Why do people here think there is something special about “entering evidence” at court? All that means is that a jury is allowed to consider it during a case. It doesn’t give it any sort of special status.
They could also just release all of the documents onto Wikileaks/OAN whatever else they want to and it would have the same affect. No reason to wait.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it has to do with Q's posts asking us how evidence gets discovered and introduced. It gets introduced in discovery phases of suits and criminal cases. Ergo, evidence gets entered into the case/public awareness. A perfect example is what Mister Winson mentions above.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you release certain types of evidence publicly before submitting it in court, it becomes inadmissable and considered hearsay.
But that’s my point - it’s not kept secret. DJT could send our whatever evidence to millions of people with the click of a mouse and there’s nothing stopping him. There’s nothing magic about it being introduced during a trial.
Why do people here think there is something special about “entering evidence” at court? All that means is that a jury is allowed to consider it during a case. It doesn’t give it any sort of special status.
They could also just release all of the documents onto Wikileaks/OAN whatever else they want to and it would have the same affect. No reason to wait.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it has to do with Q's posts asking us how evidence gets discovered and introduced. It gets introduced in discovery phases of suits and criminal cases. Ergo, evidence gets entered into the case/public awareness. A perfect example is what Mister Winson mentions above.
Perhaps the raid ties into trump's suit against hrc. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63184300/trump-v-clinton/?page=2
The only way to force media attention on a inconvenient fact is if it's part of a legal proceeding.
That is until social media is regulated, which Q mentioned as well.
Can’t remember the post number but Q says it has to be done b the book.
^^^. I am so sided of that pseudo legal nonsense line about entering evidence. If you have evidence of a crime, release it so patriots can use it.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but if you release certain types of evidence publicly before submitting it in court, it becomes inadmissable and considered hearsay.
Entering evidence establishes it's provenance and is a way to put evidence in public light when it would normally be kept secret until discovery.
But that’s my point - it’s not kept secret. DJT could send our whatever evidence to millions of people with the click of a mouse and there’s nothing stopping him. There’s nothing magic about it being introduced during a trial.