There has been some intel that the investigation is not what most people think it is. He is not investigating President Trump.
He is another version of Huber and Durham, but focusing on election fraud.
That also explains why there are no leaks. Were there any leaks from Huber? Were there any leaks from Durham? Nope. And no leaks from Smith either, for the same reasons.
I think we have similar thoughts on this. I was nervous about Smith at first, but I have found myself leaning towards JustHuman's theory about him: He is not investigating election fraud per se, but he is investigating the rats, mostly RINO types, who tried to entrap Trump up as he fought to have the fake results thrown out. It is important to remember that the R establishment had just as much of a vested interest in the steal of 2020 as the dems, so it would make sense that they would have infiltrators in Trump's circle to try and push him into doing something actually illegal in response to the fake results.
If such is the case then we should expect an indictment by Smith of Lin Wood, or others in that orbit. It will be spun by MSM and ConInc as "the walls are closing in" but as always, Trump will walk away unscathed.
They made up the Russia hoax but orchestrated J6. That's the main difference between the two I can see. Even though they are both witch hunts, it's not apples to apples.
Would love for all these things to be true. But what we have found out is they flash the fake shit in the media constantly, with fanfare and wall to wall coverage. As we have all said not once has something been true. Call me a doomer, but if they wanted something to stick would they not keep it quiet until it was "go" time?
No one in the world is perfect and we have all made mistakes. I would not doubt they ran back decades to find some misdeed to try and drag him into court/charge him over to finally get him.
There has been some intel that the investigation is not what most people think it is. He is not investigating President Trump.
He is another version of Huber and Durham, but focusing on election fraud.
That also explains why there are no leaks. Were there any leaks from Huber? Were there any leaks from Durham? Nope. And no leaks from Smith either, for the same reasons.
I think we have similar thoughts on this. I was nervous about Smith at first, but I have found myself leaning towards JustHuman's theory about him: He is not investigating election fraud per se, but he is investigating the rats, mostly RINO types, who tried to entrap Trump up as he fought to have the fake results thrown out. It is important to remember that the R establishment had just as much of a vested interest in the steal of 2020 as the dems, so it would make sense that they would have infiltrators in Trump's circle to try and push him into doing something actually illegal in response to the fake results.
If such is the case then we should expect an indictment by Smith of Lin Wood, or others in that orbit. It will be spun by MSM and ConInc as "the walls are closing in" but as always, Trump will walk away unscathed.
This sounds good if we were actually living in the constitutional republic that was created by our Founding Fathers but this is a banana republic.
They made up the Russia hoax but orchestrated J6. That's the main difference between the two I can see. Even though they are both witch hunts, it's not apples to apples.
And given #Twitterfiles drops you would think the fake fucks in MSM would be begging for 4am bits from SCO.
Would love for all these things to be true. But what we have found out is they flash the fake shit in the media constantly, with fanfare and wall to wall coverage. As we have all said not once has something been true. Call me a doomer, but if they wanted something to stick would they not keep it quiet until it was "go" time?
No one in the world is perfect and we have all made mistakes. I would not doubt they ran back decades to find some misdeed to try and drag him into court/charge him over to finally get him.
Why? Simple. Trump.is not in "office" and they dont rrally know what the SC is for.
You sound so sure handshake, what's your evidence given the point is no leaks?
Why do you assume leaks were actually leaks?
I’d have to agree with you by the simple fact Garland appointed him.