ADVERTISEMENT

Starting to believe gator on the GA Trump grand jury thing

Half of me thinks she was goaded into doing this by someone. It’s a terrible look and compromises each and every indictment they might could make, sure, but the entire probe was started with one goal in mind. Make sure Donald Trump is never president again. The Fulton County DA doesn’t give a flying fvck about perjury charges against anyone who testified. People around Trump have gone down before and it didn’t hurt him. If they didn’t have anything to take down Trump, parade this dumb bitch out there, compromise the indictments you could have possibly made, and run with the narrative that you had the goods on Trump, but couldn’t indict him because this girl compromised everything.

Her bias was clearly showing, and I’m sure she wasn’t the only one on the grand jury giddy about the idea of indicting Trump. Even if they did recommend indictment, the DA could look at it and be like “yeah, there’s no way I could convict on that evidence.” So this girl goes out, runs her mouth, and the DA can say “well we were going to indict, but this girl…” and the media runs with it as Trump was guilty, we had the goods, and the DA essentially gets the W without ever having to take it to trial.
 
Last edited:
Half of me thinks she was goaded into doing this by someone. It’s a terrible look and compromises each and every indictment they might could make, sure, but the entire probe was started with one goal in mind. Make sure Donald Trump is never president again. The Fulton County DA doesn’t give a flying fvck about perjury charges against anyone who testified. People around Trump have gone down before and it didn’t hurt him. If they didn’t have anything to take down Trump, parade this dumb bitch out there, compromise the indictments you could have possibly made, and run with the narrative that you had the goods on Trump, but couldn’t indict him because this girl compromised everything.

Her bias was clearly showing, and I’m sure she wasn’t the only one on the grand jury giddy about the idea of indicting Trump. Even if they did recommend indictment, the DA could look at it and be like “yeah, there’s no way I could convict on that evidence.” So this girl goes out, runs her mouth, and the DA can say “well we were going to indict, but this girl…” and the media runs with it as Trump was guilty, we had the goods, and the DA essentially gets the W without ever having to take it to trial.


First and foremost, a grand jury proceeding is unique in that it is conducted in complete secrecy. The only people present in the room during a grand jury proceeding are the jurors themselves, a prosecutor, and a court reporter, who is sworn to secrecy. There are no judges, clerks, or other court personnel present.

I don't really understand how/why she was able to do this. I'm by no means a lawyer or an expert on Grand Juries, but based on what little I do know, this doesn't make sense.

 
People like this bitch are why we have two shady ass senators.

I bet she has some kind of fücked up pronouns like “she/they”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reasoned
First and foremost, a grand jury proceeding is unique in that it is conducted in complete secrecy. The only people present in the room during a grand jury proceeding are the jurors themselves, a prosecutor, and a court reporter, who is sworn to secrecy. There are no judges, clerks, or other court personnel present.

I don't really understand how/why she was able to do this. I'm by no means a lawyer or an expert on Grand Juries, but based on what little I do know, this doesn't make sense.

It’s my understanding that those are guidelines and not really “illegal“ or enforceable. I guess it makes sense, you can’t really force someone to enter into a confidentiality contract with legal consequences (jury duty). She’s just proving how low the standard is for a “jury of one’s peers”…
 
  • Like
Reactions: BamaFan1137
She’s just proving how low the standard is for a “jury of one’s peers”…
This is the truly frightening lesson to be learned from her bizarre behavior. She came across as a childish, dim witted young woman, who perverted a confidential legal process into her own 15 minutes of fame…….except, she would be viewed as “infamous” were we living in a sane world.
 
Last edited:
This is the truly frightening lesson to be learned from her bizarre behavior. She came across as a childish, dim witted young woman, who perverted a confidential legal process into her own 15 minutes of fame…….except, she should viewed as “infamous” were we living in a sane world.
I hope Trump is not the Republican nominee for 2024, but her giddiness in these interviews makes a compelling case for anyone potentially indicted to argue her bias in the recommendation of indictment. Supposedly, she is “in between jobs” and that’s how she was so easily able to sacrifice so much time to “serve.” Seems like she is taking a calculated risk to get her 15 minutes of fame, and she’s hoping it parlays her into a new career. She’s a useful idiot for the left. Theyll Squeeze everything they can out of her, and then they’ll trash her for ruining their moment to get Trump. I ALMOST feel bad for her, as I truly think she’s hoping to fall into a career on air.
 
It’s my understanding that those are guidelines and not really “illegal“ or enforceable. I guess it makes sense, you can’t really force someone to enter into a confidentiality contract with legal consequences (jury duty). She’s just proving how low the standard is for a “jury of one’s peers”…

I would think you could be held in contempt. Maybe not...I sure as hell wouldn't risk it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alphatiger08
I would think you could be held in contempt. Maybe not...I sure as hell wouldn't risk it.
I will admit that was horrifying. But we have both seen lunatics picked as jurors. I was shocked that one got through. However , from what I gathered the overseeing judges guidelines were surprisingly loose. I guess it’s inconsequential at this point as it’s going to real Grand Jury now. I would bet she gets a gag order it more embarrassing than legally significant.
LOL!!
Duped again. This will result in a mistrial.
LOL dumbass… was there a trial? Which one???? There will be about a dozen.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT