Qanon shaman...likely to get a new trial considering the government withheld video evidence from the defense....

[martybegan]

Your opinions are based on your fantasies about what happened, which are based on ignorance.

This has been proven over and over again.

Society is hard enough, we don't need twats like you making shit up to get upset about.

Unlike you, I actually get informed before I run my mouth. When I present that information to you, you ignore it because you are a reality ignoring loser.

Informed????

LOLOLOLOLOL. This coming from someone who thinks women can have penises.

 

[martybegan]

You despise me because your mental masters want you to despise me.

Tucker Carlson is raking in tons of money by manipulating people like you. That's his purpose.

You wouldn't be so ignorant and misguided if you actually thought for yourself.

I despise you because all you do is regurgitate leftist tropes without thinking even once.

Good for him.

I think for myself far more than you do. I doubt you don't have 1 position that isn't hard left.

 

[Marener]

the defense

And you know that for a fact? Or is it just some criminal defense lawyer saying it on TV where they have no repercussions for lying?

 

[martybegan]

We know who the prosecution was. A pity you thought you could play bait and switch over so etching you have no answer for.

As far as Ashes Targetpractice, she tried leading a violent mob into the House chamber where some lawmakers were still holed up. It was a justifiable shoot to keep that violent mob at bay until those lawmakers & staff could be safely evacuated.

She wasn't leading anything, and she was shot unarmed halfway through a window.

But since she's a righty, you don't give a fuck.

 

[Marener]

Informed????

LOLOLOLOLOL. This coming from someone who thinks women can have penises.

It’s coming from someone who’s been reading the court documents for the case.

 

[martybegan]

Those videos were taken by the Capitol Police. It's unknown to us what was, or was not, turned over to the Department of Justice at the time BuffaloHead pled guilty.

I'm sure they had all of them, just like the House committee did.

 

[Marener]

I think for myself far more than you do.

Yet here you are parroting bullshit that the right wing media is pumping you fill of.

Not only that, but you think you’re better than me for gobbling down this shit sandwich.

 

[struth]

It needs to be turned over before trial which is what the DoJ was working on.

There’s no obligation to turn it over before he enters a plea deal.

If they hadn’t jumped the gun on the plea deal, he would have gotten anything. It’s not the government’s fault they jumped the gun.

but apparently didn't do....hence the issue...they withheld critical important Brady evidence, and violated his Constitutional right to Due Process. Yes, the obligation is to turn it over...nobody knows how a case is going to end up, plea or trial., the Govt can't without Brady evidence...hahah geez man, the Govt can't withold Brady evidence, and hope someone takes a deal instead of going to trial...that violates the person's rights. A plea has to be knowingly, and voluntary....one can't do that when the Govt is violating their rights, and hiding evidence.

 

[martybegan]

It’s coming from someone who’s been reading the court documents for the case.

No response to that eh?

typical. Now go get offended by someone using the wrong pronouns.

 

[martybegan]

Yet here you are parroting bullshit that the right wing media is pumping you fill of.

Not only that, but you think you’re better than me for gobbling down this shit sandwich.

.
No, I',m giving you my opinion of the known information, not denying it out of hand because it doesn't fit my small SJW worldview.

 

[bodecea]

Informed????

LOLOLOLOLOL. This coming from someone who thinks women can have penises.

Deflection now?

 

[martybegan]

Deflection now?

Not deflection, with lefty SJW idiots you have to view the entire reality bending package.

 

[struth]

And you know that for a fact? Or is it just some criminal defense lawyer saying it on TV where they have no repercussions for lying?

yes, I know for a fact they didn't see the video, because they told us. Did you forget to read the link in the OP again?

 

[bodecea]

Not deflection, with lefty SJW idiots you have to view the entire reality bending package.

Deflection. Show us that this thread is about.....checks notes.....women with penises.

 

[Faun]

What in that article makes you think the DOJ turned everything over?

Why are you trying to divert from what I said? You claimed the DoJ said they didn't turn over these videos. You then posted a link as though that would confirm your claim, but it didn't.

So? Did you lie or do you have actual evidence that the DoJ said they didn't turn over these videos?

 

[martybegan]

Deflection. Show us that this thread is about.....checks notes.....women with penises.

Whole package response to a whole package accusation.

 

[Faun]

The DOJ is charged with having them.https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/brady_rule

The Brady rule, named after Brady v. Maryland, requires prosecutors to disclose material, exculpatory information in the government's possession to the defense. Brady material, or the evidence the prosecutor is required to disclose under this rule, includes any information favorable to the accused which may reduce a defendant's potential sentence, go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness, or otherwise allow a jury to infer against the defendant’s guilt.

Initially, the Brady rule was only applicable if the defendant made a pretrial request for specific information which the prosecution denied. In United States v. Bagley, however, the Supreme Court eliminated this request requirement and stated that the prosecution has a constitutional duty to disclose all material, favorable information in their possession to defendants regardless of whether it is requested. This duty is breached regardless of whether that information is withheld intentionally or unintentionally.

Do you not read what you post?

under this rule, includes any information favorable to the accused which may reduce a defendant's potential sentence, go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness, or otherwise allow a jury to infer against the defendant’s guilt.​

BuffaloHead was convicted for illegally entering the Capitol with a mob which caused Congress to recess from an official proceeding. That's his crime. That's what he pled guilty to.

In regards to that crime, what in Tucker's videos may reduce BuffaloHead's potential sentence or go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness?

 

[struth]

Why are you trying to divert from what I said? You claimed the DoJ said they didn't turn over these videos. You then posted a link as though that would confirm your claim, but it didn't.

So? Did you lie or do you have actual evidence that the DoJ said they didn't turn over these videos?

DOJ takes on the Jan. 6 Tucker Carlson tapes

Prosecutors emphasized that defendants and their lawyers have had access to an enormous trove of evidence for nearly two years.

www.politico.com

“The United States does not know the extent of any material that a member of the legislative branch purportedly provided to other individuals,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean McCauley wrote in a court filing connected to prominent Jan. 6 defendant Ryan Nichols. “This Court should not commit to an indefinite trial extension for this Defendant, or for any defendants, based on the unsupported allegation that pertinent information may exist somewhere, but is not currently known to either the prosecution or the defense.”

- they are clearly admitting they did not get the video to turn over, that it came from Congresss

 

[Faun]

Yes it's suppose to be, in this case it looks like the Dems hide it

It looks like that to you. But of course, you still haven't presented any evidence prosecutors had possession of Tucker's videos at the time BuffaloHead pled guilty.

 

[struth]

Do you not read what you post?

under this rule, includes any information favorable to the accused which may reduce a defendant's potential sentence, go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness, or otherwise allow a jury to infer against the defendant’s guilt.​

BuffaloHead was convicted for illegally entering the Capitol with a mob which caused Congress to recess from an official proceeding. That's his crime. That's what he pled guilty to.

In regards to that crime, what in Tucker's videos may reduce BuffaloHead's potential sentence or go against the credibility of an unfavorable witness?

It shows how peaceful he was, and how he was actually being lead getting a tour by the Capitol Police. Did you read the OP? It completlely undermines the Xiden DOJ's false narrative that he was some violent character