When they say a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich
it depends on the lies used by the prosecutor to the grand jury. I think it's a good bet that the point here was to get the indictment no matter what lies had to be told to the grand jury. It should not surprise anybody if the so called "evidence" presented to the grand jury bears no resemblance to anything that will be provided in discovery or used at trial.
Obviously anybody who works for, is associated with or represents Crumb the 1st is chosen because they have no ethical problem with telling lies. Should Hackagain be concerned that in the end of all of this her law license may end up with the same fate as Ghooliani? Even a ham sandwich could figure that one out.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.