Q Research General #24769: Moar Eggstein Docs! Edition
bakes, did we ever get a dick pic of Epstein's tiny egg dick?
Matthew Boyle
@Realmattboyle
NEW: @realDonaldTrump told me and @Marlow for latest @breitbartnews exclusive interview that Special Counsel Jack Smith knows he is “LOSING” the war for public opinion on the cases he’s brought against Trump. breitbart.com/politics/2024/01
Exclusive —Donald Trump: Jack Smith 'Feels Like He’s Losing Politically'
Donald Trump told Breitbart News exclusively that he feels like he is winning the war for public opinion against Special Counsel Jack Smith.
www.breitbart.com

287
ReTruths

873
Likes
Jan 04, 2024, 2:52 PM
https://truthsocial.com/@Realmattboyle/posts/111699424570428638
Brooke Singman
@brookesingman
EXCLUSIVE: Atop prosecutor on Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team discouraged the FBI from pursuing an investigation into the Clinton Foundation in 2016 due to what he viewed as negligible evidence, despite multiple Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) related to hundreds of thousands of dollars in foreign transactions, Fox News Digital has learned.
foxnews.com/politics/prosecuto
Prosecutor on Jack Smith team discouraged FBI from investigating Clinton Foundation in 2016
A top prosecutor on Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team discouraged the FBI investigating the Clinton Foundation in 2016 despite "suspicious activity reports" on financial transactions
www.foxnews.com

2k
ReTruths

3.14k
Likes
Jan 04, 2024, 4:10 PM
https://truthsocial.com/@brookesingman/posts/111699730781322002
evening mrpig
Jack Smith Goes Off the Rails, Claims Trump Immunity Argument Would Allow Him to Order His Supporters to Murder Opposing Lawmakers
Special Counsel Jack Smith went completely off the rails and told a federal appeals court that Trump’s immunity argument would allow him to order his supporters to murder opposing lawmakers.
Trump’s lawyers argued that Trump is immune from federal prosecution for alleged ‘crimes’ committed while he served as US President.
“In 234 years of American history, no president ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in last month’s filing, according to CBS News. “To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.”
Oral arguments in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals begin on January 9.
Dr. Peter McCullough Urges Preparedness on News of Chinese Pneumonia Outbreak
Jack Smith argued Trump is not immune from prosecution because he could order the murder of his political opponents or sell nuclear secrets.
“The implications of the defendant’s broad immunity theory are sobering. In his view, a court should treat a President’s criminal conduct as immune from prosecution as long as it takes the form of correspondence with a state official about a matter in which there is a federal interest, a meeting with a member of the Executive Branch, or a statement on a matter of public concern,” according to Jack Smith’s 82-page filing reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
Jack Smith’s team argued that if Trump is protected by the presidential immunity argument, what could stop him from telling his “inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers…”
“That approach would grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a President who accepts a bribe in exchange for directing a lucrative government contract to the payer; a President who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a President who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a President who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary, because in each of these scenarios, the President could assert that he was simply executing the laws; or communicating with the Department of Justice; or discharging his powers as Commander-in-Chief; or engaging in foreign diplomacy. Under the defendant’s framework, the Nation would have no recourse to deter a President from inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers—thereby hamstringing any impeachment proceeding—to ensure that he remains in office unlawfully,” Jack Smith wrote.
President Trump’s attorneys on Thursday asked the Court to hold Special Counsel Jack Smith in contempt for violating Judge Chutkan’s order staying all proceedings in the January 6 case against Trump.
“President Donald J. Trump respectfully moves this Court for an order to show cause why prosecutors Jack Smith, Molly Gaston, and Thomas Windom (collectively, the “prosecutors”) should not be held in contempt for violating the Court’s order “stay[ing] any further proceedings that would move this case towards trial or impose additional burdens of litigation on Defendant.” Doc. 186 at 2 (the “Stay Order”).” Trump’s lawyer wrote in the order reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
“The Stay Order is clear, straightforward, and unambiguous. All substantive proceedings in this Court are halted. Despite this clarity, the prosecutors began violating the Stay almost immediately. First, within five days of the Court entering the Stay Order, the prosecutors served thousands of pages of additional discovery, together with a purported draft exhibit list. Through counsel, President Trump advised that he rejected the prosecutors’ unlawful productions, that their actions violated the Stay Order, and that he would seek relief if their malicious conduct continued.” Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche wrote.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/01/jack-smith-goes-rails-claims-trump-immunity-argument
you are not part of my conversation with that other anon, if I want to interact with low iq assholes, I would act like you.
fuck off
PSA: I filter ID+, sauceless posts, old pointless posts and nuisance posts to Baker, consider this, if you want attention from Baker.
No Fucks Given.
can bake
>https://fullchan.net/?7fa763a3a8996cd2#349JJ5qhXBYDy2rW17uY7JfGXPvpi6LxmT3Tf6CoCmfc
baking