50+ results for "tag:hush-money-trial"
I am proud to represent our Failing Nation in fighting the GREATEST POLITICAL WITCH HUNT IN HISTORY. REMOVE THE GAG ORDER SO THAT I CAN SHOW HOW CORRUPT OUR COURT SYSTEM IS. PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ARE NOT TO BE GAGGED!
https://www.theepochtimes.com/opinion/did-the-new-york-prosecution-violate-president-trumps-jury-trial-right-5667652
….“This is not because the charges were persuasive; they weren’t. This is not because the evidence presented was damning; if anything, it was damning for the prosecution who staked their case on a convicted perjurer’s word and sent a porn star who mistook a possum for a ghost to testify, even though she had no knowledge that was pertinent and contradicted her own public interviews in her testimony. The reason this case was rigged was simple: because this trial was less an American trial and more like a real-life repeat of the infamous Disney cartoon ‘Pluto’s Judgment Day,’ in which the titular dog dreams of being sent to Hell, where he is tried by a courtroom full of cats. Except that cats would probably give dogs a fairer hearing than this jury and (especially) this Judge gave Trump….
….“However, unlike the prosecutors in this case, we will not simply lob a charge and then expect friendly audiences to accept it unquestioningly. Unlike the prosecutors, we plan to prove our case; at least, as much as we can in an editorial. The evidence is so exhaustive it could fill a book. But we will try to summarize it as far as possible. Start with Judge Juan Merchan’s infamous ‘gag order,’ a blatant and arguably unconstitutional attack on President Trump’s free speech rights, and which Trump is suing Merchan over…In the course of the trial, Merchan has denied Trump the right to attend a Supreme Court hearing on his claims of presidential immunity and even initially denied him the right to attend his own son’s high school graduation. Gratuitous and nasty though these decisions were, however, they pale in comparison to Merchan’s more substantively dangerous rulings….
….“For example, as Jonathan Turley argued, Merchan ‘continues to allow the jury to hear references to campaign-finance violations that do not exist.’ He refused to allow a legal expert to testify that these violations did not exist…He sustained every prosecutorial objection to defense witness Robert Costello repeatedly pointing out Michael Cohen’s record as a perjurer, and then screamed at Costello from the bench when he expressed his frustration and befuddlement. Costello, for the record, is both a former prosecutor and a far more decorated lawyer than Cohen, yet Merchan treated him with about as much respect as a convicted felon….
….“Then, when prosecutors showed similar disregard for his own rulings in their closing arguments, Merchan simply let it slide. But none of this, none of this can hold a candle to Merchan’s instructions to the jury before they began deliberations. Firstly, Merchan told the jury they did not have to agree on what crime Trump committed (or, indeed, whether he committed a crime at all). Even if four jurors believed Trump had committed one crime, four believed he had committed a second (but not the first), and four believed he committed a third (but not the first two), Merchan would treat that as a unanimous verdict. In other words, the jury were allowed to act like South Park’s underpants gnomes, and convict Trump under the following theory:Point 1: Trump falsified his business records to commit a crime (specified in point 2)Point 2: ?????????????Point 3: GUILTY!….
