Jack Smith asks court to ban Trump from introducing evidence of Jan. 6 security failures
(justthenews.com)
- P A N I C -
Comments (59)
sorted by:
No way he gets consentual sex
🙏Amen! God Bless President Donald Trump, his wife, family, legal team, friends, Q followers, most of all his security team and their families too, God Bless America, missing children and you the reader Too.🙏
Kek
Minors can't consent, so you are correct by default.
Adam Schiff says otherwise
Upvoted for correct spelling of consentual! :)
Root = consent
This is outright banana republic stuff. They just have no shame at all. I can't believe they actually have the audacity to even try this nor that Democrats eat this stuff up and still cry about MuH DeMocRaCy
And most of the common Dem folk still see all this as ok. Scary what it will take.
"Scary what it will take". You ain't shittin'. Sheeple and libtards have basically already admitted they are okay with non-fair elections, the government spying on them, the government forcing lockdowns, shutdowns, forced or coerced consent for experimental RNA altering concoctions, etc.
Seriously, if we are going to see escalation until mass awakening, It might take full blown concentration camps for dissidents. Even then, I think there'd be many "Stand with Ukraine" people fully supporting Trump supporters being subject to torture and gas chambers.
Yeah, it seems as long as it happens incrementally, the demoralizing narrative of powerlessness pushed by an all encompassing and ever-saturating media will lull most of the normie public into a passive state of doom and helplessness.
Communists and secret societies are destroying our country.
Always have been
IMO they are being forced to expose themselves. Pee-wee Herman movie theatre style.
that does put a damper on our popcorn enjoyment if you bring pee-wee in on it...
This dude needs to be examined from kindergarten on. Something is seriously off with this dude. Sauce: gut feeling. Not autist enough to do the digs and prove it.
HIS filings are the "partisan political attacks" and he needs to be stopped in his tracks and humiliated as a hack. Wish I had the skills to do it.
Your gut is never wrong, trust it. What I've learned from firsthand experience is; even remotely; even if you never have met anyone; your gut is right.
Everything from their facial expressions, the way they talk, act; the totality of who they are as a living thing (albeit a satanic demon in this case) all are picked up by & noticed by your "gut"
I've been pretty much 100% spot on with my gut feelings, even about people I've never met & never will meet.....
This dude needs exactly what the rest of these beta leftist cucks need, the ass whooping we stopped giving them when we became tolerant of their bullshit thanks to an infiltrated education, legal and religious system that plagues this country.
Erm. Police started lobbing tear-gas and rubber bullets into a peaceful, unarmed crowd - from many angles, we can see this. No singing or chanting, behind barrriers - was the message. That was physical assault BTW. People were willfully injured - also, that sort of charge is worse than property damage.
So who started the insumm-erection?
Jack Wagon Smith
His middle name is wagon?
😂
It is now :)
I thought his middle name was shit
KEK! Please Judge, don't let Trump introduce and evidence that would prove he is innocent!
What a wanker
And yet, is this hurting Trump or helping him? The more ridiculous it gets, the more it helps Trump and the more people simply recognize how stupid and corrupt the anti-trump movement is.
To Jack Smith, I say, keep on keeping on. Nothing can stop what is coming.
Yes I agree!! I get a lot of enjoyment watching his antics fail. :)
Smith has 'band' connections so imo there's a GOOD chance he's a part of this movie to expose all
I didn't know he has band connections.
I'm a fan of the band theory, but am still to do any serious digging on it. Not sure where to start, actually.
here is my VERY messy collection of 'band info on GAB maybe this will help
https://gab.com/hippie/posts/106625011885402304
Thanks for this. MANY thanks for this. I'm eager to get in to it.
yvvw
After failing all other desperate measures, Jack Smith will try to ban Trump from even speaking - oh waith - he has already pull that one. Next he will ban Trump from breathing.
Fucking clowns!
They should all be executed for seriously asking this of a judge.
Banana republic is a compliment at this point....
Unbelievable....
Saying they should be executed for asking this of the judge is pretty much the exact same standard you yourself are criticizing. It seems you would really replace one banana republic with another.
The first step of exiting the matrix is to realize that there is a matrix. We do not win this war by doing what our enemy is doing, but by upholding the real and authentic standards they are trashing.
Respectfully, your line of reasoning is incredibly awful and corrosive, and is hugely responsible for the situation we are in today; evil is flourishing because we are too "good" to do what MUST be done.
Your basic reasoning is "we can't stoop to our enemy's level" or "if we act like them then we become them"
While we are busy having debates about what's prim & proper and respecting pronouns, our enemy is literally killing and taking physical action.
