An unlikely partnership of major news companies, Democrats, and Donald Trump wants the former president's March 2024 trial in Washington televised live. Merrick Garland is poised to fight them.
The whole point of January 6, which, for anyone interested in reviewing the evidence of what actually happened that day and the security precautions that were purposely not taken, was to prevent any examination of the alleged widespread fraud in the election. The risk in televising the trial is that Trump will present that evidence. The Biden Administration will do everything to prevent that from happening.
You are both exactly right. As I pointed out in Police State, Republicans planned to use hours that day to present to the American people proof of voting fraud in key states. After the "insurrection," those plans were dropped. Coincidence?
I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge that it is because of your (Julie Kelly) work, along with Darren Beattie, Jim Hoft and Tucker Carlson, that the public is aware that the official narrative is a fairy tale. Of course, the official narrative is preposterous. Ordinary, law-abiding Americans, most of whom have never been in trouble, go to DC to support Trump and express their skepticism that the election was fair and accurate and somehow, although they come from all over, work together under Trump’s direction (essentially innocuous words in a speech ) to attack the Capitol. Right. They do this without weapons and while walking respectfully through the Rotunda. It’s ridiculous.
Great story Julie! Strange bedfellows indeed. If they don’t allow the cameras it will demonstrate yet again the police state in which we live. Thanks for your journalism 🙏
Most Americans believe 2020 election was stolen and that J6 was an entrapment operation. Thankfully the truth is revealed more everyday due to patriots like Julie Kelly
Julie, I have followed you from Day One! Thanks, for continuing to take a stand, you, and just a few politicians, who knew Jan6th, was another “Russian Collusion” attempt! Sadly, it worked, and people like you, continue to fight! Keep it up, we love you!
Thank you for the heads up Julie. This never ending game of humiliating a former US President through an over zealous prosecutor and a bias judge who insist on hiding in a closed courtroom is beyond scandalous. This will be interesting. The media lions will want to feast as usual and won’t take kindly to Garland telling them they aren’t welcome at the table. Your information is so valuable and I know someday many will remember that it was you who never stopped searching for the truth about J6.
In answer to your question, when one looks at the actions of either party, they are the result of polling. I venture to guess that the Democrats have figured out that the public viewing their evil behavior in real time might not help their political future.
Since the OJ trial, prosecutors have been leery of television in the courtroom because most prosecutors have no experience with cameras except while standing at a lectern on the courthouse steps. They live in fear that a thin, complicated, boring prosecution case-in-chief will be blown out of the water by an "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit" moment they'll be unable to answer, as happened to Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. The judge, on the other hand, won't be as easily able to exclude evidence or cut off cross examination. And failure to win a conviction in this case will see her invitations to tony Georgetown parties evaporate.
Lord knows I would love to see this trial because it would expose the two-tiered system of justice under which we live currently, Julie. Of course, that would be wonderful in the best of all possible worlds. But it's obvious that Commissar Garland isn't about to let the proletariat see what's happening in the Soviet-Show-Trials, courtesy of his Stasi-style-Secret-Police inside Moscow-on-the-Potomac, do you?
The whole point of January 6, which, for anyone interested in reviewing the evidence of what actually happened that day and the security precautions that were purposely not taken, was to prevent any examination of the alleged widespread fraud in the election. The risk in televising the trial is that Trump will present that evidence. The Biden Administration will do everything to prevent that from happening.
Not only would the evidence be presented, but it would become a historical congressional record!
You are both exactly right. As I pointed out in Police State, Republicans planned to use hours that day to present to the American people proof of voting fraud in key states. After the "insurrection," those plans were dropped. Coincidence?
I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge that it is because of your (Julie Kelly) work, along with Darren Beattie, Jim Hoft and Tucker Carlson, that the public is aware that the official narrative is a fairy tale. Of course, the official narrative is preposterous. Ordinary, law-abiding Americans, most of whom have never been in trouble, go to DC to support Trump and express their skepticism that the election was fair and accurate and somehow, although they come from all over, work together under Trump’s direction (essentially innocuous words in a speech ) to attack the Capitol. Right. They do this without weapons and while walking respectfully through the Rotunda. It’s ridiculous.
Coincidence on both sides?
Great story Julie! Strange bedfellows indeed. If they don’t allow the cameras it will demonstrate yet again the police state in which we live. Thanks for your journalism 🙏
This is going to be an interesting fight! Thanks for subscribing!
Most Americans believe 2020 election was stolen and that J6 was an entrapment operation. Thankfully the truth is revealed more everyday due to patriots like Julie Kelly
Julie, I have followed you from Day One! Thanks, for continuing to take a stand, you, and just a few politicians, who knew Jan6th, was another “Russian Collusion” attempt! Sadly, it worked, and people like you, continue to fight! Keep it up, we love you!
Thank you for the heads up Julie. This never ending game of humiliating a former US President through an over zealous prosecutor and a bias judge who insist on hiding in a closed courtroom is beyond scandalous. This will be interesting. The media lions will want to feast as usual and won’t take kindly to Garland telling them they aren’t welcome at the table. Your information is so valuable and I know someday many will remember that it was you who never stopped searching for the truth about J6.
In answer to your question, when one looks at the actions of either party, they are the result of polling. I venture to guess that the Democrats have figured out that the public viewing their evil behavior in real time might not help their political future.
Remember all, this is the origin of the last four years(at least).
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/from-derailing-trumps-economic-recovery
New document filed for the Obstruction charge
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-94.html
Since the OJ trial, prosecutors have been leery of television in the courtroom because most prosecutors have no experience with cameras except while standing at a lectern on the courthouse steps. They live in fear that a thin, complicated, boring prosecution case-in-chief will be blown out of the water by an "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit" moment they'll be unable to answer, as happened to Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. The judge, on the other hand, won't be as easily able to exclude evidence or cut off cross examination. And failure to win a conviction in this case will see her invitations to tony Georgetown parties evaporate.
Lord knows I would love to see this trial because it would expose the two-tiered system of justice under which we live currently, Julie. Of course, that would be wonderful in the best of all possible worlds. But it's obvious that Commissar Garland isn't about to let the proletariat see what's happening in the Soviet-Show-Trials, courtesy of his Stasi-style-Secret-Police inside Moscow-on-the-Potomac, do you?