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-trial-violated-due-process-76fae047
My bookkeeper called a “Legal Expense,” on the “tiny” description line of the Ledger, a “Legal Expense,” openly paid to my lawyer, at that time a fully accredited one…
My very honest and respected bookkeeper called a legal expense on the tiny description line of a ledger. A legal expense. The only thing you could have called it. Openly paid to my lawyer at the time a fully accredited one. So a legal expense was called a legal expense. Not a construction expense or an expense for sheetrock or cinder block or an expense for what other people might want to call it. Now legal expense was legal expense. It was nothing wrong. I was not involved in that designation. But what else would you have called it? It was absolutely done correctly. It was in fact a legal expense. And that is the so-called crime that you've been reading so much about. On top of that, I wasn't allowed by the judge to use in any form the standard reliance on counsel defense or advice of counsel. My lawyer at the time did virtually everything on the NDA, non-disclosure agreement, which is a very commonly used agreement. Very legal. And I assumed that what he did was correct. I did absolutely nothing wrong. And frankly, there was nothing done wrong. NDAs are so standard and so commonly used. And I just say that we are going to end these witch hunts. It has to end. It has to end. But think of it. You rely on a lawyer and you're allowed to do that. And the judge wouldn't allow that as a defense. It's a standard defense. He wouldn't allow it. If this can happen to me, it can happen to anyone. We have to save our country and we're going to save our country. We're going to make America great again. Thank you very much everybody.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Judge Jeanine: “It clearly is not fair…none of this is fair…this whole trial is a make believe trial in the sense that these are crimes we’ve never heard of based upon dead misdemeanors…”
It clearly is not fair, and you know, none of this is fair. This whole trial is a make-believe trial in the sense that these are crimes we've never heard of based upon dead misdemeanors, based upon felonies that are federal crimes that are roped into it for which you don't need a unanimous verdict. And the whole thing is just, you know, they tried smoke and mirrors. You know, he must have done something wrong here, so it will be a very difficult task for the jury to try to figure this out. And the defense wasn't even, pursuant to the Fifth Amendment, advised what that original crime was that bootstraps this and makes it into a felony. In addition to the fact they don't have to be unanimous about column A, B, or C that involve federal tax crimes and federal election campaign violations.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Everyone's against this case. I haven't seen one legal scholar say that this case should've been filed. It's 7-years-old, everybody turned it down…Federal Elections turned it down, the Southern District turned it down—Bragg turned it down, then he rejuvenated it when I was running for office—at the request of Crooked Joe Biden.
And by the way, everyone's against this case. I haven't seen one legal scholar or expert in the law saying that this case should have been filed. It should not have been filed, or at a minimum, it should have been filed seven years ago. Seven years old, everybody turned it down, including federal elections turned it down. Southern District turned it down. Bragg turned it down, that he rejuvenated it when I was running for office, it's a terrible thing. At the request of Biden.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Gregg Jarrett: “I dare say that in the history of American jurisprudence, never has a defendant been tried on an unidentified charge. No ethical prosecutor would ever do it. No fair or competent judge would ever allow it because every defendant has a right to be informed of the precise accusations against him. It is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and rigorously guarded…The U.S. Supreme Court has held that unanimity in jury verdicts is required under the Sixth and Seventh Amendments. That requirement extends to all issues, said the high court. To find someone guilty, jurors must always agree —without dissent— on every necessary element of the purported crime. This is an indispensable feature of jury trials. Yet, it has inexplicably vanished in this case. District Attorney Alvin Bragg has deprived Trump of a fair trial by robbing him of his due process rights guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Judge Jeanine: “This is a Kangaroo Court…”
to me it was a very difficult day today. I heard a man with a robe instructing a jury that on issues that I know as a former judge exactly as he was were just plain wrong, reversible error. I was stunned at what he brought up and what he said and specifically I refer number one to the fact that we've been talking for weeks, months actually since in this indictment came down is to what is that unknown felony that will be used to resurrect two dead expired misdemeanors. Well that unknown felony is an election law violation according to this judge that is made up of a federal campaign violation of a creation of a false record or of a tax law violation. The Trump defense team didn't know this so they couldn't speak to it and it is a Fifth Amendment requirement that you know the charges against you, that you know it in the indictment in the bill of particulars and discovery in the opening statement and through the testimony. This was and I knew it during the prosecution summation this was clearly it was like a game between the prosecution and the judge where the defense was left out of it and specifically there was they talked about there was no legitimate press function and no one had talked about that during the course of the trial neither side presented evidence as to what a normal legitimate press function was but the jury hears about it from the prosecution in summation. No evidence whatsoever by either side and of course we know that there was no evidence allowed of a federal campaign election campaign violation because the defense was not allowed to put on Brad Smith who was the head of the Federal Election Campaign Commission. So the prosecution put on evidence the defense wants to put on evidence of what an FEC violation truly is and is not allowed to do that and then the defense of advice of counsel was not allowed that's what Trump wanted. This is a kangaroo court you've never heard of anything other than a unanimous verdict in a criminal trial and here's a new one legal expenses are if you report them as as income is a crime I never I wrote it again reporting money as income when its reimbursement is a crime so the judge is saying that itself is a crime no one knew that they could have argued it at the trial but they didn't have the opportunity so I mean those are just some of the issues it was a sad day for me I sat with Andy McCarthy and Jonathan Turley and Trey Gowdy and Shannon Britton we were all like this is unheard of.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Tammy Bruce: “With everything we’ve seen with how the American People have responded to this unfairness, we don’t like unfairness. The Country is built on a blind Justice System…It is not a game.”
