Okay, since you insist, I’ll play.
I do believe it was a fair trial. Your opinion may differ.
I do not believe it was a political statement or coverup. Your opinion may differ.
Suppression of priors is a lawful defense tactic. Fact.
“Probably eligible for the 3 strikes law”. Sounds like your opinion or guess.
Suppression of evidence is a lawful defense tactic. Fact.
Failure to test the gun was poor prosecution. Fact.
Failure to charge for a plethora... How many? What specifications?
Violation of Federal immigration laws by defendant. Apparently factual.
Violation of Federal immigration laws by State. Alleged by you.
Etc., etc., etc. ... padding? Or do you just like to see yourself type? You do understand how debate works, right? Point/counterpoint?
Yeah, you know, on second thought this really does sound like it was a political statement or coverup.