Jump to content
MNBigRedNorth

JUSSIE SMOLETT: All charges DROPPED !!

Recommended Posts

This is a ripe one for obstruction of justice.  What's going on with this.  Kim Foxx had the charges dropped. She had recused herself but somehow wormed her way back in.  She must have gotten a call from Michelle Obama her past boss.  Michelle and Jussie are good friends. This is Chicago politics in it’s highest form.  How can 12 indictments get dropped?  It was a slam duck case the Chief of Police said.  Also hearing that the Chief of Police and their local Police Union are now making a criminal legal referrals to U.S. Department of Justice for them to review the whole thing, including how it got dropped. More proof there is a two tiered justice system.  One for politicians, celebrities and people politician favor for their political gain and one for the rest of us! 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/arts/television/jussie-smollett-charges-dropped.html

  • Plus1 2
  • Eyeroll 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MNBigRedNorth said:

More proof there is a two tiered justice system.  One for politicians, celebrities and people politician favor for their political gain and one for the rest of us!  

 

Remember this when you think of the Barr letter based on Mueller's investigation.

  • Plus1 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MNBigRedNorth said:

This is a ripe one for obstruction of justice.  What's going on with this.  Kim Foxx had the charges dropped. She had recused herself but somehow wormed her way back in.  She must have gotten a call from Michelle Obama her past boss.  Michelle and Jussie are good friends. This is Chicago politics in it’s highest form.  How can 12 indictments get dropped?  It was a slam duck case the Chief of Police said.  Also hearing that the Chief of Police and their local Police Union are now making a criminal legal referrals to U.S. Department of Justice for them to review the whole thing, including how it got dropped. More proof there is a two tiered justice system.  One for politicians, celebrities and people politician favor for their political gain and one for the rest of us! 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/26/arts/television/jussie-smollett-charges-dropped.html

 

 

It was 16 indictments.  They drop them when they have no evidence and can't convict.

  • Plus1 1
  • Haha 2
  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember thinking the Smollett case was an embarrassment to everyone, but I didn't know it would just keep giving. 

 

Only question left: what plans does the New World Order have for Jussie Smollett? 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind seeing him be made an example of in a substantial yet non life destroying sort of way that he could eventually come back from, but it seems pretty obvious the powers that be didn't want to deal with the s#!t storm and felt fine to just let a victimless crime slide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I remember thinking the Smollett case was an embarrassment to everyone, but I didn't know it would just keep giving. 

 

Only question left: what plans does the New World Order have for Jussie Smollett? 

Michelle Obama will tap him as a running mate, have the Socialists of the EU rig the election to get them in the White House.  At that time the EU will consolidate and crown him king of the world.  Only to find out that he hasn't been vaccinated, therefore they are unable to control his thoughts with the "potion".  This will create an apocalypse of biblical proportions.  Obama will come yielding a sword (because guns will have been banned) riding a chariot pulled by 7 rinos.  

  • Plus1 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, funhusker said:

Michelle Obama will tap him as a running mate, have the Socialists of the EU rig the election to get them in the White House.  At that time the EU will consolidate and crown him king of the world.  Only to find out that he hasn't been vaccinated, therefore they are unable to control his thoughts with the "potion".  This will create an apocalypse of biblical proportions.  Obama will come yielding a sword (because guns will have been banned) riding a chariot pulled by 7 rinos.  

where is soros and what will the deep state be like then?

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, commando said:

where is soros and what will the deep state be like then?

They will have been banished to Trumpian Prisons but will be freed as the earth breaks open after a fracking expedition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

I heard Smollett is really a white man in black face.  

 

(ouch...quite possibly too soon...eyeswear2allthatsholy )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DevoHusker said:

 

(ouch...quite possibly too soon...eyeswear2allthatsholy )

Yeah I debated that.

 

It will be interesting to see how people verbalize it, because there is the extra component; on top of a wealthy man getting off on a crime(s), there is going to be added doubt/outrage that he was black.  