Jesse Watters: “This is a case with a crime they won’t tell you, and it’s not even in the D.A.’s jurisdiction, but the jury can pick whatever crime they want, and they can all disagree on the crime, and it’s still a unanimous decision…It’s like a buffet!”
Judge Jeanine: “That’s bizarre—NO ONE has heard of this…”
But there's no evidence, the defense couldn't defend themselves on it. That's bizarre, John, no one has heard of this. It's like a menu, A column A, B, or C. You don't all have to agree on it, whatever, folks. This is a kangaroo court, this is unheard of. I'm telling you, I've done this for 32 years. I'm not a federal prosecutor, I'm a state prosecutor, I'm not a federal judge, I'm a county judge just like Mershawn. This is New York law, this is my wheelhouse. He is wrong.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
JUDGE JEANINE: “THIS IS UNHEARD OF….”
Thank you so much for joining us. So, Judge, tell us your thoughts in this moment. I don't know, predictions, what we're leaving out, what should we be looking at as this jury is deliberating? - I'm flabbergasted by the charges to the jury. You may have already gone through that, but I was doing something else. I have never heard a jury charge like this judge's charge to this jury. We knew the judge was flaky. We knew that he hated Donald Trump, but this judge is beyond the pale. To say that he's gonna take dead misdemeanors and raise them to felonies when they don't have to unanimously agree on what that felony is is stunning to me. It is absolutely stunning. I wanna be clear about something. In New York State, when I was a DA, if I wanted to raise a misdemeanor, and by the way, not a misdemeanor that is expired in terms of the statute of limitations, but if I wanted to raise a misdemeanor to a felony, the only way to do that would be to file a certificate of conviction of another crime. It could be a DWI, it could be a gun possession, to prove that in this particular case, this misdemeanor would end up as a felony, and that is done outside of the presence of the jury, where it's very clear that there's another real committed convicted case that raises the level of misdemeanor to a felony. This judge is making stuff up as he goes along. This is a kangaroo court. I'll tell you that the level of reversible error on this is stunning, and this judge, unfortunately, is connected to the jury in the sense they see him as this calm, reliable guy who is as out of control in terms of the law, and he doesn't know it, or he's making it up as he goes along, so that this defendant, a former president of the United States, is convicted of dead misdemeanors that, like magic, is turned into a felony. This is unheard of, Sandra and John, and I gotta tell you one more thing. It's almost like it's a rabbit show. You're gonna pull a rabbit out of the hat, but don't look over here, look at Stormy Daniels. Look at what she said. None of that had anything to do with this. It's all about destroying Donald Trump, and this jury charge has set me over the edge in terms of the law that's being made up as we go along in a felony that we have no idea of, but now it's New York election law, but it could be federal election law, too, or it could be a tax violation, and even if he didn't underpay his taxes, it could still be a crime. What is this man talking about? Right, and then, Judge, there's the other aspect of this, which is the multiple choice aspect of the predicate crime, that the jury does not need to unanimously agree on what the predicate crime was. When you were a judge in New York, did you ever instruct the jury to say, here's a smorgasbord of things that you can find him guilty of, and you don't all have to find him guilty of the same thing. Some of you can find him guilty of one thing or her. Some others can find him or her guilty of something else, and then the remainder of you can figure out something else to find him or her guilty on. Have you ever issued an instruction like that? It's not done. John, it's not done. And let's talk about the one of three. One is a federal election campaign violation, the other is a tax violation, and the other is the creation of additional records. Federal election campaign violation, they did not let Brad Smith testify, but you heard David Pecker testify about a federal election campaign problem. You heard Michael Cohen testify about that, but Donald Trump in his defense was not allowed to talk about it, but now, all of a sudden, the jury has the ability to go in and not agree that that is one of the felonies that is necessary to resurrect these dead misdemeanors, but there's no evidence. The defense couldn't defend themselves on it. That's bizarre, John. No one has heard of this. It's like a menu, A, column A, B, or C. You don't all have to agree on it, whatever, folks. This is a kangaroo court. This is unheard of. I'm telling you, I've done this for 32 years. I'm not a federal prosecutor. I'm a state prosecutor. I'm not a federal judge. I'm a county judge, just like Mershawn. This is New York law. This is my wheelhouse. He is wrong. - All right. - Judge, thank you. - Thanks, Judge. - And the problem is, okay, guys. - Nope, finish your thought. Finish your thought. - No, and the sad part about it is this jury is gonna think they're doing the right thing based upon a charge that no one has ever heard of and that he created. - All right. - Thank you, Judge. - Thank you. We'll be right back after this. Stay tuned.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Biden Witch Hunt!
