Pardon Pro-Lifers, January 6 Political Prisoners, & Other Victims of Dem Lawfare

[Michie]

​

This implicitly recognizes that these prosecutions were nothing but lawfare, political witch hunts that failed and now have no purpose. I hope someone sends witch hunter Jack Smith a message purportedly from the next President. “You have a head start to get out of Dodge. Make use of it.”

Continued below.

Gone Like a Bad Dream in the Night - The American Catholic

This implicitly recognizes that these prosecutions were nothing but lawfare, political witch hunts that failed and now have no purpose. I hope someone sends witch hunter Jack Smith a message purportedly from the next President. "You have a head start to get out of Dodge. Make use of it." Trump...

the-american-catholic.com

 

[Fantine]

The fact that a Catholic publication would deny truth and promote debunked conspiracy theories is a disgrace and a blot on the church.
The lying sins of those with a wide circulation are magnified in God's eyes.

 

[Michie]

I’ll take their word over yours any day.

 

[actionsub]

Whatever the reason, Jack Smith did file a motion in court today to vacate the case against Trump. From other accounts I've read, he took this action because like anything else involving lawyers it takes a lot of time to do anything, even if it's just throwing in the towel.
Whether or not these cases were "witch hunts", Smith and the DOJ are apparently savvy enough to read the writing on the wall.

 

[RileyG]

Glory to God! The pro lifers did nothing wrong!

 

[JSRG]

This implicitly recognizes that these prosecutions were nothing but lawfare, political witch hunts that failed and now have no purpose. I hope someone sends witch hunter Jack Smith a message purportedly from the next President. “You have a head start to get out of Dodge. Make use of it.”

How does it "implicitly recognize" that? Justice Department policy is, as I understand it, to not indict a sitting President. While Trump isn't technically a sitting President yet, he's President-elect, and that was regarded as close enough to drop the cases. All of this is even noted in the pictured Tweet.

Even if not for that policy, it's very unlikely they'll be able to get everything ready and to trial before Trump takes office in which case he can just fire everyone who wants to prosecute him. So dropping the cases makes sense if it's lawfare... and makes sense if it's not lawfare. Given that, it makes no sense to claim this is any kind of recognizing, implicitly or otherwise, of it being political witch hunts or lawfare.

If anything the dropping of them can be used as an argument of it not being lawfare, by saying "well, if it was lawfare, they'd keep going just in the hopes they can get it done before the election."

So this claim from the article you are quoting makes no sense.