Your reasoning is complete horseshit; if I proposed a law making it legal to kill child molesters or serial rapists; does that make me evil?
Did you know that the bible itself distinguishes between "killing" and "murder"?
Do you know the difference?
Thanks for being both respectful and still candid on your views. That's a great start, and I hope I can be as respectful in reply ( I may find it hard!).
"evil is flourishing because we are too "good" to do what MUST be done."
Ahem. This is EXACTLY the justification that the C_A and other such operations used to perpetrate their worst actions and infiltrate into the worst areas of evil, eventually becoming indistinguishable from the 'evil' they asserted they were 'protecting' against.
I'd also like to point to the idea that your argument is repleat with emotive justifications:
"too good" ... as if there is actually something such as being 'too good'!? Either good is good, or it isn't. The idea that being good is contradictory to being responsible or effective doesn't wash with me, personally.
'We are busy having debates about "what's prim & proper and respecting pronouns" ... I'm not having those debates. Who are you debating with?
Reductive: "if I proposed a law making it legal to kill child molesters or serial rapists; does that make me evil?"
You're dragging child molesters and serial rapists into the discussion is about as classic a case of hyperbole as one could find.
It seems like the case you are attempting to make is that the prosecutors in this case as so evil and corrupt that regardless of their actions they should just be executed and removed. What they are actually doing (petitioning a judge in a legal action) doesn't come into it. Or if it does, they are basically the same as "child molesters or serial rapists" so execute them anyway.
Also, (paraphrasing here) "MY execution of them would be perfectly justified! Not murder! It's justified killing, the way the bible distinguishes between these two! For proposing that the judge disallow certain evidence!!!"
The temptation to see the playing field purely in terms of black and white, and to imagine oneself as being either the embodiment of, or representing, the 'white', thus justifying any and every viewpoint one has, well, I think most of us know where that temptation leads. Hollywood likes to highlight the notion of the righteous vigilante, but that's fantasy, and in reality, it doesn't go well.
In conclusion, I'm just that saying declaring that prosecutors should be executed *for petitioning something of a judge" is ludicrous, and is contradictory to the foundations of law and order that everyone that is evil in the deep State is opposed to:
DS: Action like X is justified because they are our enemy
Law and Order: action like X is justified by transcendent moral principles, which we strive to codify in our actual laws.
All of Western common law - one codification of which is the US constitution - is grounded in the premise that human beings cannot simply make laws because they want it, but that enacted law has to reflect transcendental laws established by the Creator.
If you've dug at all in to the law and order and the war currently being waged around the world between those who are using legal but not lawful means to destroy their enemy and opponents (aka the DS, the Cabal, the numerous NWO organizations and their captive governments), then you'll get the point that making something law doesn't necessarily make it right or lawful.
Anyway, thanks for sharing your reasoning. Maybe those who read the comments (although the thread is now dead) can make up their own mind whose reasoning here makes the most sense.
Welcome & likewise; Thanks for being respectful. We’re all frens here, right? :-)
I still disagree with most of what you say; I completely understand your perspective & opinion; I just disagree. (and thanks for challenging me; I love it & thats how we truly wring out our opinions & beliefs!)
I know the point about serial killers & child molesters was hyperbolic, but that was the point; some (like you? Not being a jerk - just honestly do you agree?) that if we could just round up & exterminate all child molesters & serial killers; that we should NOT do it because “wrong.” is that what you think?
I see it completely the opposite; I think the far bigger crime is leaving criminals alive and free to go on and continue victimizing innocent people - esp. children.
I do, in general, look at the bigger picture, and completely lose my shit when obviously guilty and evil people can abuse our bloated & corrupt legal system to defeat cases against them - not because they weren’t proven guilty; NOT because they were proven totally innocent; but because of one stupid legal technicality that hamstrung the case.
I absolutely think that much of our laws & legal system are ridiculous, insanely bloated to the point of being blatantly unconstitutional and counter to the original purpose of carrying out true justice.
Yes; I still think our side is “too good”; I see it all the time in every single comment out there. The vast majority of the time when more leftist / government / globalist crap is uncovered, the first / most frequent comments are “God will judge them” and infinite variations on that.
I believe that - yes, ultimate judgement lies with God, of course - but I believe it is 100% our responsibility to arrange the meeting. And much SOONER rather than later.
There's a lot more in this reply for me to agree with than otherwise. It's enjoyable getting detailed replies, because the picture of the other person's position becomes clearer.
Curiously, around the third paragraph I found myself asking whether you believe in God or not. I'll get to that in a minute.
haha. Great that you can stipulate not being a jerk! Because I see so often people taking offense because they misread or otherwise inject meaning into text that wasn't originally written to have that meaning!
My question about God is a bigger one, because how one views or understands God shapes so many other aspects of one's worldview. If you believe in God, in some manner, I would invite you to think about the question; Why does not God just obliterate the people who do evil? Why does God 'allow that evil' to continue to exist?
This is a fundamental question that impacts one's understanding (or view) of what Good and Evil are, how they continue to exist together in our world, and what Justice is, etc.
As I invite you to think about this question, I want to forewarn you that, no, my view on this is unlikely to be one that you are familiar with. You might go to the stock answers that some people adhere to, but most of them will be wrong (imo) and are essentially shorthand attempts to resolve the question by skipping logic and reasoning, or any comprehensive solution.
Regardless, its an important and fundamental question, imo. I'm curious what you would come up with.
The phrasing "round up & exterminate all child molesters & serial killers; that we should NOT do it because “wrong.” is that what you think?" seems very simplistic to me, and a lot of it hinges on the concept of 'wrong'.
I can empathize with your expressed view, that "the far bigger crime is leaving criminals alive and free to go on and continue victimizing innocent people", but I don't necessarily agree with it.
I think you've expressed a few points to me that reveal not just your view but your experience that underlies the views you've chosen to go with. E.g. "completely lose my shit when obviously guilty and evil people can abuse our bloated & corrupt legal system to defeat cases against them"
Obviously, there is a lot of emotion in that, including anger, outrage hinging on a sense of injustice. From my view, if you are being driven primarily by anger, rage and outrage, it's going to be easy to ignore or justify putting aside other aspects or nuances that may seem to hinder execution (no pun intended) the unfolding of that anger or rage. BUT, it's a primarily vulnerable position. When anger and rage etc, become a primary driving force, the very enemies we seek to counter can very easily abuse and manipulate that motive and direction. Which, imo, is one reason to be wary of it. Careful, I mean. Reflective, and self examination are important here.
BTW, I used to have some severe anger problems. I never acted on them in violence (aside from sometimes slamming the table or hitting a wall, etc), but with the assistance of my family, I came to realize where that anger was coming from, what was its origin, and how it was not serving me but hindering me.
Righteous anger can be a good thing, but in 9 cases out of 10, what people assume or believe to be righteous anger is in fact rooted in other issues. The 'righteous' part comes from a need to justify the behavior and choices.
With apologies, I'm not attempting to psychoanalyze you or lecture; I'm just putting these thoughts out here for reflection and consideration.
I am in full agreement with you there! Over the last 3-4 years I've been going down a good number of law-legal-justice system rabbit holes, and I can tell you, it's changed my view of the matrix big time! Very big time! But that's another discussion!
I suspect you may be focusing on and giving your attention to specific and certain comments, perhaps because they are tied so closely to your views (in that they seem to embody the opposite of your view and maybe trigger that anger or sense of wrongness).
Myself, I have not seen or observed that, and based on my experience, I would disagree. aka I don't think the first or most frequent comments are "God will judge them" or variations of that.
But the whole direction of our discussion via our replies points to the issues of accountability, of Divine and Human roles in accomplishing justice or even 'rightness'. I get the sense that for you 'justice' is not really the big priority, but rather 'rightness', in the sense that some situations (i.e. crimes) are so WRONG in their nature that whether it is just or not, certain actions need to be taken to make them RIGHT at least to an acceptable level. Would you agree?
I think in general that people tend to tie the idea of Justice up with what is RIGHT, but I think that in truth, justice is far more about balance than it is about what is right.
If is NOT right that innocent people suffer, let alone the most vulnerable among us, but I don't think that such wrongness can be corrected by metering out 'corrective' measures regardless of whether they are just or not.
It seems clear that we disagree on this point, at least in part, but I think that's this is probably because of differing views of what is right and wrong, and what causes those wrong to exist in the first place.
By and large, I agree with this, but I may disagree without about the HOW. In certain cases, human responsibility involves our holding our own people (other humans) to account, and sometimes, that will involve capital punishment - a death penalty. But there are other things that we CANNOT hold others to account for, and if we do, we can move into a space of violating the critical principle of responsibility.
Which leads me back to the question of why God allows evil to exist in the world, and why he doesn't, for example, simply obliterate those who commit evil or such horrendous proportions that no sane person would tolerate them.