of Sunday Night in America, Andy McCarthy, Fox News contributor and former assistant U.S. attorney in litigant who corresponded for Fox Business. So, Andy, let's start with you. The judge said that the jury has to unanimously believe that Donald Trump committed a crime in order to convict him, but they do not need to unanimously agree on what that crime was. And in what world does that work? Not in any world I've ever been in, John. What makes a criminal prosecution appropriate in the sense of taking somebody's liberty away, the array of constitutional protections we have. I've always understood them in 20 years of prosecuting cases and then more years than I care to count analyzing them. I've always understood that to mean every crime has a set of essential elements, and what the jury has to be unanimous on is that the government's proved the elements beyond a reasonable doubt. To me, it's an essential element of that case. Of this case, it's the most essential element of the count that they find this other crime because the only reason we're here is because Bragg used that other crime to inflate what would otherwise be a misdemeanor into a felony that allowed him to escape the statute of limitations. So, the thought that they don't have to be unanimous on that makes no sense to me constitutionally.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Congratulations to United States Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito for showing the INTELLIGENCE, COURAGE, and “GUTS” to refuse stepping aside from making a decision on anything January 6th related. All U.S. Judges, Justices, and Leaders should have such GRIT - Our Country would be far more advanced than its current status as A BADLY FAILING NATION, headed by the Worst President in American History, Crooked Joe Biden!
Jonathan Turley: “Abstract artist Jackson Pollock once said that his paintings have no objective meaning, so the best way for people to enjoy them is to stop looking for it. For many of us, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has created a new school of abstract law…Bragg started with nothing and sold it as a legal abstraction.”
Jim Trusty: “That is unlike any trial I could ever think of that you go through the entire trial, and it's still an open question of how this is a felony case.”
Doug Collins, Fox News: “Number one we should have never been here to start with. This is a prosecution in search of a crime. It's not there. Donald Trump didn't do anything.”
Bill O’Reilly: “There is zero evidence he even thought about campaign funding statutes. Repeat. Zero evidence. In order to convict, there has to be ‘criminal intent,’ as the nation saw with the Hillary Clinton private email thing. So, simple man that I am, I can't see a conviction.”
Mike Davis: “When CNN’s Jake Tapper is even admitting that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, you know it's a bad day for the prosecution.”
Andrew Cherkasky: “When you can't explain the crime, sometimes that's the evidence of innocence in and of its own right - When you charge them with something, and then you're waiting, and you're waiting, and you never get to it. That's the idea that the person was innocent all along.”
Gregg Jarrett: "The element of the alleged crimes were never proven in this Case - Business Records were not false, they were accurate. Trump had no involvement, there's no evidence he willfully violated Election Laws, and no Laws were even broken. Plus, it's factually impossible to influence an Election after it's over, yet that's how the Indictment reads...Where is the crime? It's nowhere! This is what I call a Bigfoot Case. It's a Trial in search of an imaginary crime."
Gregg Jarrett: "This Case against Donald Trump is Election Interference and Brazen Lawfare."
DEFENSE OF COUNSEL DEFENSE!
THE D.A.’s OFFICE WAS ALLOWED TO GO ON WITH 5 HOURS OF BULL…. YESTERDAY. I have no rights against this Crooked Judge’s Gag Order!
