The mention of a leak IS the leak.
Sprawling as in can’t stand up.
It would have been leaked if this was true.
“Special Counsel Jack Smith has “sprawling” evidence against President Trump, CBS News reporter Robert Costa said citing sources.”
If this evidence existed it would have to be revealed to Trump’s attorneys during discovery. I’m calling BS on CBS.
I doubt CBS knows anything and Discovery will tell Trump’s lawyers everything. Just more wishful thinking there is some smoking gun that really does not exist.
This guy is allowed to mine everything, such that he cones up with a final thing to try Trump on?
You are supposed to have evidence of a crime and gather only evidence of that one.
There is no end to the ways a lifetime of evidence across and entire populous could provide hints of possible crimes. Even taking a sample from a store 45 years ago would be difficult for someone to defend as not being shoplifting, when the evidence is sliced down to just showing you walking away while eating and the employee who gave it out is dead or can’t remember being there on that day.
This is 1984ish, to the extreme.
From Merriam-Webster:
sprawling—intransitive verb: to spread or develop irregularly or without restraint.
That does seem to describe the case, not the alleged evidence.
Adam Schiff said the same thing.
Sprawling evidence of what?
Jack Smith defines the crime and creates his own statute. Shocker, he has sprawling evidence to support it.
Just like he did against Bob McDonnell and his wife? Just to see it get overturned.
Lawfare special agent Jack Smith and his home court of the U.S. Dustrict Court for the Committee of Public Safety, Judge Robespierre presiding.
“Sprawling evidence”? Is that like “self evident” or “beyond circumstantial”?
But the question is, does he have “binders full of evidence”?
Have you ever seen eyes as cold and evil as Jack Smith?
yep, “sprawling” — a precise legal term that undergirds Black’s Law Dictionary
“He has memos and diary entries from key witnesses, like former Vice President Mike Pence, key eyewitness testimony from people who are inside the Oval Office with Trump.”
It is has always amazed me that corrupt people like Jack Smith will tout the supposed impeccable reliability of a written memo, such as something that would come from Mike Pence.
People will lie on the witness stand, they have to be warned of perjury, but whatever is found that is written down by the same person is on the same level as Holy Writ.
If Smith had any evidence at all, he would have leaked it long ago.
“Sprawling” is a term you might use when someone falls flat on his face.
Well that’s the end of Trump. They really have him dead to right this time. /s
When your holding complete irrefutable evidence, as a duly appointed special council within the laws of the United States, you don’t do interviews with the media and show them your sprawling evidence.
When you get spanked by the SCOTUS, and you don’t have a real case, you do ‘politically motivated’ information releases to hurt the accused, deny him due process, and to attempt to legitimize the illegitimate in the hopes that it will prevent you from answering for your misconduct.
Smith just showed his hand.
This CBS reporter also said, “And if you don’t believe me, just ask Adam Schiff...he’ll tell you about all the evidence of Trump’s guilt!”
Yeah, but there is sprawling evidence that the 2020 election was stolen and that the Bidens are crooks, so…
Kind of like all the evidence of Russian collusion that Schiff claimed to have. Haven’t we stood about enough of these people?