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The federal judge presiding over former President Donald Trump's trial on charges of election interference has set a trial date that will line up perfectly to interfere with the 2024 presidential election.
"This certainly is the most appropriate date," said U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in her announcement. "Mr. Trump is not above the law, and holding this trial to determine if he is guilty of interfering in the 2020 election gives the federal government its best chance of interfering in the 2024 election."
The trial start date, March 4, falls just one day before the "Super Tuesday" primaries, which a spokesperson for the Department of Justice insists is only a coincidence. "Total happenstance," said the source on the condition of anonymity. "This was not, in any way, done to affect Donald Trump's ability to campaign during the crucial period of state primary voting. There is also no truth to the rumors that we did an extensive investigation into what date would be most ideal to harm Trump's campaign or cast him in a questionable light in the eyes of voters. Nope. Not at all. That would be election interference, and we do not do that. That's illegal."
President Trump did not accept the DOJ's claims of impartiality. "BOGUS TRIAL DATE!" he said in a post to his Truth Social account. "Another move by our CORRUPT Justice Department to try to hurt me in the primaries. Even if I'm sitting in a courtroom, I will SWEEP the primaries, something nobody ever thought possible, but it is with me. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
At publishing time, The DOJ was reportedly hard at work scheduling all court dates to coincide with important election dates while claiming the coincidence was purely coincidental.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
33 visitors
So are you implying that all criminal trials and proceedings should be scheduled around the defendant's job interviews?
where in his post did you see anything remotely close to that?
No, they should coincide exactly with when they will do Trump the most harm; and Brandon the Human Fuck Up Machine the most good.
Garland needs to put out milk cartons with the pictures of the special counsels he assign to the Brandon investigations and Hunter investigation. Hur is MIA with his investigation; and Weiss has already relapsed back into the legal coma that consumed him for the last 4 plus years waiting for the rest of the statute of limitations to run out on Hunter's crimes.
Hur's investigation is so secret that not even government insiders know anything about it. Funny how leaks were abounding from Jack Smith's investigation on Trump- and charges were brought within mere months on both the documents and Jan 6th. Of course Hur hates Trump; and Garland knows that. There are no coincidences in the Democrat two tier justice system.
You can't have it both ways. Should they delay the criminal trial so Trump can try to get a job, or not?
Right, the timings all just a big coincidence....
No, I do not think this is a coincidence at all. These indictments are a proper and predictable (if justice actually works) response to the actions of Trump. In my judgment, Trump's decision to run was based on the likelihood that he might be dealing with indictments. Although, I doubt Trump expected the level of shit that would hit the fan.
I doubt Trump thinks he can win reelection. He would have been much better off (ego-wise) to keep playing the "I won the election ..." nonsense from the sidelines rather than risk losing again. But he very likely was planning on soaking his utterly naive, gullible followers to pay for his legal bills and that would certainly be a reason to run.
I think similarly....
No one takes him seriously. I blocked him a long time ago.
I noted a response to him the other day where he said something about Hunter Biden living in the White House. That's the first I heard of it.
I just looked it up - some CONservative said they thought he was but there was of course no evidence to support it.
It must be true then
No you do not, your comment @1.1.5, et.al. shows that you think our judicial system has indicted Trump because he is running for PotUS.
Do you think the charges are without merit?
I do not think this a coincidence at all..... please don't try to tell me what I think. As I said if you want to troll take it elsewhere.
Probably alot of the same hive attending.....
Always deflecting to the Clintons, since you obviously have nothing else.
K
Trump shouldn't even be running. If he wants to blame someone he should blame the Republican Party for letting him participate.
Right, cause those fuckers are to blame for everything...
Brandon shouldn't be running- we blame the mighty mental midgets that elected him; and Garland and Democrats that are keeping him in place.
Donald Trump started interfering with the election when he threw his hat in the ring way before it was appropriate, obviously kicking off his sole objective of pardoning himself of all the federal crimes he knew he was going to have to answer to.
what time is acceptable to you for candidates to announce they are running?
If you’re 100% going to be indicted for multiple federal and state crimes, then never.
So Brandon is ineligible.
He is guilty of everything the Democrats accuse Trump of- we just need and AG/DOJ willing to do their damn jobs and prosecute.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and presume you are joking.
It’s that pesky evidence problem. You should go find some. That’ll keep you busy.
I can't find any statutes stating that someone who might be indicted is ineligible.
Probably because it would be atrociously stupid for such crap to exist
The legally predicated investigations by Congress and the JD into Hunter Biden are ongoing
Have a little patience!
Everyone knows that is a stupid claim. Why make it? To what end?
Right off the bat, you believe Biden (is guilty of, no less) attempted to use coercion, false documents, fake electors, lying, obstruction of Congress, etc. in an attempt to steal a US presidential election??
So you find it appropriate for criminals to run for the highest level of government. Careful, your slavish devotion to Donald Trump is showing.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt as well...
Do you think that Trump is the only political figure to be indicted?...
It’s a very short list, but Trump is miles ahead of the next front runner.
unless you can show a statute prohibiting indicted people from running, you are completely out of gas.
Of course, the law doesn't say anything so stupid because, despite what others may think, the presumption of innocence is how we do things.
That comment is stupid and a lie.
In number of indictments? Yep... I'm still skeptical about the timing even if you aren't
Appropriate?....
Or perhaps he was anxious to get back in the fight since he felt like he got fucked over?...
Either way, that would be true.
Or perhaps he was anxious to get back in the fight since he felt like he got fucked over?...
What - sixty losing attempts to claim election interference wasn’t enough? Fuck his feelings.
Yeah, I don't really care about his feelings, or yours either for that matter. I was just saying that maybe that's why he declared before it was deemed appropriate by you.....
He would be delusional to believe that he was the legitimate winner of the 2020 election.
Either he:
Option 2 seems most likely to me.
That seems to be the popular choice among some posters here. How do you prove that in criminal court?
Why would you think that a conclusion that Trump is running to provide cover for justice must be proved in criminal court?
It is not criminal to run for PotUS regardless of the reason. And Trump has not been charged with running for PotUS as a crime.
There is a constitutional question as to eligibility based on his attempt to fraudulently steal a US election (among other things) but even that would NOT be concerned with the reason Trump is running.
Hal sure seems to think differently.
Why do you say that? Be specific if possible.
It’s because he doesn’t comprehend the meaning of the word “appropriate”. For some reason he thinks I’ve implied illegality, which any thinking person could see that I haven’t.
Joe Exotic is also running for President. Not illegal, just wildly inappropriate.
I read his comments, specifically 3 and 3.1.1
Try it!
Your posts 3 and 3.1.1 strangely enough don't mention "appropriate" so your post doesn't make sense
Read 3.2.8. Try it!
Which all stems from comment 3, where the word “appropriate” is clearly visible. You know this.
Read it, it is not worth reading again as it is false.
yes I know which is why I am forced to tell you!
There it is again - your slavish devotion to DT!
that post is idiotic and false.
Of course, you [Deleted] hide behind vague comments and deflect. Take a stand, be clear.
Damn, man, how much clearer do you need me to make it for you?
READ THE FUCKING COMNENTS!!
More deflection. Not even a modest attempt to be clear.
No one here can stop you from pretending you don't understand.
In whose opinion? Yours? Much like someone else's opinion of "appropriate"? [Deleted]
[Deleted]
Lol!
[Deleted]
[Deleted]
Well, since you claim to not be a Trumpster then maybe you’re going to vote for Joe Exotic. I’m sure he’s appropriate in your mind.
you are a really bad guesser.
If that is all I could do, I would stop
[Deleted]
[Deleted]