Whacky Trump Grand Jury Forechick Goes on TV to Talk about Deliberations

[Care4all]

My God, she exhibits the brand of vapid stupidity that is typical of Democrats and their voters. In what world is this OK? Moreover, in what world would an individual think this is OK?!? Forget that this involves Trump. This is just plain asinine. Truly, the local DA, and affirmative action lawyer, wasted a lot of taxpayer money going after Trump only to have this nitwit F- it up like this.

What the Hell Is Going on With That Trump Grand Jury Foreman?

pjmedia.com

She didn't talk about deliberations by the grand jury.

She was goofy in responses, trying to avoid speaking about deliberations....

 

[SeaMajor7]

What? You talk out of both sides of your mouth? Color me shocked

You're twisting into a pretzel defending your doppelganger.

 

[Care4all]

This is a special grand jury. This grand jury can NOT INDICT anyone, like a normal grand jury would do, they can only recommend indictments.

The AG now has to pull a case together for each indictment the AG decides are worthy and has to present the AG case for indictment to a regular grand jury, who decides on indictments brought.

THIS powerless GRAND JURY is something weird that only Georgia does first, before the normal grand jury.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

She didn't talk about deliberations by the grand jury.

She was goofy in responses, trying to avoid speaking about deliberations....

Well, thank you for acknowledging that she is one goofy ass chick.

 

[Lesh]

Well, thank you for acknowledging that she is one goofy ass chick.

Not like Roody goofy right?

Maybe like Kraken Lady goofy?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Nope

Yep. Absolutely you would, both sides are keen on the outrage of the other side

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yes, it does. Which, if they are serious and sincere questions....by the judge, or the prosecutors....they can be judiciously and thoroughly addressed, and fall what may.

As far as 'questions' from the defense attorneys? Well, then we need be very guarded on their sincerity, their intentions. They have every right to raise 'em.....but, I'd trust the judge's conclusions more than the defense attorneys.

The defense attorneys have every right to question it as the judge or the prosecutors. Yeah, let them look into it and what it is, it is, I’ve got no gripe there. All I was saying is, she went on national media and said some things that would indicate bias, and the defense would rightly have cause to have that looked into.

 

[ThisIsMe]

What? You talk out of both sides of your mouth? Color me shocked

I think you are mistaken. I addressed one specific part of your comment and that was what my comment was talking about.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Not like Roody goofy right?

Maybe like Kraken Lady goofy?

Like AOC goofy-as-a-fucking-loon goofy.

 

[BlindBoo]

Maybe, but it’s not a good idea for someone in a jury or grand jury to go out on tv and make statements that indicate a bias. It raises questions.

She didn't break any Georgia law.

The defense attorneys have every right to question it as the judge or the prosecutors. Yeah, let them look into it and what it is, it is, I’ve got no gripe there. All I was saying is, she went on national media and said some things that would indicate bias, and the defense would rightly have cause to have that looked into.

It was a short-bus Grand ju....um I mean a Special grand jury. The DA has to present her case to another one if she wants to indict anyone I think.

 

[Lesh]

She didn't break any Georgia law.

It was a short-bus Grand ju....um I mean a Special grand jury. The DA has to present her case to another one if she wants to indict anyone I think.

Yup

 

[Lakhota]

Looks like Trump's legal team needs to scrounge for a new defense.



NEXT! Judge throws water on Trump defense's preemptive strike at GA grand jury

 

[Indeependent]

My God, she exhibits the brand of vapid stupidity that is typical of Democrats and their voters. In what world is this OK? Moreover, in what world would an individual think this is OK?!? Forget that this involves Trump. This is just plain asinine. Truly, the local DA, and affirmative action lawyer, wasted a lot of taxpayer money going after Trump only to have this nitwit F- it up like this.

What the Hell Is Going on With That Trump Grand Jury Foreman?

pjmedia.com

You owe me for making me look at one of the ugliest humans to ever walk the face of the earth.

 

[Lakhota]

Go Emily!

 

[Indeependent]

Go Emily!

Stop posting that monster!

 

[ThisIsMe]

She didn't break any Georgia law.

It was a short-bus Grand ju....um I mean a Special grand jury. The DA has to present her case to another one if she wants to indict anyone I think.

I’m not suggesting she broke any laws, I’m suggesting that she showed bias, and the defense could use that.

As far as her indicating trump was on the list of indictment recommendations, even though she only hinted at it, is a violation of the judges orders. He did say that any indictment recommendations were to remain under seal. Of course the judge said other stuff too so it’s hard to tell what he meant. There are some contradictions here.

You’re right though, probably nothing will happen.

 

[Lesh]

I’m not suggesting she broke any laws, I’m suggesting that she showed bias, and the defense could use that.

As far as her indicating trump was on the list of indictment recommendations, even though she only hinted at it, is a violation of the judges orders. He did say that any indictment recommendations were to remain under seal. Of course the judge said other stuff too so it’s hard to tell what he meant. There are some contradictions here.

You’re right though, probably nothing will happen.

Stick with your last sentence.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Stick with your last sentence.

I’ll stick with everything I said.

 

[BlindBoo]

I’m not suggesting she broke any laws, I’m suggesting that she showed bias, and the defense could use that.

As far as her indicating trump was on the list of indictment recommendations, even though she only hinted at it, is a violation of the judges orders. He did say that any indictment recommendations were to remain under seal. Of course the judge said other stuff too so it’s hard to tell what he meant. There are some contradictions here.

You’re right though, probably nothing will happen.

The only bias she showed was with the truth of what the Special grand jury recommended, not towards any specific individuals with some kind of political bias, at least imo.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The only bias she showed was with the truth of what the Special grand jury recommended, not towards any specific individuals with some kind of political bias, at least imo.

It doesn’t matter to whom it was toward, her statements showed bias.

It’s doubtful anything will come of it anyway.