 

edit: probably just need to wait for Hannity or Tucker tonight to get the read on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

 

It was 16 indictments.  They drop them when they have no evidence and can't convict.

Seriously?

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NM11046 said:

Yeah I debated that.

 

It will be interesting to see how people verbalize it, because there is the extra component; on top of a wealthy man getting off on a crime(s), there is going to be added doubt/outrage that he was black.  

 

unfortunately...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BIG ERN said:

It's called money, not race. The color green is all that matters in the court room. 

I wonder why the whole Smollet case has been sealed.  We should know everything about this case.  Why is it so different than the Mueller Russian file that it has to be sealed.  I'm all for the Mueller file being released don't doubt me on that one. (I think there is some incriminating stuff in there the Dems may be sorry that we all get to see!)     Also it's funny back during Water Gate, all those Nixon files were sealed and have never been opened.  Who's being protected by sealing these files.  I've heard they have all his phone records and that most likely those records contain phone calls from Michelle and Barack and maybe even his relative Senator Harris.  Do you think the Smollet file should be unsealed?

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MNBigRedNorth said:

I wonder why the whole Smollet has been sealed.  We should know everything about this case.  Why is it so different than the Mueller Russian file that it has to be sealed.  I'm all for the Mueller file being released don't doubt me on that one. (I think there is some incriminating stuff in there the Dems may be sorry that we all get to see!)     Also it's funny back during Water Gate, all those Nixon files were sealed and have never been opened.  Who's being protected by sealing these files.  I've heard they have all his phone records and that most likely those records contain phone calls from Michelle and Barack and maybe even his relative Senator Harris.  Do you think the Smollet file should be unsealed?


Everyone and case should be treated the same, but we know that isn't how it works. Our judicial system is a complete joke from top to bottom. I've seen people get longer sentences for selling drugs than someone raping a child. How TF does that make any sense? 

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, HuskerNBigD said:

Seriously?

 

 

Yep.  Oh, there was "evidence" that was reported by the media I suppose...but in a court of law an indictment comes after a grand jury (which isn't all that grand...6 people minimum to 12 max).  Indictments come after presentation of evidence IN STRICT CONFIDENCE between grand jury members and the prosecution...no one else. The judge doesn't even see the evidence.  If the 6 to 12 individuals say 'yeah, that's enough to accuse this person' then it goes to trial. 

 

If the judge, prosecutor and defense lawyer finally have a trial (after all pretrial motions, etc)...they can go through the indictments and determine which ones will stay and which ones will go based on the evidence at hand.  For example, defense lawyers can get specific ones thrown out due (both before and during a trial) to inadmissible evidence (2nd hand knowledge, no eyewitnesses, etc).  Once this is determined, the prosecution then can determine whether to continue to prosecute, to offer a deal for reduced sentence and admission of guilt, or to dismiss the charges if they don't think they will be able to prove them in a court of law.

 

So, the prosecutor determined they would not win in a court of law and dismissed all charges.  This means either the judge determined that the grand jury indictments weren't up to snuff and dismissed some of the charges...or the defense lawyer was able to get some that the prosecution COULD  prove thrown out and perhaps those indictments were needed to prove other indictments and thus dominos of indictments may have fallen, or a combination of all of these or even related reasons (I'm sure everyone can think of some)

 

Bottom line, no conviction means there was only an accusation and there wasn't evidence in place that allowed for a conviction of these crimes.

 

It's important to also note that the prosecution has a sworn oath to prosecute ANY crime that they can prove to serve the public interest.  In other words, if they can prove it...they "should act with integrity and balanced judgment to increase public safety both by pursuing appropriate criminal charges of appropriate severity, and by exercising discretion to not pursue criminal charges in appropriate circumstances. The prosecutor should seek to protect the innocent and convict the guilty"

 

I have no dog in the fight...I don't care if he was guilt or innocent.  I don't watch Empire.  

