Trump Takes the Gloves Off, Files Unsealed Motion to Dismiss Jack Smith’s Classified Docs Case For “Vindictive and Selective Prosecution” – AND SLAMS HILLARY CLINTON!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com ^ | 5/2/2024 | cristina laila

[DouglasKC]

eVERYONE knows THIS IS TRUE BUT THE MEDIA OR THE GOVERNMENT WILLE EVER ADMIT IT. cANNON HAS TO TAKE THESLINGS AND ARROWS ANDDISMISS THIS FARCE.

[joesbucks]

I’m game. What do you think the chances are?

[linMcHlp]

BTTT

[Roadrunner383]

I believe Judge Cannon has already questioned Jack Smith as to whether any other President has ever been charged under the Espionage Act, and I think she mentioned Joe Biden. This is definitely on her radar.

On a side note, a recent case before the U.S. Supreme Ct. alleging selective prosecution by local police has drawn a lot of interest from the Justices. From what was reported, the Supreme Court is aware of the issue. There was a lot of questions by some of the Justices. The liberal Justices were actually pretty critical of the police for engaging in selective prosecution.

[Candor7]

THe question is, did the Deep State get to Judge Cannon?

[sit-rep]

its a stretch... I never heard of the “Let me go because everyone else did it” working anywhere...

[Elsie]

When are we EVER gonna get a UC/LC Change button?

[Elsie]

– AND SLAMS HILLARY CLINTON!

In his unsealed motion to dismiss, Trump highlighted how others such as James Comey, Joe Biden, Mike Pence, and Bill and Hillary Clinton all illegally possessed classified documents yet they were never prosecuted.

 

 

“Hillary Clinton  and her colleagues deleted 31,830 emails and destroyed data on numerous electronic devices, including after a congressional preservation order,” Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche wrote referring to Hillary's criminal email deletion and use of BleachBit to destroy emails under subpoena. Hillary also took a hammer to her BlackBerrys.

[Alberta's Child]

This filing seems to have the greatest value as a political tool right now. Since it has been unsealed, I could see entire passages from it used in Trump campaign ads.

I would not dismiss the legal weight of it, though. The “selective prosecution” argument reinforces — almost perfectly — the questions that were asked by several U.S. Supreme Court justices in one of the J6 cases before them right now.

[Alberta's Child]

stretch... I never heard of the “Let me go because everyone else did it” working anywhere...

It’s probably more like this rationale: “Nobody else was prosecuted for it because it’s not a crime.”

[sit-rep]

Lol... Don’t get me wrong, I agree! But we’re not living in a sensible world!!

[shotgun]

He should argue entrapment based upon the unsealed documents that show how the deep state and White House colluded to come up with these charges.

[Pajamajan]

bttt

[enumerated]

“Good luck with that. Selective prosecution is exceedingly difficult to prove.“

What utter BS.

Selective prosecution is exceedingly easy to prove in any courtroom that is not rigged - that is where the luck will have to come in. Good luck finding such a courtroom in any of these once-great American cities turned Democrat hell-holes.

Any three-year-old can see that this persecution of President Trump
Is not about justice. None of this would be happening if he were not leading a popular revolution against an unelected and thoroughly corrupt administrative state.

[lurk]

Cannon seems to be allowing the pre-trial material to mature in the direction of dismissal. It’s a good move if she intends to dismiss with prejudice.

[1Old Pro]

Seems pretty obvious this case should be dismissed.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

If “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against Hillary, how can Smith get away with charging Trump? Situational ethics. That was then, this is now.