That’s all great, basically just repeating, but still doesn’t answer or address anything I asked. I don’t disagree at all that there are people, major players in the law profession, who are saying this is a sham. What I’m saying is there are also people, major players in the law profession, saying just the opposite.
So my main question/point is being that, and I think we can both agree on these:
A) you and I are in no way experts in law
B) you and I have not intricate details what so ever in the case, because we weren’t involved in the investigations, we didn’t sit on the grand jury that indicted, and we weren’t in the courtroom or reading transcripts thereof
C) you and I both know that at least 90% of the media we watch/read is agenda driven.
How can any of us take such a hard stance on this, over the people who were in fact intricately involved, most notably members of the grand and trial juries?
Is it the reporting and who you believe is and is not bias?