Sure and I have a bridge in Arizona to sell you.
Pending indictment against Trump in Georgia
213,080 Views |
2428 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by TXAggie2011
Correction needed for accuracy. Kemp can call a Special Session upon request or on his own accord.Im Gipper said:
The posters mad that he isn't calling a special session. Guess what? The legislature doesn't want one!
General Assembly can vote themselves into a Special Session over the Governor's objections with a 3/5s vote. Very high bar, obviously.
Giglio applies to juries, but sure, and I don't see where Willis is suggesting she doesn't.aggiehawg said:
Speedy trial demand or not, prosecution still has to turn over Brady and Giglio materials to the defense.
As to defendants Harold Floyd and Trevian Kutti, indicted for their conversation with Ruby Freeman, there's a problem. The entire conversation was witnessed by police officer(s) and recorded. Then there was a conversation with police supervisor.
Go HERE
For the rest of the story and what Ruby Freeman actually said to themQuote:
Discussion by Police Officers on the Original Police Report heard on the body cam.
Then one hour and three minutes into the body cam we hear the responding officer talk with a supervisor about writing the police report.
Officer 1: "This report will be media entrants. So..
Officer Supervisor: "Media what?"
Officer 1: "Mostly everything going to be in support of that. Pretty much everything and it's going to be real bland on public now.
(1:03:13) Officer Supervisor "I wouldn't go too detailed on this at all because this might not even be a thing. It's just, she approached the door, she didn't feel comfortable. We spoke to both parties and she agreed to meet with them ... You don't have to run with what they talked about don't worry about that."
(1:03:25) Officer 1: "Yeah"
(1:03:27) Officer Supervisor: "So I mean this could be yeah definitely so don't go too…"
(1:03:30) Officer: "No I'm not…"
(1:03:32) Officer Supervisor: "You know you all the …you need, date of birth and everything?"
(1:03:42) Officer 1: "Mmm hmm"
(1:03:46) Officer Supervisor: "Okay. Yeah, yeah I wouldn't, I mean there's no crime here, there's nothing"
(1:03:49) Officer 1: "Mmm Mmm, Yeah it's, it's just political."
(1:03:52) Officer Supervisor: "at this point we generated a case number and because we don't even know what was going on."
(1:03:57) Officer 1: "Because of, thing, coverup, anyway it's a cover-up and we took all the necessary, necessary steps though."
Go HERE
NEW: Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee, rejecting Fani Willis’s request that he advise on the impact of speedy trial demands, will enter a scheduling order “for all Defendants soon after arraignment and after considering any severance motions.” pic.twitter.com/NrGqOwF9vP
— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) September 1, 2023
Nothing really substantive has occurred yet, but I like this judge so far. Seems sharp. He essentially tells the state he isn't going to be advising the defendants of anything at this point. When something becomes ripe & relevant, it will be discussed.
Willis' case against the "false" electors continues to fall apart.
LINK
Quote:
In her Aug. 14 indictment, Willis alleged the existence of Republican electors for Trump constituted an unlawful "conspiracy" to overturn the Peach State's 2020 election results. Among those charged for partaking in this so-called "conspiracy" are David Shafer, one of Georgia's 2020 Republican electors, and Ray Smith, who served as one of Trump's lawyers at the time of the contest.
That is laughable to begin with. It also is a lie and she knows it.Quote:
Specifically, Willis claimed Shafer and the other alternate electors "unlawfully falsely held themselves out" as Georgia's "duly elected and qualified" presidential electors. She further insisted these electors with Smith's assistance intentionally attempted to "mislead" figures such as then-Vice President Mike Pence and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger "into believing that they actually were such officers."
IOW, they were contingent electors and stated as much. Made no attempt to mislead anyone and certainly not the certifying state officer, Raffensperger.Quote:
A transcript of the Georgia Republican electors' Dec. 14, 2020, meeting, obtained by The Federalist, explicitly shows the intent behind casting alternate electors was not to impersonate public officers, as Willis alleged, but to lawfully preserve Trump's legal challenge to the state's election results. At the meeting's outset, Shafer specifically noted how he and his fellow Republicans were acting as "Republican nominees for Presidential Elector," not as "duly elected and qualified" presidential electors.
"[President Trump] has filed a contest to the certified returns. That contest is pending [and has] not been decided or even heard by any judge with the authority to hear it," Shafer said. "And so in order to preserve his rights, it's important that the Republican nominees for Presidential Elector meet here today and cast their votes."
