(11-02-2023, 11:13 PM)p_rushing Wrote:

(11-02-2023, 09:12 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: Just making the assumption that these prosecutors are using one of the most common tools in the book to strengthen their case. 

It's as common as catching a cold. 

Multiple defendants are charged with the intent of letting the little fish swim free in order to build a stronger case on the whale. 

Why would they not do this ?  
What real cause do most of these defendants have not to spit their guts on a guy who hung them out to dry? 

I'll wager a few of them will sing like birds. 

There are also dozens of reports out there claiming this is exactly what is happening via protected sources. 

I'm not making some wild claim here. This is courtroom 101 type stuff.

Yes that is standard practice but in those cases the person admitted to something that was charged but was being given lesser sentences.

Right now no one has admitted to breaking any laws to do with the rico charges. When they testify, they will say no laws were broken. Trump will present the evidence of fraud and it will be not guilty.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Why do you assume the bolded? 

How do you think you know who will and won't testify with damaging testimony against Trump, and how do you think you know what they will and won't say?

You have no idea. We can only guess. Based on what I've seen following cases with multiple defendants in the past -
It is my opinion that they used these plea deals to coerce damaging testimony out of one or more of those defendants. It's a perfectly reasonable thing to expect. And again - reporters with protected sources are saying this is the case. 

You can disagree - but you don't know beyond doubt any more than I do.

---