KANGAROO COURT! A CORRUPT AND CONFLICTED JUDGE. RELIANCE ON COUNSEL (ADVISE OF COUNSEL) NOT ALLOWED BY MERCHAN, A FIRST. HIS RULINGS, ON A CASE THAT SHOULD, ACCORDING TO ALL LEGAL SCHOLARS AND EXPERTS, NEVER HAVE BEEN BROUGHT, HAVE MADE THIS A BIDEN PUSHED WITCH HUNT. THERE WAS NO CRIME, EXCEPT FOR THE BUM THAT GOT CAUGHT STEALING FROM ME! IN GOD WE TRUST!
I DIDN’T HAVE A FIXER, I HAD A LAWYER WHO, AT THAT TIME, WAS FULLY ACCREDITED AND ACCEPTED WITHIN THE LEGAL COMMUNITY, BUT THE JUDGE IS NOT ALLOWING ME TO USE THE RELIANCE ON COUNSEL DEFENSE. I MAY BE THE ONLY PERSON IN THE COUNTRY NOT ALLOWED TO DO SO AND, THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS A VERY UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND RESTRICTIVE GAG ORDER. NOT FAIR — FREEDOM!
FILIBUSTER!
Could somebody please ask Judge Merchan, whatever happened to MARK POMERANTZ, the man Alvin Bragg was furious at for the things he did on this contrived and unconstitutional case, and why wasn’t he allowed to testify? Also, why did Judge Merchan not allow Brad Smith, the leading Election Law Expert in the Country, to testify. He would have ended the case quickly by explaining the Law and stating that President Trump did nothing wrong. Likewise Bob Costello, and all of his direct and irrefutable knowledge, why was he so horribly treated and completely shut down by the Conflicted Judge, and why were his Emails and Text Messages not allowed to be shown…And then, of course, there’s the BIGGEST EVENT OF THEM ALL, but I’m not allowed to talk about it because I’m under an illegal and unconstitutional GAG ORDER. This is the Biden White House at work. ELECTION INTERFERENCE!
The reason the Radical, highly Conflicted Judge Juan Merchan had to come up with three FAKE options for the jury to choose from, without requiring them to be unanimous, which is completely UNAMERICAN AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL, is because the Corrupt, Soros backed D.A., Alvin Bragg, couldn’t come close to proving that any crime was committed. THERE WAS NO CRIME. Legal Expense paid to a lawyer was marked, by a bookkeeper using a dropdown menu in a computer program, as Legal Expense paid to a lawyer. WHAT ELSE COULD YOU CALL IT? There is NO CASE, just a Democrat Persecutor controlled by Crooked Joe Biden’s White House, a Democrat Judge, and a biased venue. This is nothing but an Election Interfering Witch Hunt, and the American People know it! MAGA2024
Can anyone believe that Soros backed D.A., Alvin Bragg, was able to get a DELAY of 7 days to his Corrupt and Unconstitutional Case against me, with no sequester? Legal Expense = Legal Expense! The only thing Bragg has going for him is the Corrupt and highly Conflicted Judge - Which is a lot!!!
In addition to the fact that I did nothing wrong, NDA’s are totally legal and commonly used, and that virtually every legal Scholar and Expert says, in written form, that this is a case which has NO MERIT and should not have been brought, my lawyers have informed me that the highly Conflicted and Corrupt Judge, Juan Merchan, will not allow RELIANCE ON COUNSEL, which virtually everyone is allowed to use, as an additional, though not needed because I did NOTHING WRONG, Defense. This “Case,” which could have been brought seven years ago but wasn’t because it has no merit, is a disgrace. It was only begun to interfere with Crooked Joe Biden’s Political Opponent, ME. RELIANCE ON COUNSEL. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL - OPINION. ALVIN BRAGG HASN’T PROVED HIS CASE IN THE TRUMP TRIAL. THE EVIDENCE SHOWS WHY THE CHARGES SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN BROUGHT. New York Prosecutors rested their hush-money case against Donald Trump this week, but after 20 days in Court, and a trial transcript of 4000 pages, the missing piece is still missing. The question is whether Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg presented the evidence necessary for a conviction, and if we were in the jury room, we’d say NO.