That's the safe harbor provision in the ECA. But remember, Trump's lawsuit filed on December 4th was supposed to be expedited under Georgia law but it wasn't. By the time the judge got around to schedule the state mandated hearing, he scheduled it for January 7th, after the federal certification occurred on Jan 6th. But on December 14th, none of those electors would know that.Quote:
For context, Shafer and Trump filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Raffensberger in Fulton County state court on Dec. 4, 2020, alleging tens of thousands of illegal votes had been cast in the state's presidential election. The suit came after a recount, requested by Trump, deemed Biden the winner of Georgia's 16 electoral votes by a margin of 11,779. The recount prompted Raffensberger to recertify the election on Dec. 7 while Trump's legal challenge remained ongoing.
By the time Dec. 14, 2020, arrived the day on which nominees for presidential electors are required by federal law to meet Trump and Shafer's lawsuit was still pending. As such, Georgia's Republican nominees, including Shafer, cast their electoral votes for Trump while the state's Democrat nominees cast theirs for Biden.
The old use-it-or-lose-it.Quote:
During the Dec. 14, 2020, meeting, Shafer further clarified the legal rationale for filing alternate electors in a conversation with Smith, asking Trump's then-lawyer: "And so the only way for us to have any judge consider the merits of our complaint, the thousands of people we allege voted unlawfully, is for us to have this meeting and permit the contest to continue?"
"That's correct," Smith replied.
Quote:
While speaking to Shafer and the other Republican electors at the Dec. 14, 2020, meeting, Smith asserted the naming of Republican electors for Trump would be conducted "in accordance with the Constitution" and the precedent established in the 1960 Hawaii case, saying, "We're conducting this because the contest of the election in Georgia is ongoing."
"And if we did not hold this meeting, then our election contest would effectively be abandoned?" Shafer asked, to which Smith replied, "That's correct."
Or she thinks she can file a motion to get it excluded? Who knows what she is thinking.Quote:
The revelations unearthed in the transcript raise a significant question: If Willis was in possession of the transcript prior to Aug. 14, why did she charge Shafer and Smith for allegedly partaking in a "conspiracy" to overturn Georgia's 2020 election results when the aforementioned document shows otherwise?
LINK
I think it's safe to assume she is not the one thinking likely not capable of thinking, certainly not capably of making decisions for herself.
She is just a cog in the coordinated effort to sideline Trump and keep him occupied and his opposition (and his base) ginned up.
From Jack Smith to Willis to Bragg they know huge constitutional issues exist along with evidence issues along with creating crimes by cutting and pasting varying poorly based legal theories together.
Has to again drive you lawyers mad, because nothing about what is being done relates to what was taught in law school.
She is just a cog in the coordinated effort to sideline Trump and keep him occupied and his opposition (and his base) ginned up.
From Jack Smith to Willis to Bragg they know huge constitutional issues exist along with evidence issues along with creating crimes by cutting and pasting varying poorly based legal theories together.
Has to again drive you lawyers mad, because nothing about what is being done relates to what was taught in law school.
There are rare occasions when a novel theory of a portion of law has some merit and is worth further examination. But that is more likely to be in the civil arena than the criminal one and more likely in response to a newly passed law or regulation. Statutory construction question.Quote:
Has to again drive you lawyers mad, because nothing about what is being done relates to what was taught in law school.
But that is not remotely what Willis has done here. I didn't think I'd see worse indictments than most of the ones Team Mueller cobbled together. I was wrong. Bragg, Smith and Willis have surpassed Team Mueller's inanity.
Well, this is disturbing from an election official.
LINK
Uhmm, what?Quote:
Still, State Election Board Chairman Matt Mashburn promised a "fair" investigation of its claims.
"It's not going to be a witch hunt," he said at a meeting of the board. "It's going to be done soberly and with great care by people who know what they're doing."
The movie, called "2000 Mules," paints an ominous picture suggesting Democrat-aligned ballot "mules" were supposedly paid to illegally collect and drop off ballots in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It has been praised by former President Donald Trump as exposing "great election fraud," but election security experts say it is based on faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data.
Mashburn, who said he watched the film, said it suggested there were 92,000 "illegitimate, manufactured votes" in the state, but he said that's not true.
Even if a ballot is illegally dropped off, it goes through the same checks as other ballots to ensure the vote is legitimate, he said.
"A ballot harvested vote might be a perfectly legal vote," he said. "It's just the manner of its delivery was illegal."
LINK
Sounds like the claim leftists make that "no person is illegal." It's an attempt to completely derail the discussion and continue with whatever illegality they support.
