— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) March 13, 2024
Pending indictment against Trump in Georgia
220,224 Views |
2442 Replies |
Last: 9 days ago by Stat Monitor Repairman
New wrinkle if McAfee does disqualify. If she appeals? Case gets delayed even further.Quote:
There's no timetable dictating by when the council must appoint a new prosecuting office, which could cause delays.
In July 2022, Willis and her office were disqualified from prosecuting Georgia Lt. Gov. Burt Jones after the district attorney headlined a fundraiser for one of his political opponents. The council still has not reassigned the case, a year and a half later.
Any delay could be exacerbated by an appeal of McAfee's decision by the district attorney's office. Skandalakis told NBC News that he would hold off on choosing a new prosecutor until after the appeal was resolved.
OTOH.
So another wa it gets delayed even if Willis remains on the case.Quote:
If McAfee rules that Willis can continue prosecuting the case, he could grant the defense a certificate to appeal immediately or make them wait for a post-trial conviction to appeal, according to Anthony Michael Kreis, a law professor at Georgia State University who has closely followed the case.
The defense could then request discretionary review by the appellate court though grants of such appeals are rare, said Melissa Redmon, director of the University of Georgia's Prosecutorial Justice Program. If they do choose to apply for a review of the matter, defense attorneys would have 10 days after McAfee's order to do so, she said.
I wouldn't read that much into those questions by the judge. But the presentation by Willis lawyer Abbate was so bad and not on point that it was clear McAfee was becoming exasperated.Quote:
During the state's closing arguments earlier this month, McAfee pushed back on prosecutors' contention that an actual conflict must be proven, citing several cases that he said "seem to exclusively rely on the appearance of impropriety."
The exchange could indicate the judge is looking at a broader method to examine the evidence.
LINKQuote:
A trial date has not yet been set in Trump's Georgia case, though prosecutors proposed an Aug. 5 start.
Either outcome could tie up the case in appeals, but the former president's other legal matters might already make delay inevitable. Trump's federal election interference case in Washington, D.C., is on pause as he appeals the issue of presidential immunity, and delays in his Florida federal case appear imminent which could push back the start of a Georgia trial.
"I think the August trial date was ambitious," Redmon said, citing numerous unresolved motions that could still be appealed once ruled on by McAfee. "I would be surprised if the case went to trial before the election."
So...what other charges are left with this indictment?aggiehawg said:— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) March 13, 2024
More takes:
This thing is not going to trial. Not in its current form at least and certainly not before the election. And finding the indictment being facially insufficient also bears on the issue of Fani's hiring of an inexperienced Wade as Special Prosecutor. He obviously wasn't hired for prosecutorial prowess with such a faulty indictment.
Quote:
CNN legal analyst Elie Honig criticized Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) after a judge overseeing former President Trump's election interference case in Georgia threw out some charges against him.
"I don't think this ruling changes the type of evidence that the DA's going to be able to introduce, but it does knock out some of the charges and look, it's embarrassing for prosecutors," Honig said Wednesday on CNN. "It's a screwup by prosecutors when you bring a charge and then a judge throws it out before it even goes to trial."
LINKQuote:
Honig's comments were first highlighted by Mediaite.
Judge Scott McAfee tossed six of the charges Trump and his allies face in Georgia, ruling that prosecutors failed to provide enough detail for the defendants to mount their defenses.
"There have been several screwups, frankly, by the DA throughout the history of this case. Going back to the investigative phase, the DA got herself disqualified from a small piece of the case because she created a political conflict of interest," Honig said, in reference to a separate examination the judge is conducting into an alleged relationship between Willis and a special prosecutor on the case.
"We've seen Fani Willis make public statements in the church and elsewhere that have now been called into question that I think violate the ethics of prosecutorial rules, and now we've seen six of the charges thrown out of the case and unlike the conflict of interest issue, this does go to the charges against the defendant. This does go to the indictment itself."
This thing is not going to trial. Not in its current form at least and certainly not before the election. And finding the indictment being facially insufficient also bears on the issue of Fani's hiring of an inexperienced Wade as Special Prosecutor. He obviously wasn't hired for prosecutorial prowess with such a faulty indictment.
I'm surprised the media is not playing politics and actually calling a ball a ball and a strike a strike.
Counts2, 5, 6, 23, 28, and 38 are quashed.
Quote:
However, these pleading deficiencies do not apply to the corresponding overt acts listedin Count 1,specifically,overtacts 23, 42, 55, 102, 112, and 156. Overt actsalleged as part of a conspiracyare not held to the same pleading standards as statutorily based offenses
Full decision is at the bottom of the LINKQuote:
This is an area of law where federal courts have achieved greater efficiency, and one might wish that future grand jurors could be spared this inconvenience for something so easily remedied. SeeFed. R. Crim. P. 7(f)(allowing government filing of a bill of particulars to inform a defendant of the charges in sufficient detail to minimizesurprise at trial). But Georgia law currently provides no such option. SeeWard v. State, 188 Ga. App. 372, 373 (1988) ("A'bill of particulars'is not a recognized pleading[.]").
Alternatively, the State may request a certificate of immediate review pursuant to O.C.G.A. 5-7-2whichthe Court would likely grantdue to the lack of precedential authority. See State v. Outen, 289 Ga. 579, 581 (2011)(finding dismissal of less than all counts of indictment not a final order for purposes of State's automatic right to appeal).9Defendant Cheeley goes further and claims Count 23 also fails because there is no nexus between the offense and the public officers'official duties. See, e.g., State v. Tullis, 213 Ga. App. 581, 582 (1994). The Court disagrees and finds that the Georgia Senate can play a role in election contests and that the appointment of presidential electors relates totheir official duties.
ETA: I bolded that last part because it pertains to the fake electors theory. If it is within their purview, asking them to do it is not a violation of their oath.
This is more succinct.The dismissed charges including three counts against Trump. The central racketeering charge against Trump and all remaining co-defendants remains in place.
Now RICO cases do depend upon acts done in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit other crimes. The predicate crimes, if you will. The phone call with Raffensperger now being out, how many of the remaining acts as alleged were done by Trump?
Case is unraveling.
Now RICO cases do depend upon acts done in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit other crimes. The predicate crimes, if you will. The phone call with Raffensperger now being out, how many of the remaining acts as alleged were done by Trump?
Case is unraveling.
Question --
Mark Meadows is charged with Counts 1 and 28 of the indictment.
Does he have to be charged with Count 28 in order to be charged with Count 1 (Racketeering)?
If Count 28 is out, which it is, is he in the clear?
Mark Meadows is charged with Counts 1 and 28 of the indictment.
Does he have to be charged with Count 28 in order to be charged with Count 1 (Racketeering)?
If Count 28 is out, which it is, is he in the clear?
Good question. Short answer is I'm not entirely sure since this a state RICO case under GA law and precedent and I am not familiar how their exact RICO statutes work. Moving for dismissal on that basis might be premature though due to the possibility of reindictment to reinstate those charges.Reality Check said:
Question --
Mark Meadows is charged with Counts 1 and 28 of the indictment.
Does he have to be charged with Count 28 in order to be charged with Count 1 (Racketeering)?
If Count 28 is out, which it is, is he in the clear?
Like I said before, there are a lot of moving parts here.
aggiehawg said:
Like I said before, there are a lot of moving parts here.
Is this a reference to what happened when Fani and her Boo were having sleepovers in Yeartie's condo?
LOL. No. Procedurally going forward is anything but a straight line, a lot of off-ramps, tangents, dead ends, even a rabbit hole or two.Reality Check said:aggiehawg said:
Like I said before, there are a lot of moving parts here.
Is this a reference to what happened when Fani and her Boo were having sleepovers in Yeartie's condo?
One thing is sure though, Fani has neither the intelligence nor experience to navigate her way through all of this as nearly all of it was by her own making.
She made this bed, now she has to lie in it. (Now that is a reference to Fani and her Boo.)
