Shouldn’t Kamala Harris be Indicted for Encouraging BLM riots?

[Lisa558]

Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters should also be indicted for inciting the 2020 nationwide Democrat race riots.
View attachment 818882

Yup. This was the “protest” for which Kamala Harris bailed out those arrested so they could rejoin the fray.

 

[Marener]

Gore did the same thing, He was trying to find more votes.

Gore wanted all the votes to be counted. Trump didn’t.

Huge difference.

 

[Lisa558]

Gore wanted all the votes to be counted. Trump didn’t.

Huge difference.

Trump wanted all the valid votes to be counted as well.

 

[Marener]

Trump wanted all the valid votes to be counted as well.

No. He wanted democratic votes to be taken away. He didn’t care if it was valid or not.

I believe he told the DoJ “just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me”.

Trump to DOJ last December: 'Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me' | CNN Politics

Trump pressured top Justice Dept. officials to falsely declare the election "illegal" and "corrupt" despite finding no evidence of widespread voter fraud

www.cnn.com

 

[berg80]

If Trump is being indicted for encouraging his supporters to protest peacefully, shouldn’t Kamala Harris be indicted for encouraging rioters by helping raise funds for their bail upon arrest?

In another example, she also said that protestors “should protest“ [the lie] about George Floyd being about police racism, while Trump said his supporters should make their voices heard - although he emphasized PEACEFULLY while Harris did no such thing.

And finally, the damage done during the Summer of Hate and Violence was much worse than the few hours on Jan 6.

Kamala Harris Lies About Bailing Out Violent Criminals

The vice president just openly lied about her involvement in bailing out violent criminals during the 2020 George Floyd riots.

thefederalist.com

The premise of the thread is based on a lie.

Graham Twists Facts on Harris Support for Protesters - FactCheck.org

Sen. Lindsey Graham twisted the facts about then-Sen. Kamala Harris encouraging donations to pay bail for protesters to claim “she actually bailed out rioters," including one who "went back to the streets and broke somebody’s head open."

www.factcheck.org

What else you got?

 

[BlindBoo]

Nothing in the source you provided qualifies as election fraud.
Disagree?
Where's the pressure to arbitrarily or illegally change the vote counts - to commit fraud?
Where's the pressure to lie - to commit fraud?
What part of the conversation leads you to believe the people Trump talked to thought he asked them to lie, or commit a crime - to commit fraud?
It certainly isn't stated , and given the context of the conversation, there's no implication of any such thing.

As defense counsel you don't think you can generate reasonable doubt here?

There are only two charges in Ga that include fraud and one that mentions defraud as a charge.

Read the full text of the Georgia Trump indictment document to learn more about the charges and co-conspirators

The Georgia grand jury investigating former President Trump returned indictments on election fraud, racketeering and other charges.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[M14 Shooter]

There are only two charges in Ga that include fraud and one that mentions defraud as a charge.

Did you notice your inability to actually address my questions?
-I- did.

 

[Faun]

Oh, I know what you are referring to, I’m trying to figure out what part of what he said was a threat.

Again, the trial will answer that question for you.

 

[Faun]

Trump wanted all the valid votes to be counted as well.

Gore wanted all the votes to be counted. Trump didn’t.

Huge difference.

False....

 

[ThisIsMe]

Again, the trial will answer that question for you.

I don’t think it will, because trump never threatened him. The fact that raffensperger “felt” it was a threat is circumstantial, trump can’t be held accountable for the way someone feels.

 

[Faun]

I don’t think it will, because trump never threatened him. The fact that raffensperger “felt” it was a threat is circumstantial, trump can’t be held accountable for the way someone feels.

You're funny. He threatened him with putting him in jail. That's a threat no matter how Raffensperger took it.

 

[ThisIsMe]

You're funny. He threatened him with putting him in jail. That's a threat no matter how Raffensperger took it.

Really? Trump said that? I think this is another case of “trump said something and left is going to interpret it the way that fits their narrative”

The fact that trump pointed out something doesn’t mean he was suggesting he was going to make it happen.

 

[Freedomisneverfree]

Really? Trump said that? I think this is another case of “trump said something and left is going to interpret it the way that fits their narrative”

The fact that trump pointed out something doesn’t mean he was suggesting he was going to make it happen.

It's called "Leftist Lies" to stir the pot. They want him gone. They are going to blow everything out of proportion.

 

[YoursTruly]

If Trump is being indicted for encouraging his supporters to protest peacefully, shouldn’t Kamala Harris be indicted for encouraging rioters by helping raise funds for their bail upon arrest?

In another example, she also said that protestors “should protest“ [the lie] about George Floyd being about police racism, while Trump said his supporters should make their voices heard - although he emphasized PEACEFULLY while Harris did no such thing.

And finally, the damage done during the Summer of Hate and Violence was much worse than the few hours on Jan 6.

Kamala Harris Lies About Bailing Out Violent Criminals

The vice president just openly lied about her involvement in bailing out violent criminals during the 2020 George Floyd riots.

thefederalist.com

She should be. But the GOP is weak AF. And don't have the balls to go after her.

 

[Faun]

Really? Trump said that? I think this is another case of “trump said something and left is going to interpret it the way that fits their narrative”

The fact that trump pointed out something doesn’t mean he was suggesting he was going to make it happen.

Idiot....

Donald J. Trump retweeted...

He [Donald Trump] gave @BrianKempGA and @GaSecofState every chance to get it right. They refused. They will soon be going to jail.

 

[FA_Q2]

Really? Trump said that? I think this is another case of “trump said something and left is going to interpret it the way that fits their narrative”

The fact that trump pointed out something doesn’t mean he was suggesting he was going to make it happen.

That is a really nice store you have there. It would be a shame if anyone burned it down. Now, about that protection money?

Clearly not a threat, right?

If only criminals knew that you cannot be charged with a crime if you just talk around what you want rather than state it directly. I could murder anyone, all I have to do is point out they should be killed and I am no longer asking for it...

 

[Mac1958]

I'm tired of repeating it for idiots who refuse to pay attention. Watch the trial and find out.

That's pretty much all you can say. You can tell them to read the indictments, and that won't matter either.

Any facts you give them will be summarily dismissed and/or denied. They'll also dismiss and deny them during the trial. So at least they're consistent.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Idiot....

Donald J. Trump retweeted...

He [Donald Trump] gave @BrianKempGA and @GaSecofState every chance to get it right. They refused. They will soon be going to jail.

Ok, so he retweeted what someone else said about them going to jail. If that’s the threat then fine. It’s a bit of a stretch since trump didn’t actually make a threat, he may have just liked the idea. But I can see where one might think it was an indirect threat.

 

[ThisIsMe]

That is a really nice store you have there. It would be a shame if anyone burned it down. Now, about that protection money?

Clearly not a threat, right?

If only criminals knew that you cannot be charged with a crime if you just talk around what you want rather than state it directly. I could murder anyone, all I have to do is point out they should be killed and I am no longer asking for it...

Ok, I get it. I can see how it might be construed as indirect threat, granted, it’s a fine line because in the context of what they were talking about, it could be viewed either way.

 

[ThisIsMe]

That's pretty much all you can say. You can tell them to read the indictments, and that won't matter either.

Any facts you give them will be summarily dismissed and/or denied. They'll also dismiss and deny them during the trial. So at least they're consistent.

To be fair…the dems do the exact same thing…