The James scandal just keeps on giving

[Jarod]

Neither will make it beyond the pre trial motions to dismiss. They are both utter garbage cases if you read the indictments which is why not one actual prosecutor would do them. They both had the prior professional Prosecutors state there was no cases here.



Terry is what known as 'stuck on stupid' here as he keeps using historical fact while ignoring that things have changed under Trump and Co incompetence.

Yes its true, PRIOR, that DoJ won 98% of their cases as they only brought a tiny percent of cases to court that were vetted as almost sure winners. It is also where the comment 'indict a ham sandwich' came from as they only brought near certain cases to the GJ.

Trump and Co are both incompetent and bringing crazy weak cases. Take the James Comey for example where only 12 of 23 (legal minimum) voted to indict and that is based on one sided presentation (no defense) and on selective disclosure (i bet breaks DOJ rules and gets the Prosecution disbarred) and yet still barely got across the line.

And prior prosecutors would not bring this case because if you can barely get 12 of 23 grand jurors to a MUCH LOWER finding to indict, then the chances of getting all 12 jurors, in a trial to the MUCH HIGHER standard of 'beyond any reasonable' doubt, would be clearly a losing battle to all but the painfully stupid.


cite

Terry : But... BUT DoJ cases have such a high conviction rate so how could such a historically percentage be abandoned by Trumps DoJ after charging ... I do not understand...

When these political cases, their conviction rate is going to plummet.

They are already failing to secure indictments, which is rare.

 

[QP!]

When these political cases, their conviction rate is going to plummet.

They are already failing to secure indictments, which is rare.

Yup.

@T. A. Gardner is stuck on stupid.

What he keeps repeating is like saying because there is a dominant sports team that wins 90%+ of its games, then even when that team is no more and replaced by a losing team, you should still bet on them winning by ignoring todays reality and only focusing on the math of the prior win rate.

Only a stupid person would ignore the team has changed, and its Trump's corrupt DoJ in now and currently at all levels they are losing at historical rates never before seen.

But Terry keeps repeating 'look at the Biden and DoJ prior rate and bet using that'... again because he is stupid.

 

[Noking]

Yup.

@T. A. Gardner is stuck on stupid.

What he keeps repeating is like saying because there is a dominant sports team that wins 90%+ of its games, then even when that team is no more and replaced by a losing team, you should still bet on them winning by ignoring todays reality and only focusing on the math of the prior win rate.

Only a stupid person would ignore the team has changed, and its Trump's corrupt DoJ in now and currently at all levels they are losing at historical rates never before seen.

But Terry keeps repeating 'look at the Biden and DoJ prior rate and bet using that'... again because he is stupid.

That your I keep using the word naive.

 

[QP!]

As soon as Trump can remove the US Attorney and put in another insurance lawyer or parking lot lawyer, we will see Schiff indicted.

This will again be a case that is so poor that it will be unlikely to survive dismissal motions and when dismissed you will see magats, like Terry pretend that the defense getting it thrown out is somehow a win for magats.

What Terry will ignore while he pushes WRONGLY that those charged would plead out due to the DoJ having a high historical success rate, is that cases getting 'tossed out via motions to dismiss' are even more rare than the Prosecution losing in court, historically.

Both tie in to the same thing and that is the current incompetence and corruption of this Trump DoJ. If Trump's DoJ was not incompetent and corrupt the chances of getting these tossed (looking at historic rates as Terry points out) would be near zero. And instead we will see all three of these tossed once Trump can put in someone corrupt to bring this charge. AND HE WILL.