Everyone involved with Trump lawfare needs to cancel their summer vacation plans including the US Supreme Court (no summer break this year). With 237-days until the election it's all hands on deck.
aggiehawg said:Good question. Short answer is I'm not entirely sure since this a state RICO case under GA law and precedent and I am not familiar how their exact RICO statutes work. Moving for dismissal on that basis might be premature though due to the possibility of reindictment to reinstate those charges.Reality Check said:
Question --
Mark Meadows is charged with Counts 1 and 28 of the indictment.
Does he have to be charged with Count 28 in order to be charged with Count 1 (Racketeering)?
If Count 28 is out, which it is, is he in the clear?
Like I said before, there are a lot of moving parts here.
The paragraph starting with however says you can be charged with a conspiracy if a co-conspirator is found to have committed an overt act. So it looks like MM could still be in this case even with the only overt act he allegedly committed being thrown out.
Good point. The counter to that is whether his arranging a phone call that has now been quashed still a conspiracy as to him? Not inclined to find a eprsuasive argument that it is as applied to Meadows.Quote:
The paragraph starting with however says you can be charged with a conspiracy if a co-conspirator is found to have committed an overt act. So it looks like MM could still be in this case even with the only overt act he allegedly committed being thrown out.
aggiehawg said:Good point. The counter to that is whether his arranging a phone call that has now been quashed still a conspiracy as to him? Not inclined to find a eprsuasive argument that it is as applied to Meadows.Quote:
The paragraph starting with however says you can be charged with a conspiracy if a co-conspirator is found to have committed an overt act. So it looks like MM could still be in this case even with the only overt act he allegedly committed being thrown out.
That's the big question to me. What's the line of being a co-conspirator and just being someone loosely connected to the case. If he set up the phone call knowing Trump was trying to illegally overthrow the election….maybe? But if I've was doing that then you'd think there'd be other overt acts to tie to him. Since Fani didn't, I'd argue Meadows is not part of the alleged conspiracy.
I'm also a little weirded out that he didn't say "found guilty of committing.." and only said that other co-conspirators "commit" over acts. Meaning, is it enough that a co-conspirator took a plea deal to convict you for being part of a conspiracy?
Another good question. The plea deals so far have been structured differently than we think of a guilty pleas as Sure, I did it!Quote:
Meaning, is it enough that a co-conspirator took a plea deal to convict you for being part of a conspiracy?
Powell's apology letter was one sentence handwritten, for instance. More akin to a diversionary agreement wherein the plea and the charge disappear after probation period expires.
The defendant who may have screwed herself over is Jenna Ellis. I don't know if she received poor legal advice or just panicked or both. But her overwrought written statement applies mostly to Guiliani rather than Meadows or Trump, in my view.
This case remains a mess instead of a straight forward criminal case, and RICO cases can be messy but not this messy. And what is the predicate crime? Violation of oath of office is out. Raffensperger phone is out and likely inadmissible since it was an illegal recording and the transcript was falsified. The Jan 6th stuff is also falling apart as the Jan 6th Committee both manufactured and deleted evidence, tampered with witnesses, etc.
Therein lies an even bigger question, was this brought as a RICO case to intentionally make it messy? Fighting all the weird elements and questions of first impression are extremely expensive and time consuming. And even if most elements are dismissed, you might be able to still rope Trump into defending this long after any overt acts he committed are dismissed.
It also keeps this in the news for a long time while Fani keeps telling the electorate that Trump tried to steal the election from black people because he's racist.
It also keeps this in the news for a long time while Fani keeps telling the electorate that Trump tried to steal the election from black people because he's racist.
The Biden WH inserted their designated lawyer (forget his name at the moment, Jeff something) on Fani's team. The RICO stuff was likely his idea as a novel legal theory as applied to facts like these. Although many crazed Dems do think Trump is John Gotti 2.0.aggiejayrod said:
Therein lies an even bigger question, was this brought as a RICO case to intentionally make it messy? Fighting all the weird elements and questions of first impression are extremely expensive and time consuming. And even if most elements are dismissed, you might be able to still rope Trump into defending this long after any overt acts he committed are dismissed.
