Brainwash, rinse and repeat: “…that ‘argument‘ at trial. You can make that ‘argument‘ at trial. You can make…“ These are very typical dodges to tough evidentiary questions we get when we are being attacked by these predators. If you ask a question, and they start with, “As I said…“; you are not going to get a responsive answer.
Though there’s a lot to unpack in this particular Call of Shame, there is nothing substantially concrete that was ever confirmed; this is the mastered trade-craft of a well-conditioned deceptionist. Though this prosecutor is not very good yet, very transparent, like she wasn’t even trying to be convincing.
I do address this call in some detail at the end of last week’s No State Project, so I won’t go into much detail here. What is important is to notice the lame attempt at a straw man. When I ask her directly for the evidence her argument is based, she claims the argument her evidence is insufficient is a legal question for the court to decide.
While I point out each time I am asking for her to just disclose her evidence, if any, she sticks to her straw man and refuses to make a disclosure. She request we put it in writing. We did, but I’m not holding my breathe she will be responsive.
You can’t provide what doesn’t exist. If there was evidence proving the laws apply to us, then the evidence would be provided. And no, claims of punishment is not evidence supporting the argument/opinion.
If you, or someone you know thinks there is evidence, then please call into a live broadcast.