Fulton County Sheriff Says ‘We’ll Have A Mugshot’ If Former Pres. Trump Is Indicted Locally

The transcipts of the calls are available online. I mean, if you want to know what he actually said to the AG of Georgia.
They are too terrified to read anything which explodes the lies they have been fed to parrot.
 
It's funny that all of you tards say the exact same talking point. You clearly all subscribe to the same MAGA propagandists who have trained you parrots very well.
You got it backwards. Right wing propagandist come here to see me and what I'm saying.

But in your ignorant repetitions, you all reveal you have not read the indictment. Not even so much as the first two pages.

That's sad. Really, really sad.
What's sad is watching democrats claim speech crimes.

Democrats believe saying 2020 was stolen is a crime.
 
What I don't understand, is. . . if he had been paying attention to what was going on in his own DoJ, when they declined to prosecute Brenda Snipes for this same type of stuff, then this would not have been a problem, IF they had deployed preventative measures to prevent this sort of shenigans from taking place. . .

It is almost like the establishment wanted this sort of thing to go on. . .
When you're the president, and everyone in the government is trying to screw you over, it's difficult for one man to make sure everything is being done properly. That's what delegation of authority is.
Even Pence was out to get him.
It's a seriously fucked up mess, and everyone involved should have been charged with treason.
 

Fulton County Sheriff Pat Labat says his office is preparing for the possibility of former President Donald Trump being indicted in Fulton County.

He says that, if indicted by a grand jury, the former president will be treated like anyone else accused of a crime, including fingerprints and a mugshot.

“Unless somebody tells me differently, we are following our normal practices, and so it doesn’t matter your status, we’ll have a mugshot ready for you,” Sheriff Labat said.



T-shirt sales will skyrocket!


With Trump's pending indictment in Georgia, what new nothingburger hoax do you all suppose Comer will pull out of his ass to once again attempt to distract from Trump's crimes?
The fact that he hasn't had his mugshot taken yet is proof that the legal system doesn't treat everyone the same.

This is what the political left has been saying for 150 years or so.
 
Trump was shown he had a fair count. He was even offered the full video of the ballot counting. He refused it because it debunked his Big Lie.

Then, in desperation, he threatened to weaponize the federal government against the Secretary of State and his attorney if they didn't go along.


And he created illegal electors from seven states which also told him he lost the election.


So when I hear the parroting tards all say in unison, "Dissis bout free speech!", I can't help but laugh my ass off at how credulous and submissive they are.

Not one of you has read the indictment.

You don't even know what an indictment is.
Your ignorant ass should probably just STFU.
 
When you're the president, and everyone in the government is trying to screw you over, it's difficult for one man to make sure everything is being done properly. That's what delegation of authority is.
Even Pence was out to get him.
It's a seriously fucked up mess, and everyone involved should have been charged with treason.
From the transcript I read, they were indeed counting ballots with no observers present. There is no factual disagreement on this. And normally, this is against agreed upon laws.

That does seem to be in violation of the law.

Now, of course, we have the pretext of, "COVID," so, I don't know what to do with that.

I understood his arguments about the ballot signatures as well. Those? Are just a bit more flimsy. A person's signature does change over time, mine certainly has. . .
Election 2020

Georgia Requires Signature Matching On Mail-In Ballots, But The Science Is Dubious​

Georgia Requires Signature Matching On Mail-In Ballots, But The Science Is Dubious

Now, that provisional ballot issue? That one is a doozie. I remember during the 2000 & 2005 elections, and again when the Bernie supporters, were contesting the primary in California, a lot of times, there is the argument about, "provisional," ballots and whether they need be counted at all or not. Sometimes, election workers won't even count them. I have no idea if Trump's claims that what he heard about all those military votes being allegedly for Biden, when polling shows them all being for him are true or not. . . .

I have no idea if his claim that they were saying 100% of those went for Biden or not. I don't know if everything he said that he was hearing, in this call is accurate, but, the spin in the MSM, versus what the transcript of what Trump said, are indeed, very different. He was not acting in a "criminal," way, IMO, what he was doing, was trying to have normal election safe guards applied, in a time of the pandemic. Yet, the folks he was dealing with, were very not thinking, or acting, rational or clearly, because they were all very much terrified of dying from a virus. . .

This now seems to be a case, of the establishment now in hindsight, of wanting to paint Trump as trying to de-legitimize national elections, which were HIGHLY irregular and unusual, while he was clearly just trying to contest them. . . .

Now if it wasn't? Why now? What has changed? What new evidence has come to light? Why did they not bring this case to court a year ago?

I will tell you. His popularity in the polls, and his threat to the current administration.

Anyone that can't see this a political ploy, is not very smart IMO. Don't they remember we were in the midst of a pandemic when this all went on?

:dunno:
 
He is charged with speech crimes.

That's why you won't say what action trump did that was illegal.
I'm not the one indicting Trump. The grand jury is. And they are quite clear what they indicting Trump for.

Read the indictment.


When you refuse to look at the indictment, you can't tell me what is or isn't in it. Because you couldn't know.
 
I'm not the one indicting Trump. The grand jury is. And they are quite clear what they indicting Trump for.

Read the indictment.


When you refuse to look at the indictment, you can't tell me what is or isn't in it. Because you couldn't know.
Why can't you just say what Trump did that was illegal?

If he did a crime, like say something democrats don't like, you should be able to tell me.
 

Forum List

Back
Top