It also keeps this in the news for a long time while Fani keeps telling the electorate that Trump tried to steal the election from black people because he's racist.
Quote:
is it enough that a co-conspirator took a plea deal to convict you for being part of a conspiracy?
The answer is "no".
I'm Gipper
Jeff DeSantis.aggiehawg said:The Biden WH inserted their designated lawyer (forget his name at the moment, Jeff something) on Fani's team. The RICO stuff was likely his idea as a novel legal theory as applied to facts like these. Although many crazed Dems do think Trump is John Gotti 2.0.aggiejayrod said:
Therein lies an even bigger question, was this brought as a RICO case to intentionally make it messy? Fighting all the weird elements and questions of first impression are extremely expensive and time consuming. And even if most elements are dismissed, you might be able to still rope Trump into defending this long after any overt acts he committed are dismissed.
It also keeps this in the news for a long time while Fani keeps telling the electorate that Trump tried to steal the election from black people because he's racist.
What's insane is these are the charges Trump is still facing:
1 RICO
9 Conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer
11 Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
13 Conspiracy to commit false statements and writing
15 Conspiracy to commit filing false documents
17 Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
19 Conspiracy to commit false statements and writing
27 Filing false documents
29 False statements and writings
39 False statements and writings
Other than 9, 11 and 17, Willis and Wade are guilty of the exact same crimes, to include RICO by having Banks call Bradley to tell him to keep his mouth shut or else.
One way or the other, McAfee knows he is out of there! His exceptional ability shown during this crazy S&JT Show is going to get him numerous big time money offers from top criminal defense law firms.
Most of those relate to the alternate slates of electors, right? (TBH, those charges never made sense to me given the legal requirements under the ECA in effect at the time.)Quote:
1 RICO
9 Conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer
11 Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
13 Conspiracy to commit false statements and writing
15 Conspiracy to commit filing false documents
17 Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
19 Conspiracy to commit false statements and writing
27 Filing false documents
29 False statements and writings
39 False statements and writings
So indictment of Trump and anyone associated with Trump in Georgia took on a scattershot approach.
When dealing with this level of a threat to democracy it was the only option; leave no stone unturned.
So Fanni and them Georgia boys threw through the kitchen sink at 'em.
If they lose this case it ain't gonna be from lack of effort on the indictment on their part.
Prosecuting their chief political rival and current presidential candidate they went full tilt. the whole 9-yards. Everything they had.
Anything less you'd have to question their allegiance to the cause.
When dealing with this level of a threat to democracy it was the only option; leave no stone unturned.
So Fanni and them Georgia boys threw through the kitchen sink at 'em.
If they lose this case it ain't gonna be from lack of effort on the indictment on their part.
Prosecuting their chief political rival and current presidential candidate they went full tilt. the whole 9-yards. Everything they had.
Anything less you'd have to question their allegiance to the cause.
Jan 6th Committee did as well and that was the basis for the special grand jury and then a regular grand jury. Reading heavily edited and cherry picked transcripts of now missing/deleted video interviews to the grand juries?Quote:
So indictment of Trump and anyone associated with Trump in Georgia took on a scattershot approach.
Yeah nothing at all sus about that. /sarc
What is he a co-conspirator of? So...if someone you know and work with does something bad, you're guilty too?aggiejayrod said:aggiehawg said:Good question. Short answer is I'm not entirely sure since this a state RICO case under GA law and precedent and I am not familiar how their exact RICO statutes work. Moving for dismissal on that basis might be premature though due to the possibility of reindictment to reinstate those charges.Reality Check said:
Question --
Mark Meadows is charged with Counts 1 and 28 of the indictment.
Does he have to be charged with Count 28 in order to be charged with Count 1 (Racketeering)?
If Count 28 is out, which it is, is he in the clear?
Like I said before, there are a lot of moving parts here.
