Davin News Server

> On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 18:48:18 +0000,  Mitchell Holman says...  
> 
> > > So why did they go after someone who spent $130,000 of HIS OWN
> > > money, when Congress has used at least $17 MILLION to settle THEIR
> > > sexual misconduct hush money cases?
>  
> > If Trump did nothing wrong why did he lie about it?

Like Joe Biden, re: Chinese Business Partner? - Asked whether he was involved in the business dealings or was sitting with Hunter when the message 
was sent, Biden told reporters Wednesday, "No. I wasn't." Asked again, Biden replied more forcefully, "No."

Hunter Biden: "I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director 
that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand. And now means tonight. I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me 
and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the 
call WITH my father."

Like Bill Clinton, re: Monica Lewinsky? - "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." - "Th(at) lie saved me." - Bill Clinton

Like Hill Clinton, re: Benghazi? - "Was it because of a protest(anti-Muhammad video) or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided 
they would go kill some Americans?" - Hillary Clinton

Like Barack Hussein Obama, re: healthcare? - "If you like your healthcare plan, you'll keep your healthcare plan, period." - "What we said was, you 
can keep (your plan) if it hasn't changed since the law passed." - Politifact: Lie 
 
Like Hillary Clinton, re: illegal email server? - "It was allowed." - "I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified."

"I remember landing under sniper fire." - H. Clinton

OBAMA: "... we don't threaten the freedom of the press because they say things or publish stories we don't like."

THE FACTS: Obama arguably went farther - using extraordinary actions to block the flow of information to the public.

The Obama administration used the 1917 Espionage Act with unprecedented vigor, prosecuting more people under that law for leaking sensitive 
information to the public than all previous administrations combined. Obama's Justice Department dug into confidential communications between news 
organizations and their sources as part of that effort.

=====

AP FACT CHECK: Obama Doesn't Always Tell The Straight Story
https://apnews.com/article/ffc60235c26c470c9047e0da6ff19 - F95

Obama Administration Secretly Obtains Phone Records Of AP ... - WIRED
https://www.wired.com/2013/05/doj-got-reporter-phone-records/

Justice Department Secretly Obtains AP Phone Records - NPR
https://www.npr.org/2013/05/14/183810320/justice-department-secretly-obtains-ap-phone-records

Phone Records of Journalists Seized by U.S. - The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/14/us/phone-records-of-journalists-of-the-associated-press-s

=====

Politicians lie... some to protect themselves from prosecution.

> That's not a lie... it's a denial.

Yes!

Trump breaks silence on Stormy Daniels payment, denies knowledge
April 5, 2018
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-denies-knowledge-130-
000-payment-stormy-daniels-n863116


     vs.............


Trump Admits To Authorizing Stormy Daniels Payoff
MAY 2, 2018
https://www.npr.org/2018/05/02/607943366/giuliani-says-trump-did-know-
about-stormy-daniels-payment


[1]    Which is the denial?

Uhhh... the one that says: "DENIES knowledge"?

[1] Fissed it for you.

Again, dipshit... WHY was Trump charged and indicted, while Congressmen who used $18.5 million of TAXPAYER'S money, weren't?

So why did they go after someone who spent $130,000 of HIS OWN money, when Congress has used at least $17 MILLION to settle THEIR sexual misconduct 
hush money cases?

So, Congress has paid over $17 million in hush money for sexual misconduct inside of the offices in these buildings. And what's more, is that was 
taxpayer money. Right? The allegation is that President Trump paid $130,000 of his own money. But here in Congress we have... there may be some on 
this dais... I mean, I'm for turning loose all of these records. Who in here has had the taxpayer pay for their sexual misconduct charges... the hush 
money?

I bet there's some over there, there may be some over here. I don't know, but I do know it's taxpayer money and I do know not a single penny of it 
has been turned in as a campaign finance expense. Wouldn't, I mean, is the FEC going to investigate the $17 million that, that Congress has paid to 
settle, behind closed doors of these, these, uh, sexual misconduct allegations?

Congressman, if, if a complaint were to come to us about it, I'm sure it would be thoroughly investigated.

I might file one because it seems like anybody could do this.

But let me, let me just ask this, is this verdict going to be vacated? Attorney General Bailey, what do you think?

It absolutely should be.

On what grounds?

Numerous grounds! I think the, the five grounds I laid out in my opening statement provide sufficient justification to undermine the credibility of 
the conviction. I think there are additional grounds as well. But I think that the, the constitutional violations, the due process violation, the 
jury unanimity sixth amendment problem alone, the gag order is violative of the first amendment. I mean, the, the prosecutorial misconduct, those are 
the, the conviction is replete with legal error.

Ms. Foley. Do you think this is going to be vacated this this verdict?

I do. And I, I think eventually it's going to be uh reversed based on um uh legal grounds rather than uh mixed questions of fact and law. So some of 
the evidentiary issues, some of the biases issues. I think they're more difficult to win on appeal because the appellate courts owe deference on 
these evidentiary determinations of trial judges. Bias is very difficult to win on appeal, because the judge has so much latitude in deciding whether 
to recuse himself. That's why the due process errors are so critical here because obviously due process errors are questions of law. They get de Novo 
standard of appellate review. The appellate courts owe absolutely no deference whatsoever.

So the irony here is this is going to be vacated, and this trial was all about trying to influence an election, using the process as the punishment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6f9Ow8cJlg&t=119s