NEW: Judge Scott McAfee has ruled that former Trump lawyers Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell will go to trial on Oct. 23 in Fulton County without the other co-defendants in the 2020 election case. Not the outcome that the Fulton County FA wanted.
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) September 14, 2023
Just what exactly are they going to "turn on Trump" about?GeorgiAg said:
The way I see this, it goes one of two way.
They get convicted and sentenced. The other defendants have a come-to-Jesus moment and turn on Trump
or
The get off or get slaps on the wrist and the other defendants rally around Trump. Very interesting indeed.
Im Gipper said:NEW: Judge Scott McAfee has ruled that former Trump lawyers Kenneth Chesebro and Sidney Powell will go to trial on Oct. 23 in Fulton County without the other co-defendants in the 2020 election case. Not the outcome that the Fulton County FA wanted.
— Hugo Lowell (@hugolowell) September 14, 2023
Kraken lady & Cheese-bro up next month.
Get your popcorn ready.
A fool and his money are soon parted.Quote:
And why would anyone need to get the popcorn ready?
Is someone expecting something to be presented other than what is in the indictment? Cause if they had it, we would already know about it.
I'd put money on the cases being dismissed.
jt2hunt said:
Knew he lost the election???
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3686868-cassidy-hutchinson-trump-told-meadows-this-is-embarrassing-i-dont-want-people-to-know-that-we-lost/Quote:
Former President Trump told his then-chief of staff "this is embarrassing," and "I don't want people to know that we lost," after the Supreme Court ruled against him on a key case about the 2020 election, former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson told the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-cruz/trump-accuses-cruz-of-stealing-iowa-caucuses-through-fraud-idUSKCN0VC1Z6Quote:
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Wednesday accused rival Ted Cruz of stealing a victory in the Iowa caucuses and called for another vote or nullification of Cruz's win.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/13/donald-trump-claims-cheating-is-only-way-he-can-lose-pennsylvaniaQuote:
Donald Trump has stepped up his argument that the presidential election will be rigged in favour of Hillary Clinton, claiming that the only way he can lose Pennsylvania is "if cheating goes on".
Whereas Trump regularly cited opinion polls when he was winning the Republican primaries, his poor showing in recent national surveys has left him sowing doubt about the integrity of the process, even before a vote is cast.
GeorgiAg said:
Dismissed? Nah, there will be a trial.
"Turning on Trump" would be admitting he:
- knew he lost the election
- asked for ways to subvert it in Georgia
- formed a plan for doing so by impaneling fake electors, getting GOP gov and/or SOS to throw the election to the GOP controlled legislature without solid legal or factual basis.
- having fake electors vote for Trump in Electoral College
Im Gipper said:A fool and his money are soon parted.Quote:
And why would anyone need to get the popcorn ready?
Is someone expecting something to be presented other than what is in the indictment? Cause if they had it, we would already know about it.
I'd put money on the cases being dismissed.
There is no chance the Cheesebro/Powell case gets dismissed. Whether it should or not is a different question.
No.Im Gipper said:
How is it "double hearsay"? Didn't she testify she heard Trump say that to Meadows?
Quote:
Fulton County DA Fani Willis wanted to try all 19 defendants at the same time in October.
McAfee said no:Quote:
Beginning with the logistical concerns, the Fulton County Courthouse simply contains no courtroom adequately large enough to hold all 19 defendants, their multiple attorneys and support staff, the sheriff's deputies, court personnel, and the State's prosecutorial team. Relocating to another larger venue raises security concerns that cannot be rapidly addressed. As for the length of the trial, the State argues it plans to call the same number of witnesses in its case in chief no matter how many defendants are tried together. Maybe so. But this is only one of many factors that drive the length of trial. Each additional defendant increases the length of opening and closing arguments, crossexamination, and the number of evidentiary objections. Each additional defendant increases the risk that the trial must be paused due to the unexpected absence of a party or attorney.
LINKQuote:
McAfee decided against severance:Quote:
Left with only arguments regarding judicial economy, and the perceived unfairness of being forced to sit through a presentation of evidence that the Defendants contend only tangentially relates to them, the Court finds that these ancillary interests are outweighed by efficiency concerns of its own. Specifically, due to the projected length of this trial, severing the case would require the enlistment of another member of the bench to comply with the statutory speedy trial deadline. The Defendants' judicial economy concerns simply do not outweigh the resources expended through an additional trial, the shuttering of a second judge's docket, and the resultant delay to a multitude of other criminal and civil cases, many of which involve inmates in lengthy pretrial confinement.
Judge McAFEE, who is presiding over Trump's racketeering case, says a complaint by codefendants David Shafer, Jeff Clark, Sidney Powell and Cathleen Latham — who got a mailer from the firm of one of the prosceutors — "facially lacks merit."
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 15, 2023
He says to stop wasting his time. pic.twitter.com/MghDt1JODY
McAfee also denied a request by Chesebro and Powell to obtain all materials produced by the special grand jury last year.
— Anna Bower (@AnnaBower) September 19, 2023
But he says the state must hand over special grand jury transcripts of witnesses it intends to call in pre-trial/trial proceedings.https://t.co/zFKA3fxHoz pic.twitter.com/ZKtDGuZve2
oh no said:
All Powell needs is one.jt2hunt said:
What is voluntary? The defense asks a juror to come in for an interview and they can do it or decline?
BMX Bandit said:
Read that Jeffrey Clark didn't even show up at his hearing trying to remove his case to federal court.
Quote:
A legal expert is warning that Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis could be walking into a "trap" regarding an appeal to have a case moved out of her jurisdiction and into a federal court.
The warning comes after former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows' first attempt to get his charges by Willis removed to federal court failed, leading him to file an appeal with the 11th Circuit Court, which is now asking for a brief from Willis regarding her opinion on whether federal officials, generally speaking, are eligible for such immunity of the kind being sought by Meadows, a former GOP congressman from North Carolina.
Quote:
Georgia State Law professor Anthony Michael Kreis says that even if Willis wins the review, it will be shortlived and meaningless.
"I think this is a trap that Fani Willis should not walk into," Kreis wrote on the X platform. "The consensus has generally been (and I think correct) that the current status of the defendant does not matter but what does matter is whether the acts that undergird the legal action are related to official duties."
Willis should shut this down despite it maybe giving Meadows a defeat. First, it is a nasty kind of textualism that conservatives like and liberals should reject. Second, it introduces more unnecessary confusion and opens the door to a greater likelihood of Supreme Court review.
— Anthony Michael Kreis (@AnthonyMKreis) September 12, 2023
In a case like this with a lot of defendants who may not be well-liked, their bad acts can rub off on others whose actions may not be that bad at all. It's so you can end up with a "guilt by association."will25u said:
What is the benefit to prosecutors of trying everyone together? Not necessarily specific to this case, but in general?
And why is she hell bent on keeping all of them together?
Witnesses over time tend to misremember and testify differently, leading to impeachment and credibility issues in later trials, is the most usual concern.will25u said:
What is the benefit to prosecutors of trying everyone together? Not necessarily specific to this case, but in general?
And why is she hell bent on keeping all of them together?
