BadMoonRisin said:

---

Super weird.

They say they are dropping the charges because he performed some kind of community service and is not a threat to public safety...sounding like they admit he did it, but hes not worth putting in jail..

He is saying that he was still attacked and did not lie...unreal.

---

[img][/img]

bam02 said:

---

fooz said:

---

siap

---

Soros poured big money into a lot of local DA races lately. It's the new strategy. It happened in San Antonio and it worked.

Anyone saying this doesn't matter or doesn't affect them is short-sighted.

---

Houston too

4stringAg said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

I'm guessing this stunt was pre-planned with Kamala's knowledge, and she was afraid that once he was looking at being the bell of da ball, Jussie would give her up.

---

I think that's exactly what happened. My guess is Kamala is the Obama's choice for POTUS. To get her signature legistlation that I think was laboring in Congress a kick in the ass, Jussie planned this for her. Well, she left her fate in the hands of a dumbass who was stupid enough to leave all kinds of evidence laying around. So Kamala/Michelle O step in with their friend Kim Foxx and cut Jussie a sweet deal that even let's him walk out scot free without even having to admit the hoax.

---

Kamala is going to have to learn to delegate her dirty tricks to more competent shltbags. Jussie was a terrible choice to go with.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/tom-fitton-yes-judicial-watch-will-investigate-jussie-smollett-scandal/

Not sure how that will work with both a court seal and expungement order.

GCP12 said:

---

Everyone needs to remember that this POS was willing to send two random white dudes to jail to keep the hoax going

---

And he nearly did send two black guys that he knew well and paid to carry out the hoax. Their attorney telling them to start talking was the only thing that saved them from prison time because Jussie wasn't going to save them.

aggiehawg said:

---

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/tom-fitton-yes-judicial-watch-will-investigate-jussie-smollett-scandal/

Not sure how that will work with both a court seal and expungement order.

---

Probably FOIA for DA correspondence on the decision making process leading up to dismissal. The case records may be sealed, but what lead to the internal decision to drop charges probably isn't. Whether they like of or not, that office will need to justify this beyond, "It's not worth our time to prosecute 16 felony indictments from a grand jury on a case that tied up a dozen detectives for weeks."

Quote:

---

Probably FOIA for DA correspondence on the decision making process leading up to dismissal. The case records may be sealed, but what lead to the internal decision to drop charges probably isn't. Whether they like of or not,

---

Perhaps. For all we know, she used a burner phone to talk with the Michelle Obama former aide and Smollett family and not her state issued one.

No one saw this coming, including apparently Smollett's lawyer. I doubt there's a ton of records there but hopefully you are correct.

Quote:

---

For all we know, she used a burner phone to talk with the Michelle Obama former aide and Smollett family and not her state issued one

---

So we don't have any proof that she did use a burner phone but we also don't have proof she didn't?

87IE said:

---

Quote:

---

For all we know, she used a burner phone to talk with the Michelle Obama former aide and Smollett family and not her state issued one

---

So we don't have any proof that she did use a burner phone but we also don't have proof she didn't?

---

What we do know, beyond the shadow of a doubt, is that Jussie Smollett committed a hate crime that ignited an anti-white, anti-Trump, anti-conservative firestorm and is walking.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Probably FOIA for DA correspondence on the decision making process leading up to dismissal. The case records may be sealed, but what lead to the internal decision to drop charges probably isn't. Whether they like of or not,

---

Perhaps. For all we know, she used a burner phone to talk with the Michelle Obama former aide and Smollett family and not her state issued one.

No one saw this coming, including apparently Smollett's lawyer. I doubt there's a ton of records there but hopefully you are correct.

---

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-kim-foxx-texts-emails-jussie-smollett-20190313-htmlstory.html

She's a miserable piece of sht...

JCA1 said:

---

Dropping these highly publicized charges without any advance notice, much less approval, of either the mayor or the Chicago PD was going to clearly tick people off. Leads me to believe the DA's office is scared of something more than the wrath of the mayor or the PD.

---

Well, it's the county, so the mayor and PD can pound sand AS fast as the DA's office is concerned. They're doing it for the political favors and know no one will give a **** in 6 months.

Someone must be scared, because you know the CPD are going to ask the Feds to look into someone they admit they have evidence of crimes, but they aren't charging.

Unless he is giving states evidence on some really big names with proof of crimes? Otherwise makes absolutely zero sense, but it is Chicago and they seem to have helped invent corruption in the US.

As posted, some of the exchange is already public, and it's not like there aren't internal emails of the approval process within the DA's office. There has to be some sort of trail of memos and such giving marching orders.

The DA's Statement that there are bigger fish to fry, at least on its face, is plausible. But the utter lack of inclusion of anyone else in the decision making of this very public case coupled with apparently no requirements of Jussie so he literally walks out of the courthouse and proclaims his innocence is highly unusual.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

As posted, some of the exchange is already public, and it's not like there aren't internal emails of the approval process within the DA's office. There has to be some sort of trail of memos and such giving marching orders.