This was a question I struggled a lot with when I became a teenager, and my critical thinking faculties began to kick in. Why does God allow such evil (and suffering) to exist in the world? As a teenager, I came to the conclusion that because God allows suffering to exist, then I do not like that God and I would refuse to acknowledge him! So for about 3 or 4 years in my teenage youth, I decided that I would be an atheist!
There have been a LOT of theories put forward over the centuries to try to resolve this problem, but as far as I know, all of them fail to fully elucidate and provide a satisfactory answer that reconciles logic and reasoning with faith and understanding of heart, etc.
Many will draw up the idea of free will, and leave it there. Or that God allows suffering (some think God creates the suffering!) to teach people a lesson, etc. Or that in his own good time, God will resolve it, and we simply cannot know.
None of those are satisfactory, imo. But the problem is complex, because it is connected directly to how evil came to exist in the first place, and why God did not prevent that from happening. God of love? Then WHY did God even allow evil to come into existence? Or did God create evil (some think so!)?
The Key to all this is to understand the principle of responsibility and how it is tied into God's purpose for the universe and humanity. We know the idea that there is no freedom without responsibility. But what is also true is that without responsibility, there is no growth or development or maturing of character. A child who has no responsibility at all will NOT develop the capacity to be responsible as an adult, and adults who are irresponsible are merely immature humans who never developed their capacity to be responsible.
Importantly, there are two forms of 'irresponsibility' that need to be clearly recognized: one, not taking responsibility for things we are properly responsible for. Two, taking 'responsibility' for things we are properly NOT responsible for. Both of these are aberrations, and distort the realm of responsibility, which in my view is the root cause of ALL the problems in the world.
When a man lies or cheats and then refuses to take responsibility for that, he violates the principle of responsibility. But also, when a man approaches you and tells you to do x or y or z when he actually has no authority to tell you or demand that you do that, he also violates the principle of responsibility.
That second form of abuse of responsibility manifests as control over others without the right authority. A govt telling living men or women what to do when it has not proper authority to do so, violates the responsibility of those men or women.
In God's original design, each human being is created to grow to spiritual maturity by exercising and fulfilling his or her responsibility. This involves making choices and living by the consequences. Spiritual growth is essentially the growth of the capacity to give and receive unconditional love. The responsibility that was given to human beings to complete that growth was faith in the word (Commandment) that God gave them: not to 'eat the fruit'.
Without going into what the fruit actually was, we can say that the original human ancestors were tempted and lured to abandon their responsibility to keep the faith, and the rest is history. (notice, when God came to Adam, he asked "what happened?" Adam's first reply was "Not MY fault, the woman YOU gave me tempted me!" signifying Adam failing to take responsibility for his choice. Instead, he blamed the woman and also subtly implied it was God's fault because God created the woman in the first place. When God asked Eve, she also behaved the same: "Not MY fault. The Serpent in the garden tempted me!"
The reason God does not, cannot interfere with certain realities in the world aka (the existence of evil) is because ultimately, it was the human beings failing in their responsibility in the first place, and then NOT taking responsibility in the second place, that gave birth to the existence of evil. While God works to assist, guide and help us resolve evil, he himself cannot liquidate it himself. He must adhere to the principle of not violating human responsibility, because he himself created that principle.
Could he do it? That's debatable. The question is, could God ever contradict himself? I believe the answer is no.
So, throughout history, God has worked to bring human beings in to a place where they can reverse the mistake by a) fulfilling their responsibility to believe and follow the word and b) take responsibility for the consequences of our actions.
When the Israelites believed in God's word to them, they were setting conditions to reverse the mistake of NOT believing in God's word that Adam and Eve coimmitted. Likewise, when a Christian affirms and believe sin Jesus, the embodiment of the word or the word in substance, we reverse that original mistake and set a condition that we fulfill our responsibility. BECAUSE we do that, God now can intervere and influence us without violating our responsibility, because we've set the condition to fulfill it.
(Cont.)
If Adam and Eve had fulfilled their responsibility and kept faith in the Commandment then the consequences of their actions would be unity with God, fulfillment of his purpose, and then ruling over the world in joy and peace as God's children. God's sovereignty would have been established. By Adam perfecting himself, God would come to dwell in Adam fully and partake in human society fully as the heavenly parent.
Because Adam failed, Jesus comes to fulfill the responsibility that Adam failed to complete.
The question of being able to execute (again, no pun) judgment hinges on our own capacity to represent God and execute our own responsibility. The non-violation of human responsibility is such a fundamental principle that God has worked without cease over millennia to rescue the world and bring humanity to the point where we can fulfill our responsibility so that by completion of that responsibility, true justice can prevail.
