Let me summarize this article... Liz and her 'committee' (brute squad) were caught being dishonest... again.
At least she's consistent
At least she's consistent
Liz caught in a lie again...
- Thread starter derek_tiger
- Start date
Epoch times? Seriously ? I can’t get past the firewall.
Just curious- are you going to believe Cippaloni when he verifies the Rosen Vs Clark coup plot on the fraudulent letter to the states to throw out the vote? .
It was verified under oath by 3 DOJ AGs & staffers in the WH meeting with Adolph. Cippoloni ( PC) told them “ it was a murder suicide pact” and he and DOJ would resign INSTANTLY before they walked out the door. Too many people verify.
He shouldn’t have had that meeting. He’s fvcked.
PC will absolutely verify that today and bury Clark. Clark will flip on Trumpsky.
BTW there is no attorney client privilege. PC is only the attorney fothe Office of POTUS… not his personal lawyer. His job is to protect the institution. He tried to do that. He will testify as such.
John Dean did the exact same thing to Nixon. That was only a simple burglary.
Very difficult to take you seriously when you mock Epoch Times... then turn around and post shite from the Communist News Network, the Atlantic, NYT, and any other leftist BS site. Really?
Pull quotes:
A key lawyer for President Donald Trump who helped draft memos that sought to investigate claims of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election told The Epoch Times that he backs the charges by a recent committee witness that the January 6 committee lied to the American people.
Witness and former Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Ken Klukowski, who testified before the committee last week, said in a statement provided to The Federalist over the July 4 weekend, “The January 6 Committee falsely accused me on Thursday of being a go-between in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. That accusation is false both in its broad outlines and its details.”
In an exclusive interview with The Epoch Times, former Trump lawyer John Eastman said he supports Klukowski’s claims.
Trump critic and committee member Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wy.) said that the testimony only shows that Klukowski was appointed to his DOJ position under the influence of Eastman—a claim that both deny.
Cheney claimed that together, they proposed to “overturn the election”—failing to mention this was only possible if they could prove any significant allegations of elections fraud—with the cooperation of Jeff Clark, a former assistant attorney general at the DOJ.
While it’s true that Clark drafted a letter that his bosses felt was inappropriate for the DOJ to present to the states over the election, according to the testimony presented in The Federalist, the connection between Clark, Eastman, and Klukowski to that letter is tenuous, according to Klukowski’s statement in the Federalist and Eastman’s account of his relationship with Klukowski.
Eastman said that the committee is specifically lying in three different ways to advance the notion that what they did was illegal.
“Every time they use the word ‘baseless’ as describing our allegations of illegality and or fraud, that’s a lie,” Eastman said.
In fact, even before the election was held, some media outlets were claiming that any allegations of voter fraud were “baseless.”
An NPR news story published nearly a month before Election Day claimed, “In reality, voter fraud is extremely rare, though President Trump has repeated baseless claims about it being widespread.”
Eastman said that his legal argument to allow states to send alternate electors if voter fraud is proven isn’t novel, nor is his argument that there is ambiguity on the question of whether the vice president may delay the appointment of electors.
The idea that the vice president had the authority to nullify state electors had been out there “for decades, including by a lot of leftist professors, after the Bush versus Gore campaign,” he said.
Eastman pointed to an article in The Atlantic in September 2020 where legal scholars, including a group convened by UC Irvine, made the point that there is still a lot of legal ambiguity surrounding the vice president’s authority over accepting electors.
Don't forget Vox, Slate and Vanity Fair. Lulz
PARDON ME!! Here’s my response from Trumpskys very own lawyers deposition- Eric Herschmann? Remember him? The guy who brilliantly defended him in the first impeachment .. definitely RINO LOLOLOL
If you don’t mind, I think I’ll take Trumpskys own handpicked lawyers, Cipplaloni and Herschmann over your sources.
This dissertation will end up as your next “Kraken ( disbarred) ,” Durham uncovers crime of the century ( embarrassed 0-12) “ as I said before- Wait for it”
Rudy, Clark and Eastman are all going down like Tim Cook on a Asian boy. Just wondering why they asked for pardons and didn’t get one. Who rolls on Trumpsky first? My money is on Clark.
So based on WH counsel sworn testimony and advice to WH staff - IYO who all needs a criminal lawyer at this point?
Just curious on your gut feeling? No flame.
I haven't followed it like you have. Assuming what you have posted is accurate, I'd say there are several who could be in trouble.
You don’t have to rely on me or anyone else’s opinion. It’s pretty clear. . The video testimony was devastating. Liz had to rub one off after this.
Herschmann was the bad ass no BS WH enforcer who screened activities of conspirators. . While Cipploni was the gentle good guy who “handled “ the child tantrums of Trumpsky.
He went off for the record on Clark/ Eastman / Navarro scheme and the GA fvck up. He also recorded his conversations for his own protection. It’s fatal.
If something is going to happen, I want it to be soon so the country can move past it.
I’m hoping that it encourages the other GOP candidates who will have to work through Cult death threats and Trumpsky intimidation.
J6 has to get DOJ to make criminal referrals before the Freedom Caucus shuts down the investigation. There is a good reason that they fought the investigation from the beginning.
Similar threads