 

I only think trial in the court of public opinion is an affront to our justice system.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MNBigRedNorth said:

I wonder why the whole Smollet case has been sealed.  We should know everything about this case.  Why is it so different than the Mueller Russian file that it has to be sealed.  I'm all for the Mueller file being released don't doubt me on that one. (I think there is some incriminating stuff in there the Dems may be sorry that we all get to see!)     Also it's funny back during Water Gate, all those Nixon files were sealed and have never been opened.  Who's being protected by sealing these files.  I've heard they have all his phone records and that most likely those records contain phone calls from Michelle and Barack and maybe even his relative Senator Harris.  Do you think the Smollet file should be unsealed?

Where are you hearing that from?

 

yes, it should be released just like the mueller report. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

 

Yep.  Oh, there was "evidence" that was reported by the media I suppose...but in a court of law an indictment comes after a grand jury (which isn't all that grand...6 people minimum to 12 max).  Indictments come after presentation of evidence IN STRICT CONFIDENCE between grand jury members and the prosecution...no one else. The judge doesn't even see the evidence.  If the 6 to 12 individuals say 'yeah, that's enough to accuse this person' then it goes to trial. 

 

If the judge, prosecutor and defense lawyer finally have a trial (after all pretrial motions, etc)...they can go through the indictments and determine which ones will stay and which ones will go based on the evidence at hand.  For example, defense lawyers can get specific ones thrown out due (both before and during a trial) to inadmissible evidence (2nd hand knowledge, no eyewitnesses, etc).  Once this is determined, the prosecution then can determine whether to continue to prosecute, to offer a deal for reduced sentence and admission of guilt, or to dismiss the charges if they don't think they will be able to prove them in a court of law.

 

So, the prosecutor determined they would not win in a court of law and dismissed all charges.  This means either the judge determined that the grand jury indictments weren't up to snuff and dismissed some of the charges...or the defense lawyer was able to get some that the prosecution COULD  prove thrown out and perhaps those indictments were needed to prove other indictments and thus dominos of indictments may have fallen, or a combination of all of these or even related reasons (I'm sure everyone can think of some)

 

Bottom line, no conviction means there was only an accusation and there wasn't evidence in place that allowed for a conviction of these crimes.

 

It's important to also note that the prosecution has a sworn oath to prosecute ANY crime that they can prove to serve the public interest.  In other words, if they can prove it...they "should act with integrity and balanced judgment to increase public safety both by pursuing appropriate criminal charges of appropriate severity, and by exercising discretion to not pursue criminal charges in appropriate circumstances. The prosecutor should seek to protect the innocent and convict the guilty"

 

I have no dog in the fight...I don't care if he was guilt or innocent.  I don't watch Empire.  

 

I only think trial in the court of public opinion is an affront to our justice system.

I don’t have a dog in the fight either, but I believe you have to be pretty ignorant to overlook the fact they have the two brothers on camera buying the red hat and rope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Where are you hearing that from?

 

yes, it should be released just like the mueller report. 

The far right that wants to hang their hat on this event and claim scoreboard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Where are you hearing that from?

 

yes, it should be released just like the mueller report. 

Everything is the Obamas' fault, don't ya know?

 

#ThanksObama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, HuskerNBigD said:

The far right that wants to hang their hat on this event and claim scoreboard. 

I don’t think that’s it. I’ve never heard of a case where 16 felonies were dropped after 16 hours of community service and 10k bail money that was kept.

 

 

 

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Landlord said:

I wouldn't mind seeing him be made an example of in a substantial yet non life destroying sort of way that he could eventually come back from, but it seems pretty obvious the powers that be didn't want to deal with the s#!t storm and felt fine to just let a victimless crime slide.