Think about it. None of us is a sinner. But does God or Jesus appear to us every second of the day and say, "Hey! you just sinned! Slap!" or "hey! You are thinking of sinning. I'll stop you!". No. And why not? Not simply because of 'free will', but because if we have no responsibility, then we have no free will. They will not interfere with OUR portion of responsibility. However, when we do set conditions and make choices and actions that fulfill our responsibility (related to belief, and action), even in some small way, then they will act to influence because they can do so without violating our responsibility.
The danger in executing 'justice' in our own way based on our own standards is the risk of slipping into a position where we violate the principle of responsibility, or ourselves, and others.
Who decides the guilt of someone that you accuse of being a pedo or a molester, or trafficker or whatever? The pinnacle of God's work (so far) to raise humanity to fulfill their responsibility has culminated (so far) in the trial by one's peers, as far as justice and the law are concerned.
I fully agree with you that the systems are out of whack, and that's because they have strayed so far from what they are originally designed to be.
But the ultimate solution will ONLY be found by more and more human beings fulfilling their responsibility as far as God sees it.
But if we step out and start mowing down people we are convinced are criminals, simply because we can and because we are so certain of our own judgments, then its really perilous territory. Because the moment we violate the principle of human responsibility, either by NOT being responsible for what we should be and for trying to be responsible for what we are not, then we compromise God's ability to guide, govern and be sovereign over us. And if he isn't then someone else is. To see how bad that gets, we need only look at history.
Long write out, if you made it to the end, congrats!
At the end of the day, although it falls short, the above is a rather broad description of why I think its important that law and order prevail, and that while it is painful and entails suffering, there are no quick solutions, like just rounding up 'pedos' (actually who I think is a pedo, really) and executing them.
If that was a viable solution, I think God would already have done it.
The wheels of justice grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly finely.
Anyway, a few thoughts.
OK so real quick because I gotta head out.....
Thanks for writing such detail & clearly taking so much time & effort on this. I really do appreciate it and want to know what you (and others!) think.
I think by and large, like 95%++ we are on the same page on the bulk of our views / opinions on most of this stuff.
I think what's causing this discussion is the fact that it's written / text and hence ZERO tonality, body language, etc.
I do not - absolutely not - think "we" (whether society in general or whoever) should just go out & start killing people that "we" suspect (or even know) are criminals.
I do fully believe in "innocent until proven guilty" (now more than ever with Trump & J6 just to name a few!) and the overall process, and I believe that anyone accused of ANY crime should absolutely be entitled to a complete, thorough, and FAIR hearing.
That said; We've definitely swung too far in a very wrong way, where our justice system no longer works, hardly at all.
I don't think we should go out & start shooting people we SUSPECT of crime, but I do think that the victims of any sort of crime should never be arrested nor hassled for defending themselves at the moment of the crime.
For example; if you walk in on someone abusing your child & you kill them; that's not murder & the only thing you should be given is a parade & cash reward.
The "justice" system today has been so grotesquely warped & distorted that the families of actual criminals can sue the victims for "civil rights / emotional distress" and other utter clown world bullshit.
That's the sort of stuff that drives me insane, as I think it does most people.
I'll try to follow up with more later, but that's what I've got to start...
OK....I gotta question here for folks. How come when I run a Jack Smith photo through an AI photo detector it always comes back identified as an AI photo? Is this guy for real...or just part of the show?
“Chickens die shortly after having sex. At least in my experience “
— Jack Smith (via “unnamed sources”)
It’s so easy; which is why liberals do it consistently
Count Duku is not happy.
Isn't that special?? How can these people make these crazy statements and expect the judge to honor them? Oh, I know, they are Liberal/Progressive/Woke/ COMMUNIST judges!
Next he'll ask to ban him from showing the watermarked ballots
It's like how they forbid the toxicology report of whatever that guys name was because he overdosed on fentanyl and they wanted to blame his death on a white cop. Judicial system is a joke
Well shit, why bother with an expensive show trial? Just declare him guilty and call it a day. /s
"partisan political attacks", oh like this whole farce?
They must have something huge on this guy to come up with the shit he does. He is a clown!
or.....an actor ;)
Let me give the TL;DR of that article:
We have already decided Trump is guilty. He shouldn't be allowed to introduce any evidence that might show someone else is responsible and he is innocent. We told everyone that his claims were disinformation, and allowing actual facts into the public record would destroy our carefully constructed propaganda.
Prosecutor asks court to ban defendant from introducing exculpatory evidence
Normal?
Please tell me how you ban somebody from showing proof?