Yeah. But a legal vote only counts if there is a chain of custody, that's legitimate.Ellis Wyatt said:
Sounds like the claim leftists make that "no person is illegal." It's an attempt to completely derail the discussion and continue with whatever illegality they support.
How anyone can actually say that under these circumstances is mind blowing.
Those pre completed ballots in suitcases hauled in unsupervised during the middle of the night have rights too. We cannot disenfranchise the will of the Democratic Party to impose their regime if we stick to rules, laws and nonsense like chains of custody.
Dems only care about one set of chains, the kind it throws around its subjects in the name of "fweedum".
Dems only care about one set of chains, the kind it throws around its subjects in the name of "fweedum".
"The absence of the word accountability is not the same as wanting no accountability" -unknown
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
The rule of law, or in this case secure elections, is meaningless to them.aggiehawg said:Yeah. But a legal vote only counts if there is a chain of custody, that's legitimate.Ellis Wyatt said:
Sounds like the claim leftists make that "no person is illegal." It's an attempt to completely derail the discussion and continue with whatever illegality they support.
How anyone can actually say that under these circumstances is mind blowing.
FIFYEllis Wyatt said:The rule of law, or in this case secure elections, isaggiehawg said:Yeah. But a legal vote only counts if there is a chain of custody, that's legitimate.Ellis Wyatt said:
Sounds like the claim leftists make that "no person is illegal." It's an attempt to completely derail the discussion and continue with whatever illegality they support.
How anyone can actually say that under these circumstances is mind blowing.meaninglessanathema to them.
Judge denied Chesebro and Powell's motions to sever their cases from each other. And will be sticking to the October trial date for them both, as of now.
Fulton County showed up with a PowerPoint outlining their predicted flow of the case. And outlined they have about 150 witnesses to call.
Fulton County showed up with a PowerPoint outlining their predicted flow of the case. And outlined they have about 150 witnesses to call.
Yesterday I received an eight page solicitation from the Wade & Campbell law firm to represent me in the Trump indictment. Nathan Wade, pictured on the cover, is the Trump special prosecutor appointed by Fani Willis. We have notified the judge and moved for an immediate hearing. pic.twitter.com/Oo317130qb
— David Shafer (@DavidShafer) September 7, 2023
Not good news for Chesebro, Powell and the Trump legal team.TXAggie2011 said:
Judge denied Chesebro and Powell's motions to sever their cases from each other. And will be sticking to the October trial date for them both, as of now.
Fulton County showed up with a PowerPoint outlining their predicted flow of the case. And outlined they have about 150 witnesses to call.
Wait, what? Did Willis appoint a lawyer from private practice as Special Counsel and not an employee from her office?will25u said:Yesterday I received an eight page solicitation from the Wade & Campbell law firm to represent me in the Trump indictment. Nathan Wade, pictured on the cover, is the Trump special prosecutor appointed by Fani Willis. We have notified the judge and moved for an immediate hearing. pic.twitter.com/Oo317130qb
— David Shafer (@DavidShafer) September 7, 2023
Probably are 100 of those who read the tweet from Trump that is part of the indictment. Another 40 who were duped into watching the special session in GA lege at Trump's behest.TXAggie2011 said:
Judge denied Chesebro and Powell's motions to sever their cases from each other. And will be sticking to the October trial date for them both, as of now.
Fulton County showed up with a PowerPoint outlining their predicted flow of the case. And outlined they have about 150 witnesses to call.
Another 5 who were mislead about ballots in suitcases.
All 150 witnesses will be utterly damaging to Trump and his racketeering friends. Got him now for sure!
"The absence of the word accountability is not the same as wanting no accountability" -unknown
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
fka ftc
Joined:
Jun 25, 2020
Posts:
14,788
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trump tells judge he may try to move Georgia election interference case to federal court, which could allow him to invoke immunity protections - CNN
— NewsWire (@NewsWire_US) September 7, 2023
Willis will play this into some sort of claim of systemic racism by Trump and his white nationalist lawyers to take away her time in the spotlight and her planned YouTube streaming career.
I would feel sorry for her if she was not so ****ing incompetent and evil.
I would feel sorry for her if she was not so ****ing incompetent and evil.
"The absence of the word accountability is not the same as wanting no accountability" -unknown
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
"You can never go wrong by staying silent if there is nothing apt to say" -Walter Isaacson
If they move a state case into Federal Court, doesn't that mean that state law still applies? Basically just a federal judge applying Georgia law to the case?
So if Trump can't claim immunity under state law, how can he claim immunity under federal law in a case to which state law applies?