---

Hope you are correct. These FOIA things take so long however it could be 2021 before Judicial Watch gets their hands on the information though.

There is another avenue if the US Attorney's office gets involved pursuit to the police union's request and sends a preservation order.

No matter how you look at it, this deal stinks to high heaven of corruption. I still don't understand how Kim Foxx was even involved after her recusal, plus her Deputy thinks Smollett is not exonerated and is still guilty even after today's activities. Real kick in the teeth to the CPD. That seldom ends well.

She may be recused, but she's not dead. If she tells Magats to drop it, he's going to do it and say it was his call. The next time he needs a favor, he's going to call it in.

Even the CNN panel are scratching their heads and saying it doesn't make sense.

Well one is saying "Don't jump to conclusions, we don't know what happened."

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

She may be recused, but she's not dead. If she tells Magats to drop it, he's going to do it and say it was his call. The next time he needs a favor, he's going to call it in.

---

Sounds like a female state version of Chuck Rhoades in Billions. So which private law firm will she go to for a multi-million dollar job in the next few months (courtesy of the Obamas)??

And as for favors, not sure her endorsement for him to replace her won't move the needle. Police union is pissed. Other unions will be pissed, too. The only thing she can offer him is Soros money. And even that will cause blow-back.

bmks270 said:

---

Even the CNN panel are scratching their heads and saying it doesn't make sense.

Well one is saying "Don't jump to conclusions, we don't know what happened."

---

Sounds a whole lot like the way Hillary's email situation was handled.

JCA1 said:

---

The DA's Statement that there are bigger fish to fry, at least on its face, is plausible. But the utter lack of inclusion of anyone else in the decision making of this very public case coupled with apparently no requirements of Jussie so he literally walks out of the courthouse and proclaims his innocence is highly unusual.

---

As far as the DA's statement goes, Chicago is spending a lot of time frying smaller fish than someone that committed multiple felonies. Everyone there charged with a misdemeanor or lesser felony is saying "wtf?"

bmks270 said:

---

Even the CNN panel are scratching their heads and saying it doesn't make sense.

Well one is saying "Don't jump to conclusions, we don't know what happened."

---

Well, at least they're starting to learn....

Yet another case of being held to a lower, or perhaps held to no, standard. Where is that equality that is sought?

DannyDuberstein said:

---

JCA1 said:

---

The DA's Statement that there are bigger fish to fry, at least on its face, is plausible. But the utter lack of inclusion of anyone else in the decision making of this very public case coupled with apparently no requirements of Jussie so he literally walks out of the courthouse and proclaims his innocence is highly unusual.

---

As far as the DA's statement goes, Chicago is spending a lot of time frying smaller fish than someone that committed multiple felonies. Everyone there charged with a misdemeanor or lesser felony is saying "wtf?"

---

True. But they generally can't afford a legal dream team. Like it or not, who your opponent is is a factor.

While the decision definitely raises some questions, if you want me to come up with my best non-corruption explanation, the DA didn't want a very public trial against a team of very good defense attorneys. Basically, he didn't want to get Marcia Clarked over this case.

There is no non-corrupt explanation. If you're afraid of a dream team, you work out a real plea vs this dismissal garbage

JCA1 said:

---

DannyDuberstein said:

---

JCA1 said:

---

The DA's Statement that there are bigger fish to fry, at least on its face, is plausible. But the utter lack of inclusion of anyone else in the decision making of this very public case coupled with apparently no requirements of Jussie so he literally walks out of the courthouse and proclaims his innocence is highly unusual.

---

As far as the DA's statement goes, Chicago is spending a lot of time frying smaller fish than someone that committed multiple felonies. Everyone there charged with a misdemeanor or lesser felony is saying "wtf?"

---

True. But they generally can't afford a legal dream team. Like it or not, who your opponent is is a factor.

While the decision definitely raises some questions, if you want me to come up with my best non-corruption explanation, the DA didn't want a very public trial against a team of very good defense attorneys. Basically, he didn't want to get Marcia Clarked over this case.

---

Please....I suspect the DA knows how her bread's buttered....and it's not going to get buttered by convicting a gay, black, anti-Trump activist

Don't disagree. Allowing him to walk out and proclaim his innocence was ridiculous. Just pointing out that the deal offered often turns on how good of an attorney you have and how much stomach the DA has to take them on.

WTF. Moochelle 0bama possibly involved?

https://instagr.am/p/BvffGSajOOd

This was such an honest 'transaction" the DA felt compelled to seal the record.

I guess that's what happens when the DA has the same political connections as the accused.

So, are any media outlets going to buy the witness stories?

The two men who were paid to participate in the hoax would make for a good interview. Someone has to have enough funds to get them to give one.

What kind of privledge do you call that?

JCA1 said:

---

The DA's Statement that there are bigger fish to fry, at least on its face, is plausible. But the utter lack of inclusion of anyone else in the decision making of this very public case coupled with apparently no requirements of Jussie so he literally walks out of the courthouse and proclaims his innocence is highly unusual.

---

Barnes smells bigger fish. Methinks Kamala is sweating.