This was a bizarre one for sure but I don’t think you should refer to it as “a victimless crime”. Numerous resources were wasted and I have to wonder how many people it influenced just as much as if it had actually occurred. I guess I don’t see any greater good in destroying his life but it’s also a bad message to send for others who may try to commit the same fraud. And I have trouble feeling an pity for him when he now portrays it as he was vindicated and was telling the truth all along. TBH I hope the FBI or whoever follows up actually dispenses the justice that the crooked city of Chicago screwed up.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

This was a bizarre one for sure but I don’t think you should refer to it as “a victimless crime”. Numerous resources were wasted and I have to wonder how many people it influenced just as much as if it had actually occurred. I guess I don’t see any greater good in destroying his life but it’s also a bad message to send for others who may try to commit the same fraud. And I have trouble feeling an pity for him when he now portrays it as he was vindicated and was telling the truth all along. TBH I hope the FBI or whoever follows up actually dispenses the justice that the crooked city of Chicago screwed up.

 

 

I pretty much agree with you just didn't use the most precise language.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

This was a bizarre one for sure but I don’t think you should refer to it as “a victimless crime”. Numerous resources were wasted and I have to wonder how many people it influenced just as much as if it had actually occurred. I guess I don’t see any greater good in destroying his life but it’s also a bad message to send for others who may try to commit the same fraud. And I have trouble feeling an pity for him when he now portrays it as he was vindicated and was telling the truth all along. TBH I hope the FBI or whoever follows up actually dispenses the justice that the crooked city of Chicago screwed up. 

 

Exactly. The dude walked into a medical center with a rope around his neck claiming assault. He was treated by the docs, police resources were expended to investigate his claims, and then more resources were expended to investigate the possible hoax.

 

SOMETHING happened here. SOMEONE used up a ton of resources that could have been better expended elsewhere.

 

Those are taxpayer resources. I think the taxpayers are owed a bit better explanation than the one they've been given.

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Where are you hearing that from?

 

yes, it should be released just like the mueller report. 

Various source all over twitter!  I know and I do take it with a grain of salt!

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Dewiz said:

 

This situation is weird and definitely in need of clarification.  But is it really the worth the use of federal resources and especially the time of the POTUS?  

 

The mayor of Chicago and Chicago Police Dept are dismayed by this.  Am I to understand that they can't get answers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

This situation is weird and definitely in need of clarification.  But is it really the worth the use of federal resources and especially the time of the POTUS?  

 

The mayor of Chicago and Chicago Police Dept are dismayed by this.  Am I to understand that they can't get answers?

Playing devil's advocate (and really just throwing this out there, because I have no clue whether the city could get any answers now that the case has been sealed), what if the federal government and POTUS are the only way to get answers / clarification?

 

Granted, we then have to ask ourselves whether this case warrants additional resources. Honestly, I think the guy should be prosecuted given his theatrics and intentional race-baiting, but I'm not exactly sure what that'll prove. People are already dug in on their sides, whether they support him or not, and I don't believe any sort of conviction would sway individuals one way or another. What concerns me is this case allows for others to believe you can side skirt any ramifications of trying to create hoopla around a hate crime, producing more copycat like acts. That has the potential to not only divide this country further, as some will claim it is real and others will call it another Smollett farce. We will have to rely on the fact that there are some normal human beings who can objective apply a sniff test to each individual case. However, in a world that continues to be more and more polarized by political parties or acts, I fear the number of able individuals continues to dwindle.

 

I think it is completely ridiculous that his attorneys are claiming he's 100% innocent and demanding an apology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the DA in the smolett case...this report does not exonerate jusse....almost everyone calls it BS

 

barrs report says the meuller report doesn't exonerate trump.....60,000,000 americans totally and completely ignore the part about trump not being exonerated and demand people pay for letting an investigation take place.

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, commando said:

the DA in the smolett case...this report does not exonerate jusse....almost everyone calls it BS

 

barrs report says the meuller report doesn't exonerate trump.....60,000,000 americans totally and completely ignore the part about trump not being exonerated and demand people pay for letting an investigation take place.

