Cyber sleuth
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2015
- Messages
- 1,068
- Reaction score
- 8,927
Yes section 8 statesthe information you keep citing is from a PROPOSED order suggested that JG sign regarding granting a hearing for their frank's motion. That doesn't make it something the court actually found, ruled in their favor upon, or anything even close to evidence or FACT.
It is simply words from DT.
In other words, it is not something to court said, it is something the DT WANTED the court to say and the court did exactly the opposite after reviewing more evidence than we have access to.
“ Below is a proposed Order Granting Franks Hearing which is intended to assist the Court” followed by their regular misleading and belie by defense.
Absolutely not fact but rather their sly twisting of the truth.
Anyone that believes that the defense is not able to lie during a motion must have a very narrow definition of what constitutes a lie.
Because why would a judge express concern over this teams dishonesty in an in chambers meeting if she hadn’t witnessed it first hand in motions.
They are writing these motions to enflare the public and create a fan base of those willing to believe whatever defense tells them.
All my opinion.
Link to the document cited even though it’s complete garbage.
Adobe Acrobat
Last edited: