Ags77 said:

---

I see where Meadows is asking to have his case moved from a state case to a federal case. That's what I initially thought Trump lawyers should do.

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Ags77 said:

---

I see where Meadows is asking to have his case moved from a state case to a federal case. That's what I initially thought Trump lawyers should do.

---

Yeah, and I want my house to be moved to Grand Cayman.

---

Quote:

---

To try to get the case into federal court, Trump is expected to argue that much of the conduct he's been charged with was undertaken in his capacity as an officer of the federal government, because he was still president during the critical period when he and his allies attempted to subvert the 2020 election results. A federal law, known as a "removal statute," generally allows any "officer of the United States" who is prosecuted or sued in state court to transfer the case to federal court if the case stems from the officer's governmental duties.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

It will be a Hail Mary shot, to say the least, to successfully argue most (or any) of this was within his official duties as President

---

Really? How do you figure that a President, as the unitary executive, has no responsibility to ensure free and fair elections? Because every single agency at the federal level that have those responsibilites are within the Executive Branch. Article II.

<sigh>

---

aggiehawg said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

It will be a Hail Mary shot, to say the least, to successfully argue most (or any) of this was within his official duties as President

---

Really? How do you figure that a President, as the unitary executive, has no responsibility to ensure free and fair elections? Because every single agency at the federal level that have those responsibilites are within the Executive Branch. Article II.

<sigh>

---

Quote:

---

Okay. Let's discuss this. In Thompson v Trump, a federal court said Trump provided no legal authority and the court could find no legal authority providing a role for the President in a state's electoral college process.

So, starting from that point, what's best possible legal authority providing a role for the President? Let's go from there...

---

aggiehawg said:

---

This board has been full of a lot of dumb since last night. I'm too old to suffer fools as lightly as I once did.

Today, my eyes rolled so far back up into my head, I'm surprised they didn't stay there, like my Mom always warned when I was a kid.

Not that I don't disagrre with your take at times too. I am an equal opportunity eye roller. Hope that doesn't offend you when I disagree. I'm really not sure about the veracity of your absolute immunity defense, for example. Arguments both ways, IMO.

But until SCOTUS addresss these issues instead of ducking them, we get to wander around in the woods behind small animals with no breadcrumbs showing the way.

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Since it was first, are you saying the Voting Rights Act is the clearest legal authority?

---

Quote:

---

Georgia court offers new explanation for 'fictitious' indictment posted before Trump charges

Document describing charges in indictment against Trump, 18 others, appeared online before grand jury voted

The Fulton County Clerk of Courts Office is offering a new explanation for the supposed "fictitious" indictment posted on the Georgia court's website before a grand jury voted Monday to hand up an indictment for former President Trump and 18 others.

On Monday afternoon, the Fulton County Court's website posted a document that listed the same charges included in the indictment released late Monday night, which included charges of violating the Georgia RICO Act (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), solicitation of violation of oath by a public officer, conspiracy to commit filing false documents and more.

It is still unclear why the "sample working document" and the "fictitious docket sheet" matched the exact charges brought against the former president and 18 others.

---

Quote:

---

Reuters first reported on the document before the Fulton County Court quickly removed it from the website and released a statement, blasting the document as "fictitious" and warning the media "that documents that do not bear an official case number, filing date, and the name of The Clerk of Courts, in concert, are not considered official filings and should not be treated as such."

No, I can't tell you anything about what you refer to," Willis said. "What I can tell you is that we had a grand jury here in Fulton County. They deliberated till almost 8 o'clock, if not right after 8 o'clock, an indictment was returned. It was true billed. And you now have an indictment."

The Office of the Fulton County Clerk of Superior and Magistrate Courts announces that midday on August 14, 2023, a media outlet utilizing the Fulton County Press que obtained a docket sheet and shared it with other media outlets who then released the sample working document related to the former United States President, Donald Trump reporting that an indictment had been returned by the Special Grand Jury in Fulton County Georgia," the statement reads.

"Upon learning of the mishap, Fulton County Clerk of Superior and Magistrate Courts, Ch Alexander, immediately removed the document and issued correspondence notifying the media that a fictitious document was in circulation and that no indictment had been returned by the Grand Jury."

---

aggiehawg said:

---

When I snort so hard that fluid comes out of my nose, you have achieved quite the goal. Eye rolls were one thing. But me snorting on my computer screen for that bad take takes the cake.

I snorted. Congrats.

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

When I snort so hard that fluid comes out of my nose, you have achieved quite the goal. Eye rolls were one thing. But me snorting on my computer screen for that bad take takes the cake.

I snorted. Congrats.

---

Its a simple question. What's the best legal authority? Why can't you answer it?

---

fka ftc said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

It will be a Hail Mary shot, to say the least, to successfully argue most (or any) of this was within his official duties as President

---

Really? How do you figure that a President, as the unitary executive, has no responsibility to ensure free and fair elections? Because every single agency at the federal level that have those responsibilites are within the Executive Branch. Article II.

<sigh>

---

More than the other BS cases, its pretty clear Trump has immunity here and that immunity will extend to all the co-conspirators.

"I was instructing investigations into the election integrity in the United States whilst carrying out my official duties as President of the United States."

Period. End of story. Case dismissed.

Else, we are going straight to a full-fledged constitutional crisis.

---

TheAngelFlight said:

---

If its removed, wouldn't the same prosecutor prosecute the case in Fulton County, just in a different court room with a different judge?

Is it a big deal, either way?

---

TheAngelFlight said:

---

If its removed, wouldn't the same prosecutor prosecute the case in Fulton County, just in a different court room with a different judge?

Is it a big deal, either way?

---

fka ftc said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

This board has been full of a lot of dumb since last night. I'm too old to suffer fools as lightly as I once did.

Today, my eyes rolled so far back up into my head, I'm surprised they didn't stay there, like my Mom always warned when I was a kid.

Not that I don't disagrre with your take at times too. I am an equal opportunity eye roller. Hope that doesn't offend you when I disagree. I'm really not sure about the veracity of your absolute immunity defense, for example. Arguments both ways, IMO.

But until SCOTUS addresss these issues instead of ducking them, we get to wander around in the woods behind small animals with no breadcrumbs showing the way.

---

Its not much of a discussion if we all just agree with each other. Never take offense when someone disagrees and offers the reasoning for it where I can learn where I might be offbase. You seem to go out of your way to educate folks and I appreciate that.

I understand my take on absolute immunity if on the edge, but since we are in completely uncharted waters and this is an internet message board, I don't hesitate to take a stance.

Its obvious we cannot have a POTUS with unchecked powers. However, what was done to Trump 2017 to 2021 was to use the Legislative branch and the Judiciary to try and subvert any authority the Executive had. A supposedly free press was complicit and even much of the Executive had no respect for the head of the Executive.

Now we see the current Executive doing totally inappropriate and unconstitutional things to a FPOTUS and current candidate, up to and including a low level state DA trying to convict former POTUS for alleged violations of their oath of office / official duties and doing so outside of the impeachment process, which is the only mechanism outlined in the US Constitution to hold a POTUS accountable for actions taken during office.

Like you, I think SCOTUS has been weak, feckless and way to passive in addressing these very serious issues. Like you, I have little hope they will correct their ducking and frankly the abdication of their responsibility under the US Constitution.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

TheAngelFlight said:

---

If its removed, wouldn't the same prosecutor prosecute the case in Fulton County, just in a different court room with a different judge?

Is it a big deal, either way?

---

No. She's a lowly county prosecutor, probably not even licensed in federal district cour (which is not that hard BTW as I was licensed in many) but she doesn't know those local rules as well.

More likely a US Attorney takes over if it get removes.

I say "if" because that state judge is compromised.

---

TheAngelFlight said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

TheAngelFlight said:

---

If its removed, wouldn't the same prosecutor prosecute the case in Fulton County, just in a different court room with a different judge?

Is it a big deal, either way?

---

No. She's a lowly county prosecutor, probably not even licensed in federal district cour (which is not that hard BTW as I was licensed in many) but she doesn't know those local rules as well.

More likely a US Attorney takes over if it get removes.

I say "if" because that state judge is compromised.

---

US Attorneys don't represent the State of Georgia, so I don't see why they would take over the case. That doesn't make any sense.

---

Georgia has a newly-created law enabling a panel to remove DAs who are derelict or unethical in their duties.

This panel came into existence in July. It starts accepting complaints on October 1. If the very first complaint isn't a damning case against Fani Willis and her…

— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) August 15, 2023

Quote:

---

Georgia has a newly-created law enabling a panel to remove DAs who are derelict or unethical in their duties.

This panel came into existence in July. It starts accepting complaints on October 1. If the very first complaint isn't a damning case against Fani Willis and her illegal, anti-constitutional stunt, then Republicans deserve their subsequent fate.

---

This ends with Trump either in jail or in exile.

I know it.

You know it.

— Imperator Philippus Arabus (@PhilippusArabus) August 15, 2023

pic.twitter.com/nEq99CykxX

— Roseanne Barr (@therealroseanne) August 16, 2023