The paragraph starting with however says you can be charged with a conspiracy if a co-conspirator is found to have committed an overt act. So it looks like MM could still be in this case even with the only overt act he allegedly committed being thrown out.
I know the Dems still think he was an illegitimate POTUS, but now they're charging him with a crime for it?Reality Check said:Jeff DeSantis.aggiehawg said:The Biden WH inserted their designated lawyer (forget his name at the moment, Jeff something) on Fani's team. The RICO stuff was likely his idea as a novel legal theory as applied to facts like these. Although many crazed Dems do think Trump is John Gotti 2.0.aggiejayrod said:
Therein lies an even bigger question, was this brought as a RICO case to intentionally make it messy? Fighting all the weird elements and questions of first impression are extremely expensive and time consuming. And even if most elements are dismissed, you might be able to still rope Trump into defending this long after any overt acts he committed are dismissed.
It also keeps this in the news for a long time while Fani keeps telling the electorate that Trump tried to steal the election from black people because he's racist.
What's insane is these are the charges Trump is still facing:
1 RICO
9 Conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer
11 Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
13 Conspiracy to commit false statements and writing
15 Conspiracy to commit filing false documents
17 Conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree
19 Conspiracy to commit false statements and writing
27 Filing false documents
29 False statements and writings
39 False statements and writings
Other than 9, 11 and 17, Willis and Wade are guilty of the exact same crimes, to include RICO by having Banks call Bradley to tell him to keep his mouth shut or else.
It's been said but gotta get a few more licks in every now and then for good measure. Just a little bump in case they thought we ain't payin attention.
Cannot have a conspiracy nor a RICO case without a predicate crime.
What is the predicate crime here?
What is the predicate crime here?
it depends on your color, sex, and political party.Ag with kids said:What is he a co-conspirator of? So...if someone you know and work with does something bad, you're guilty too?aggiejayrod said:aggiehawg said:Good question. Short answer is I'm not entirely sure since this a state RICO case under GA law and precedent and I am not familiar how their exact RICO statutes work. Moving for dismissal on that basis might be premature though due to the possibility of reindictment to reinstate those charges.Reality Check said:
Question --
Mark Meadows is charged with Counts 1 and 28 of the indictment.
Does he have to be charged with Count 28 in order to be charged with Count 1 (Racketeering)?
If Count 28 is out, which it is, is he in the clear?
Like I said before, there are a lot of moving parts here.
The paragraph starting with however says you can be charged with a conspiracy if a co-conspirator is found to have committed an overt act. So it looks like MM could still be in this case even with the only overt act he allegedly committed being thrown out.
Yes, yes .... something something 'intent that the crime be committed.'aggiehawg said:
Cannot have a conspriacy nor a RCO case without apredicate crime.
What is the predicate crime here?
Aren't we still waiting to hear what crime Alvin Bragg is claiming Trump falsified business records in furtherance of?
https://www.axios.com/2023/04/04/trump-indictment-felony-alvin-bragg-analysis
Quote:He added that New York state law does not require him to specify the underlying crime in the indictment.
https://www.axios.com/2023/04/04/trump-indictment-felony-alvin-bragg-analysis
Orange Man Bad?aggiehawg said:
Cannot have a conspiracy nor a RICO case without a predicate crime.
What is the predicate crime here?
Section 8, Klinger v Potter 1976
Or was that Grape Nehi..
Section 4077, Radar v Rosey's 1975?
This thread is insanely silent from all the Trump haters.
jt2hunt said:
This thread is insanely silent from all the Trump haters.
Let's not provoke them...
I wonder when the judge will actually make his ruling. Any insight into when this is expected?
Featured Stories
See All
LIVE from Reed Arena: No. 13 Texas A&M vs. Abilene Christian
by Richard Zane
A&M's season ends with microcosmic second-half collapse in Las Vegas
by Olin Buchanan
Learned, Loved, Loathed: USC 35, Texas A&M 31 (2024 Las Vegas Bowl)
by Olin Buchanan
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Battle At Reed' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United