“Pam: I have reviewed over 30 statements and posts saying that, essentially, same old story as last time, all talk, no action. Nothing is being done. What about Comey, Adam Shifty Schiff, Leticia??? Theyre all guilty as hell, but nothing is going to be done. Then we almost put in a Democrat supported U.S. Attorney, in Virginia, with a really bad Republican past. A Woke RINO, who was never going to do his job. Thats why two of the worst Dem Senators PUSHED him so hard. He even lied to the media and said he quit, and that we had no case. No, I fired him, and there is a GREAT CASE, and many layers, and legal pundits, say so. Lindsey is a really good lawyer, and likes you, a lot. We cant delay any longer, its killing our reputation and credibility. They impeached me twice, and indicted me (5 times!), OVER NOTHING. JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!! President DJT” @realDonaldTrump

Fact-Check Summary

The post contains a blend of accurate facts, misleading statements, and outright exaggeration. The firing of U.S. Attorney Erik Siebert and the nature of his departure are accurately referenced, as is the Democratic support Siebert received from Virginia’s senators. Claims about there being a “GREAT CASE” and definitive guilt of Comey, Schiff, and Letitia James are not substantiated by actual legal outcomes; investigations have not resulted in charges. The number of indictments against Trump is misstated (he was indicted four times, not five), though it is accurate that he was impeached twice. The overall rhetoric in the post often moves beyond evidence, relying on opinion and divisive language.

Belief Alignment Analysis

The language used in the post is accusatory, personal, and relies heavily on division and partisan animosity rather than promoting constructive or inclusive civic discourse. Terms like “Woke RINO” and phrases such as “guilty as hell” undermine the presumption of innocence and do not promote democratic values of fairness and civility. Calls for immediate punitive action on political opponents risk undermining trust in independent judicial procedures and democratic norms.

Opinion

While concern over slow legal processes and calls for accountability are valid in a democratic system, this post disregards due process and amplifies unproven accusations. By framing opposition figures as automatically guilty and conflating opinion with fact, the post detracts from informed, accountable public discussion and perpetuates distrust in democratic institutions.

TLDR

Some factual points in the post are accurate (Siebert’s firing, Trump’s two impeachments), but key claims about guilt and case strength lack legal substantiation. There is exaggeration regarding Trump’s indictments and derogatory rhetoric that undermines fair, democratic discourse.

Claim: Justice officials “guilty as hell,” a “Great Case” exists against them, Siebert was fired for Democratic support, Trump impeached twice and indicted 5 times.

Fact: Siebert’s firing and Democratic support are accurate; Trump was impeached twice and indicted four (not five) times; guilt of Comey, Schiff, or Letitia James is not legally established; the mortgage fraud case did not result in charges.

Opinion: The post conflates political frustration with fact, and its rhetoric undermines trust in fair, evidence-based legal proceedings.

TruthScore: 4

True: Siebert’s firing, role of Democratic support, two impeachments.

Hyperbole: Characterizing opponents as “guilty as hell,” claims of a “GREAT CASE,” implication of total judicial inaction.

Lies: Incorrect count of indictments (five, instead of four), definitive claims of legal guilt where none is established.