https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/24/politics/michael-flynn-election-denialism-business-maga/index.html
So we’ve gone over this in previous cases.
Due to the nature of the case, you’d expect if Flynn answers in the affirmative, the court would probably allow the attorneys to ask him to present his evidence. And he could be subject to perjury because it’s a material statement.
Maybe he has seen credible evidence as he says in the media…. Is he able to articulate it and defend it in a court of law? Probably not. So if I’m his attorney I tell him not to die on that hill. Why subject yourself to a potential perjury or felony? Or even if it’s just the embarrassment of not being able to explain what he saw/witnessed under examination.
Nah- no need to. Just act stupid and get out of court.
The right’s inability to defend their claims in a court of law is the entire issue.
Or possibly the embarrassment of admitting there is no evidence?
1 Like
What if the court doesn’t hear the cases?
That’s what courts do when evidence isn’t submitted. You can’t base court cases on theories and feelings.
There can be no adduction of evidence if a party is denied standing.
There can be no adduction of evidence without the existence of evidence.
Not a single day of his life with a shred of integrity. 100% consistent
Your rebuttal to every single post/argument.
Have some nuance or variety. I get it everyone that has a D by their name is truthful and all Republicans except the Rinos are liars.
Unfortunately, it’s what it devolves into every time. Again, no integrity is the common thread among MAGATs