 

 

And which types of people on this forum think neither is exonerated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moiraine said:

 

 

And which types of people on this forum think neither is exonerated?

almost everyone not related to jusse....and some of his supporters may only say things to support him without believing it.  lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, commando said:

almost everyone not related to jusse....and some of his supporters may only say things to support him without believing it.  lol.

 

 

I said neither. The point is, some people here make their decisions on these things based on political leaning rather than their brains.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, commando said:

the DA in the smolett case...this report does not exonerate jusse....almost everyone calls it BS

 

barrs report says the meuller report doesn't exonerate trump.....60,000,000 americans totally and completely ignore the part about trump not being exonerated and demand people pay for letting an investigation take place.

No it doesn't exonerate him, because exoneration is not needed when there is no there there, and there was no evidence to even start an investigation.  So again no exoneration is not needed.

  • Plus1 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MNBigRedNorth said:

No it doesn't exonerate him, because exoneration is not needed when there is no there there, and there was no evidence to even start an investigation.  So again no exoneration is not needed.

quoted directly from the barr report

 

 The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MNBigRedNorth said:

No it doesn't exonerate him, because exoneration is not needed when there is no there there, and there was no evidence to even start an investigation.  So again no exoneration is not needed.

 

Eight guilty pleas or convictions.

 

Remind us again how many people in Obama's administration were convicted or plead guilty.

  • Eyeroll 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic - I can see them dropping charges in what appears to be a victimless crime. Whatever. Not worth the resources to prosecute, and he doesn't pose a danger.

 

But I'm all for him paying this money back for the cost of the investigation.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, knapplc said:

Back on topic - I can see them dropping charges in what appears to be a victimless crime. Whatever. Not worth the resources to prosecute, and he doesn't pose a danger.

 

But I'm all for him paying this money back for the cost of the investigation.

 

 

 

I’m fine with making him pay that. 

 

But, knowing how corrupt the Chicago government and police are, I laugh at their outrage over this. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

You can always count on Chicago to shoot itself in the foot. 

 

 

And to shoot its citizens :x 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Smullett admitted to fraud? Maybe he really wasn't lying all along? I mean why is the assumtion that he is lying when fraud charges were dropped. Sure, he could have done the crime and got the charges dropped anyway, but considering he hasn't admitted to the crime, and he isn't being charged for the crime, why do we assume he did the crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Has Smullett admitted to fraud? Maybe he really wasn't lying all along? I mean why is the assumtion that he is lying when fraud charges were dropped. Sure, he could have done the crime and got the charges dropped anyway, but considering he hasn't admitted to the crime, and he isn't being charged for the crime, why do we assume he did the crime?

to paraphrase our dear leaders favorite phrase when defending his own.......he strongly denies it

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, commando said:

to paraphrase our dear leaders favorite phrase when defending his own.......he strongly denies it

I mean yea, he probably did do it lol but it is interesting to me thats not at least a theory here that its not a conspiracy at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/30/2019 at 10:39 AM, Nebfanatic said:

Has Smullett admitted to fraud? Maybe he really wasn't lying all along? I mean why is the assumtion that he is lying when fraud charges were dropped. Sure, he could have done the crime and got the charges dropped anyway, but considering he hasn't admitted to the crime, and he isn't being charged for the crime, why do we assume he did the crime?

Well, for one, there was mounting evidence from the cameras of capturing the brothers purchasing the props, to their attorney looking to strike a deal, to Smollett seemingly now not caring about whether the perps are caught. Add that to the fact that it seems highly unlikely two racists would be out on one of the coldest nights in Chicago's history and are able to identify a particular black man from across the street, with just a little bit of logic you could see how this whole situation doesn't pass the sniff test.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were shenanigans in this whole situation, and they're going to come out.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he should just admit he did wrong and if the state wants to let him off with a fine i guess it's ok with me...but i'd rather he spent some time in jail for his stunt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×