The City of New York’s D.A., Alvin Bragg, is trying to prosecute a Federal case, which cannot be done, and where there is NO CRIME, that has been turned down by everyone, including the Federal Elections Commission, SDNY, the D.A.’s Office, and Bragg himself - Until I announced that I was running for President. This case could have been brought 7 years ago, but wasn’t. It is another Crooked Joe Biden Election Interference Hoax!
Let’s put the President in jail for 150 years because a LEGAL EXPENSE to a lawyer was called, by a bookkeeper, a LEGAL EXPENSE to a lawyer!What else could you call it. Crooked Joe Biden Witch Hunt. Election Interference. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!
LEGAL EXPENSE = LEGAL EXPENSE!!!
The Worst FBI Director in History, who I inherited from the Obama Administration, but fired almost immediately into ours, along with many other Corrupt Actors in the DOJ and FBI (The start of DRAIN THE SWAMP!), is going around LYING about the SCAM brought by Soros backed D.A. Alvin Bragg, and perpetuated by the Highly Conflicted, Democrat Appointed Judge, Juan Merchan. If you want to see the real story on Comey, read the Report put out by Inspector General Michael Horowitz, that gives you all the Horrors of Comey, in great detail. If Comey had any respect for our System of Justice, which is being DESTROYED before our eyes, he would be fighting against the Crooked Joe Biden inspired Witch Hunts, instead of spreading LIES!
The bookkeeping error that I am being incorrectly and unconstitutionally prosecuted for is the fact that a bookkeeper, innocently and correctly, called a “Legal Expense” paid to a lawyer, a “Legal Expense.” IN EVEN SIMPLER WORDS, I CALLED A LEGAL EXPENSE, A LEGAL EXPENSE. WHAT THE HELL ELSE WOULD YOU CALL IT? A BIDEN INSPIRED ELECTION INTERFERENCE HOAX!!!
Pam Bondi: “I wish all Americans could see what I was able to witness, as to how bad that judge was…”
Sitting in there, that judge is basically a prosecutor. He is rooting for the prosecution. He is ruling against President Trump every step of the way. I wish all Americans could see what I was able to witness as to how bad that judge was.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Gregg Jarrett: “Where is the crime? It’s no where…this is a trial in search of an imaginary crime…”
I think much depends on the closing argument. The element of the alleged crimes were never proven in this case. Business records were not false. They were accurate. Trump had no involvement. There's no evidence. He willfully violated election laws, and no laws were even broken. Plus it's factually impossible to influence an election after it's over yet. That's how the indictment reads. Even if Trump knew about the Stormy Daniels NDA, so what? That's not unlawful, so I come to the basic question, Pete, where is the crime? It's nowhere. This is what I call a Bigfoot case. It's a trial in search of an imaginary crime.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
I have gotten to know so many amazing United States Secret Service Agents - It has been my honor to have them protecting me and my family since our historic 2016 Victory against “Beautiful” Hillary Clinton. Shockingly, however, Crooked Joe Biden’s Department of Injustice authorized the use of “deadly force” in their Illegal, UnConstitutional, and Un-American RAID of Mar-a-Lago, and that would include against our Great Secret Service, who they thought might be “in the line of fire.” As I told Crooked Joe’s DOJ, if they needed anything, “all they had to do was ask.” They did not have to ILLEGALLY AND UNCONSTITUTIONALLY RAID my home, and rummage through my family’s, including Barron’s, private quarters. END THESE THIRD WORLD WITCH HUNTS, AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!
https://www.DonaldJTrump.com
https://www.DonaldJTrump.com
https://www.DonaldJTrump.com
WOW! I just came out of the Biden Witch Hunt Trial in Manhattan, the “Icebox,” and was shown Reports that Crooked Joe Biden’s DOJ, in their Illegal and UnConstitutional Raid of Mar-a-Lago, AUTHORIZED THE FBI TO USE DEADLY (LETHAL) FORCE. NOW WE KNOW, FOR SURE, THAT JOE BIDEN IS A SERIOUS THREAT TO DEMOCRACY. HE IS MENTALLY UNFIT TO HOLD OFFICE — 25TH AMENDMENT!