Deranged Jack Smith gets smacked down by a judge who is still willing to follow the

Poor little Jack Smith—out of nowhere, a judge in Trump’s “classified documents” case fails to rubber stamp the prosecution’s unethical motions, and essentially declare Trump guilty before a trial even takes place. Judge Aileen Cannon correctly ruled that a jury should be able to contemplate the validity of Trump’s Presidential Records Act defense—but Jack Smith doesn’t want the jury to hear that because it is inconvenient to his case. Here’s this, from Politico:

Tensions flare between special counsel Jack Smith and Judge Aileen Cannon

Amid delays and uncertainty over Donald Trump’s classified documents case, a strained dynamic between his prosecutor and his judge has intensified.

Maybe the judge should remind the jury that the Justice Department let Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton off the hook for possessing and mishandling classified documents, even though they never had the cover of the PRA, and therefore no right to personally have the documents in the first place. They had no defense. After all, Jack Smith, the media, and other Democrats always want equal treatment under the law, don’t they? They certainly wouldn’t want guilty people to evade justice, and Trump to be treated with a bias, would they?

Incidentally, the PRA gives a president the “exclusive responsibility for the custody and management of the Presidential records of their administration while in office.” At least, that’s according to the National Archives. Furthermore, the National Archives and Records Administration has “no formal role” in how a president chooses to handle the records. And, Trump was president, and he maintained his administration’s records as he saw fit. He certainly didn’t scatter them across the floor in an office like the picture the FBI and media showed the public to intentionally mislead; they were at Mar-a-Lago, one of the most secure residences in the world! Arguably, more secure than the White House—you can be sure that if cocaine had been discovered in a very private area of Mar-a-Lago, security would know exactly who left it there, and immediately. Apparently, people can leave illicit drugs in secure WH lockers, or right outside the Situation Room, or wherever they now claim it was found (the location of the cocaine has changed multiple times), and WH security somehow can’t determine to whom the powder belongs. 

It is so much easier for a law-faring prosecutor when a judge works in lockstep with them! Poor little Jack Smith!

In the New York fraud case, where there was no victim and no fraud, the prosecutor, Letitia “Peekaboo” James campaigned on destroying Trump. She searched for a crime and charged Trump with something for which no one else had ever been prosecuted: supposedly exaggerating the value of his properties. I am sure no other real estate developer has done that. Then she found a nice biased judge who declared Trump guilty before the trial. Then they pulled a fine out of a hat that was based on nothing. Letitia thought she had hit the mother lode and could start repossessing Trump properties.

That, after all, would be good for her future ambitions in Democrat run New York. 

In the hush money trial, Alvin Bragg had also campaigned on destroying Trump, and found a case that the FEC and other prosecutors had turned down. Somehow he found a judge who would gag Trump—I wonder if the fact that the judge’s daughter had raised $93 million for Democrats was a safe bet? I wonder what it takes for a judge to recuse himself. Would raising $100 million be enough?

In Georgia, Fani hired a boyfriend, spent massive amounts of taxpayer money on personal trips, coordinated the prosecution with the White House and the January 6th committee, but somehow the judge didn’t consider that enough of a conflict of interest, or an appearance of conflict of interest, to throw her and her office off the case. What would it take?

The media and other Democrats have lied for years that they wanted to run against Trump because he would be the easiest to beat. If that were true, why would they work so hard to lie to the public and charge him with trumped up crimes?

Why did Hillary and the DNC pay over $10 million for a fictional dossier to destroy Trump if he were so easy to beat? Couldn’t they find real skeletons in his closet to beat him? Why didn’t they run on their record? Is it because their policies are radical and destructive?

Why did the media bury the truthful laptop story about Hunter and Joe’s corruption? Don’t they want the public to see the truth? Don’t they want a fair and honest election?

They don’t want the public to hear that the FBI concluded that January 6th was not an insurrection, and that Trump just wanted people to protest peacefully. They certainly don’t want the public to hear that it was Pelosi who decided not to secure the Capitol with the National Guard, despite Trump’s suggestion. Why would Trump have suggested surrounding the Capitol with the National Guard if he wanted trouble?

The answer to all of the above is that the media and other Democrats haven’t cared about a fair and honest election, the truth, or equal justice for a long time. All they care about is winning elections and imposing big government and control over the people.

They sure can’t stand for a president like Trump who wants to transfer the power, money, and freedom back to the people, away from the powerful government. He is the opposite of a dictator, while Biden rules like a dictator.

The choice this November is easier than it’s ever been.

Image: Public domain.