Pretty much. Triggered libs will still pretend to care just so they have something to complain about, though.
Why did Matt Gaetz Venmo minors or have them at parties? Also used his ‘adopted son’ Nestor’s Venmo to send them money. Also used Nestor’s phone to contact these children. Also flew them to NYC to show them Fox News. Hmmmmmmm…..this isn’t normal.
Women have this amazing ability to internalize and cope with male BS for long periods of time, until such a time that the males responsible for the BS ascend to a position of power where they can inflict that BS on the masses. In other words, get ready for a long list of women and teens that come forward to CREDIBLY accuse Gaetz of misconduct.
Newname probably thinks all that smoking gun evidence is just part of the deep state trap.
Garland Justice Dept investigated for 2 years and could not indict
You are getting info from the convicted criminal Greenberg who was given a deal to accuse Gaetz.
A Florida politician who emerged as a central figure in the Justice Department’s sex trafficking investigation into Rep. Matt Gaetz pleaded guilty Monday to six federal charges and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors as part of a plea deal. Joel Greenberg, a longtime associate of Gaetz’s, appeared in federal court in Orlando. He pleaded guilty to six of the nearly three dozen charges he faced, including sex trafficking of a minor, and he admitted that he had paid at least one underage girl to have sex with him and other men.
The evidence includes sworn testimony from two women, one who claims to have had sex with Gaetz, the other claims to have witnessed it. Neither of them are named Joel Greenberg.
Garland Justice Dept investigated for 2 years and could not indict
You are getting info from the convicted criminal Greenberg who was given a deal to accuse Gaetz.
A Florida politician who emerged as a central figure in the Justice Department’s sex trafficking investigation into Rep. Matt Gaetz pleaded guilty Monday to six federal charges and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors as part of a plea deal. Joel Greenberg, a longtime associate of Gaetz’s, appeared in federal court in Orlando. He pleaded guilty to six of the nearly three dozen charges he faced, including sex trafficking of a minor, and he admitted that he had paid at least one underage girl to have sex with him and other men.
The evidence includes sworn testimony from two women, one who claims to have had sex with Gaetz, the other claims to have witnessed it. Neither of them are named Joel Greenberg.
My post was a copy and paste from MSM.
Greenberg was THE witness during the 2 year investigation into these allegations by the Garland Jutice Dept that resulted into the decision not to indict.
The evidence includes sworn testimony from two women, one who claims to have had sex with Gaetz, the other claims to have witnessed it. Neither of them are named Joel Greenberg.
My post was a copy and paste from MSM.
Greenberg was THE witness during the 2 year investigation into these allegations by the Garland Jutice Dept that resulted into the decision not to indict.
You really have trouble understanding the concepts around legal matters, as you have evidenced several times in this thread. Greenberg was a witness. But the Ethics Committee investigation also includes sworn testimony by the two women. That means they were present, swore and oath to tell the truth, and testified with respect to events. So their testimony (which allegedly the hacker has accessed) is not Greenberg's testimony.
Greenberg was THE witness during the 2 year investigation into these allegations by the Garland Jutice Dept that resulted into the decision not to indict.
You really have trouble understanding the concepts around legal matters, as you have evidenced several times in this thread. Greenberg was a witness. But the Ethics Committee investigation also includes sworn testimony by the two women. That means they were present, swore and oath to tell the truth, and testified with respect to events. So their testimony (which allegedly the hacker has accessed) is not Greenberg's testimony.
Greenberg was THE witness in the two year Garland Dept investigation that resulted in NO indictment. Were these other witnesses unknown to the investigators?
I don't understand hackers. What's the point of hacking if you don't make the stuff you hack publicly available? Can't ole Beezely post the stuff he hacked on Substack or Wikileaks something? Why should only House members get to read it? If you hack something, it should be public as a matter of law.
A lawyer representing two women who testified that Trump’s nominee for attorney general, Matt Gaetz, paid them for sex has revealed new details about their testimony to the House Ethics Committee. The lawyer, Joel Leppard, on...
The evidence includes sworn testimony from two women, one who claims to have had sex with Gaetz, the other claims to have witnessed it. Neither of them are named Joel Greenberg.
My post was a copy and paste from MSM.
Greenberg was THE witness during the 2 year investigation into these allegations by the Garland Jutice Dept that resulted into the decision not to indict.
This Altam Beezley guy is certainly doing an Assange job. Weren't you in favor of hacks and public disclosures once? Or are you only for that when US national security secrets are involved? I'm asking rhetorically.
Carmine owned as usual and ignores as he knows he can't answer.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Two women told House Ethics Committee investigators that former Rep. Matt Gaetz, who has been tapped to be attorney general in the next Trump administration, paid them for sex, an…
He is o.u.t.! No problem for the pres-elect though: the barn is full of nearly equally as bizarre characters ready to step up and fake the job. Take. Ordered according to loyalty only.
Greenberg was THE witness during the 2 year investigation into these allegations by the Garland Jutice Dept that resulted into the decision not to indict.
All MSM are liars according to you previously.
MSM lies to prop up the establishment.
Not when they are reporting facts that run counter to establishment propaganda.
Every trial lawyer understands this.
When a witness testifies against his own interest, it has credibilty.
Here is why they are after Gaetz. They could not care less about his sex life.
Not when they are reporting facts that run counter to establishment propaganda.
Every trial lawyer understands this.
Not every trial lawyer believes or "understands" what you typed. I'd guess that very few do. That's an educated guess too, not one of your uninformed guesses/opinions.
What every trial lawyer does understand is that this Indictment linked below sets forth detailed, corroborated factual allegations that add up to serious felonies committed by Trump against the United States. What the large majority of trial lawyers know is that on the factual merits, the Indictment below is a "slam dunk" if there were ever to be a trial.
You and a few others here have never read it -- in fact, for some weirdo reason, you guys refuse to read it -- so you wouldn't understand or know anything about it.
Not when they are reporting facts that run counter to establishment propaganda.
Every trial lawyer understands this.
Not every trial lawyer believes or "understands" what you typed. I'd guess that very few do. That's an educated guess too, not one of your uninformed guesses/opinions.
What every trial lawyer does understand is that this Indictment linked below sets forth detailed, corroborated factual allegations that add up to serious felonies committed by Trump against the United States. What the large majority of trial lawyers know is that on the factual merits, the Indictment below is a "slam dunk" if there were ever to be a trial.
You and a few others here have never read it -- in fact, for some weirdo reason, you guys refuse to read it -- so you wouldn't understand or know anything about it.
Every Judge and lawyer knows that more crediblity is given to a witness whose testimony goes against his own self interest than one whose testimony is self serving.
There is even a term for it.
Any actual lawyers here know this term? I came across it a while ago but cannot find it right now.
How is it that if an indictment is such a slam dunk, that the Garland DOJ investigated these allegations for 2 years and decided not to indict?