I'm not saying that he can't claim immunity under federal law for a case tried under Georgia law -- I'm just curious the rationale for doing that.
So if Trump can't claim immunity under state law, how can he claim immunity under federal law in a case to which state law applies?
I'm not saying that he can't claim immunity under federal law for a case tried under Georgia law -- I'm just curious the rationale for doing that.
ThunderCougarFalconBird
Joined:
Oct 10, 2006
Posts:
49,082
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Trump has a supremacy argument. Others have articulated it more clearly but a will functionally say he was acting in his official capacity as and while president. GA stuff is completely preempted and the indictment is dismissed.
fka ftc
Joined:
Jun 25, 2020
Posts:
14,788
How long do you want to ignore this user?
His immunity as the sitting POTUS during the majority of the time at issue in the indictment is a federal question for federal courts to address. Yes federal courts can apply GA criminal law while addressing the federal issues.eric76 said:
If they move a state case into Federal Court, doesn't that mean that state law still applies? Basically just a federal judge applying Georgia law to the case?
So if Trump can't claim immunity under state law, how can he claim immunity under federal law in a case to which state law applies?
I'm not saying that he can't claim immunity under federal law for a case tried under Georgia law -- I'm just curious the rationale for doing that.
Got it (I think). Thanks.
I think that tweet's a little misleading, as Trump could raise the "immunity defense" in either federal or state court.
While true, all of the cases on the subject are federal and come from different Circuit Courts of Appeals. Also easier and faster appellate review from federal court instead of first exhausting the state appellate courts.TXAggie2011 said:
I think that tweet's a little misleading, as Trump could raise the "immunity defense" in either federal or state court.
Timing and strategy.
Pretty sure I've seen those two dudes advertised the last time I rode the MARTA train to the airport. Need laugh/cry emoticon but I'm a lolpoor.aggiehawg said:Wait, what? Did Willis appoint a lawyer from private practice as Special Counsel and not an employee from her office?will25u said:Yesterday I received an eight page solicitation from the Wade & Campbell law firm to represent me in the Trump indictment. Nathan Wade, pictured on the cover, is the Trump special prosecutor appointed by Fani Willis. We have notified the judge and moved for an immediate hearing. pic.twitter.com/Oo317130qb
— David Shafer (@DavidShafer) September 7, 2023
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I had kittens over MN AG Ellis hiring a bunch of private attorneys plus 11 of his own staff attorneys to prosecute Chauvin. Even if those lawyers were working pro bono, that is freakin' whacked out. But Cahill allowed it when defense counsel, Nelson, all by himself against that force, objected.
And then Ellis had his team continually dump 400-500 pages of "discovery" on Nelson many times during the trial. Again, Judge Cahill refused to act.
Trump is not quite in the same boat, resouce wise but still. That's stacking the deck.
And then Ellis had his team continually dump 400-500 pages of "discovery" on Nelson many times during the trial. Again, Judge Cahill refused to act.
Trump is not quite in the same boat, resouce wise but still. That's stacking the deck.
aggiehawg said:Wait, what? Did Willis appoint a lawyer from private practice as Special Counsel and not an employee from her office?will25u said:Yesterday I received an eight page solicitation from the Wade & Campbell law firm to represent me in the Trump indictment. Nathan Wade, pictured on the cover, is the Trump special prosecutor appointed by Fani Willis. We have notified the judge and moved for an immediate hearing. pic.twitter.com/Oo317130qb
— David Shafer (@DavidShafer) September 7, 2023
He would not really be a special prosecutor if he already was a DA prosecutor, would he?
Ask DE US Attorney Weiss about that.Quote:
He would not really be a special prosecutor if he already was a DA prosecutor, would he?
Plus, the whole "special" grand jury with no indictment power,now a "Special" prosecutor(s) ploy just stnks.
So the slip and fall business is slow right now and my good friends at Wade and Campbell would like to get a feather in their proverbial caps (aka street cred) and the DA is all too happy to comply?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
NEWS: Judge *rejects* Meadows’ bid to remove Fulton County criminal case to federal court.
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 8, 2023
Details TK pic.twitter.com/wSxRyAzKtH
Judge rules Meadows stays in state court. On to 11th Circuit.
I'm Gipper
Featured Stories
See All
66:03
7h ago
6.0k
Players to Watch: No. 15 Texas A&M at Auburn
by Olin Buchanan
54:59
9h ago
1.1k
37:53
6h ago
775
Reed Report: Chatting with D-Kirk, recapping A&M's 4-0 home stand
by Luke Evangelist
10:56
13h ago
2.9k