Just In: Jack Smith and Biden's DOJ to Indict Rudy Giuliani and Fellow Trump Attorneys for Questioning Stolen 2020 Election

The Gateway Pundit ^ | June 30, 2023 | Jim Hoft

[Macho MAGA Man]

Just as more and more criminal conduct is revealed against Joe Biden and the Biden Crime Family, including likely treasonous acts, the DOJ springs into action and leaks that they are going to indict Trump’s attorneys and add more bogus charges against President Trump.

You are witnessing the final stages of a once great nation.

The government is now openly working with Democrats to indict, smear, bankrupt, and imprison their political opposition – Donald Trump, his supporters, and his attorneys.

Now Merrick Garland’s DOJ is set to indict Rudy Giuliani and fellow Trump attorneys who questioned the fraudulent election and sought to delay the certification in Congress.

The Independent reported:

[SuperLuminal]

The Communist Purge Continues To Grow Exponentially & Nothing Is Being Done About It!

[Brad’s Gramma]

Bumping your post!

[ohioman]

No surprise. You like being a POS troll.

[Vermont Lt]

Dude, it’s too hot and Smokey for you to be all riled up. Take a bill and settle down. I am sure the nurse will come by soonwith your evening pill and diaper change.

Have a great weekend.

[LegendHasIt]

Gee, Jack, I don't question, I say outright: THE 2020 (and 2022) ELECTION WAS STOLEN.

Come and get me, you bastard.

[adorno]

The burden of proof is on those who claim that the election was fraudulent/stolen/dishonest/whatever

The burden of proof is with the party making the allegations or accusations. Thus, democrats who would put Trump or Juliani on the defendant's chair, would have to prove that the election was not stolen. Plus, there were many irregularities before and after the votes were tallied. It would be up to the accusers to prove that those irregularities were not a problem at all.

Proving a negative is difficult, but, the negatives exist on both sides.

[NorthMountain]

would have to prove that the election was not stolen.

That, as I said, is a logical impossibility.

However ... since when is saying "The election was stolen" a crime? WTF? What statute does that violate, and if there is one how is that statute not a direct violation of the First Amendment?

This situation is ridiculous.

[itsahoot]

They are playing a very hard game here, and only invite retaliation down the road.

Having perfected the election steal, clearly they don't expect to ever lose their power in an election, else why would they reveal their true agenda?

[adorno]

That, as I said, is a logical impossibility.

But, like I said before, there are negative accusations that can't be proven from both sides.

If Biden's team makes accusations that can't be proven, then, game over; stalemate. Everybody go home. But Trump's accusations would still remain and he might pursue the accusations of a stolen election if he becomes president.

[Varsity Flight]

* 1st Amendment brings ..

* ...2nd Amendment

Bill of Rights

☝️

[itsahoot]

and the GOP just sits back and does NOTHING

Not exactly, Barr was just there to destroy evidence and hold up prosecutions of the deep state traitors so you can hardly say the GOP does nothing. RINO speaker's of the House have protected the Deep State for near 100 years.

[StAnDeliver]

"Thank you for making my point. The two General Election polls (Trump vs. Biden) you have included show Trump stuck in the mid-40s..."

...where President Trump is beating Biden in all 3 general election polls this week, including a well-known Democrat polling organization showing Trump winning Pennsylvania.

Thank you for making my point.

[itsahoot]

It's getting about time for the pitchforks, torches and a peasant uprising.

Don't remember J6 huh? Cleverly designed to discourage that very thing.

[NorthMountain]

But Trump's accusations would still remain and he might pursue the accusations of a stolen election if he becomes president.

Trump's accusations are 1) original and 2) logically provable.

Corrupt judges refuse to let those accusations be tried on their merits. THAT is the primary problem. It's not a new problem; I've seen instances of electoral corruption and courts refusal to hear the matter going back thirty years.

The secondary problem is that making those accusations (that the election was fraudulent) isn't even a crime.

[itsahoot]

I fully expect to castigated now on FR for issuing this common sense observation.

Not common sense common marxist propaganda tactics.

[Alberta's Child]

You're making the wrong point on this thread.

I can't even remember the last time I saw a national poll for a presidential election where a prospective candidate in a general election polled any higher than the "mid-40s" ... and I'm talking about a poll taken in the last decade.

[zeugma]

Once you’ve become a banana republic, expect to see this kind of crap

[Sidebar Moderator]

Bye, troll.

[Sidebar Moderator]

Don’t let the door hit you …

[antceecee]

Ping