Nancy Pelosi: Trump will have to "prove innocence."
Nancy Pelosi
@SpeakerPelosi
The Grand Jury has acted upon the facts and the law.
No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence.
Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right.
Republican congressmen plan to grill Soros DA Alvin Bragg and demand he disclose all correspondence -- let's call it "coordination" -- between his office and the White House.
Maybe that's why Joe Biden is refusing to comment now.
President Biden said Friday he has "no comment" on the unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.
The former president of the United States and the leading Republican presidential nominee for 2024 was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury Thursday after a years-long investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
Friday, Fox News asked President Biden whether he thinks the charges against Trump were politically motivated.
"I have no comment on Trump," Biden said Friday.
I have no comment on whether I coordinated with a Soros DA to weaponize the government against a political enemy. Not even a statement like, "Gosh, I hope not, that would be a tremendous violation."
NeverTrump, are our precious norms restored now, or will it take a little longer?
Politico admits that of course this is a political witch hunt designed to take out a political enemy (or rally support for a political enemy the Democrat Party thinks they can beat). Either way, it's a case of using government power to pick who is allowed to be an opposition candidate.
Foreign interference, in fact, given that government is now essentially a hostile foreign force.
POLITICO
@politico
Opinion: Sometimes even Donald Trump has a point. It's hard to believe prosecutors would bring this case against anyone else. But that doesnt mean they�re wrong.
The article admits this is a sham:
We are likely to hear a lot of clichés from the legal commentariat in the coming days -- about how Bragg and his prosecutors are simply following the facts and the law, about how no one is above the law, and so on. That is all well and good, but the reality is that this particular criminal case probably never would have been brought for anyone but Trump. In fact, the investigation probably would not have begun in the first place for anyone else, but at the time, Trump was still in office, and given the Justice Department's policy against indicting a sitting president, the Manhattan DA's office was a convenient outlet and prosecutorial avenue for people who wanted to see Trump criminally prosecuted.There is also no indication at the moment that the case against Trump has any real precedent in New York or elsewhere. Perhaps prosecutors will demonstrate that that is wrong as they defend the case in court, but thus far, no one seems to be able to identify a comparable case brought by a local prosecutor's office.
But he defends the indictment anyway.
He says it's just a matter of "luck."
There is nothing inherently wrong about that. Luck, both good and bad, plays an undeniable role in who gets the attention of prosecutors and who gets charged in the criminal justice system.
This is the final step of the Government Party growing so brazen, and believing itself so untouchable, that they are just removing the masks and telling everyone: Submit or be destroyed.
The criminal Democrat party might wind up getting that insurrection they have long promoted and encouraged.