Posted on 08/15/2023 8:48:57 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
First of all, let me say that I am extremely upset at Fulton County DA Fani Willis. Not because of the indictment, but because I had to stay up so late reading it and trying to get my head around it. Very inconsiderate to run everything so late into the evening, and my poor coffee maker had to work overtime.
Now that I've gotten the somewhat unserious complaints (but come on, really?) out of the way, I guess we need to discuss this new indictment a bit. Having read the full indictment document and as many takes as I can from people who are or were in law, it's clear that this isn't just another Alvin Bragg situation. Trump and his legal team do need to be concerned with this in a way they don't need to be with the New York case.
First, there's a reason to compare this with the New York case and not either of Jack Smith's cases. Trump is being charged with state crimes in both, rather than federal crimes in the case of Smith's indictments. That makes things a bit more problematic for Trump - he can't pardon himself or be pardoned by a Republican in either case.
Andrew McCarthy notes as much in the New York Post.
What should most concern Trump is that the Georgia case could be the most enduring of all the criminal indictments.
If Trump or another Republican were to win the 2024 election, the new president could issue a pardon or otherwise have their Justice Department drop Smith’s federal indictments against Trump.
Indeed, that is why Smith is pushing so hard to get the federal courts in Washington and Florida to accelerate the schedule and get the cases to trial in the next few months — before Election Day 2024.
Presidents, however, have no authority to pardon state crimes.
It remains to be seen whether Wills can convince a jury of Atlantans to convict Trump. But even a newly elected President Trump could not make the Georgia prosecution go away.
If he were convicted, it would stick.
But even more than that, it's the fact that Georgia's RICO law is extremely broad, and it allows for the Fulton County DA to bring a whole hell of a lot of charges under that umbrella. While Bragg did the same thing in New York, Willis is not stretching the case as thin as Bragg did in order to make the charges work. The RICO law makes it possible to do so without weakening the case too much.
That poses a more substantial problem for Trump. Willis is claiming that Trump was planning to call the election stolen from the jump, regardless of the actual facts. That is where the conspiracy starts. And it's not that Trump directly did the things that the indictment is charging him with, but rather the people who did it were doing so to advance his criminal conspiracy, making him culpable under the RICO statute. That's makes it a lot harder for Trump to dismiss, as there appears to be witnesses who testified (or will testify) that Trump knew the results were legit all along.
Part of the problem for Willis, however, is that some of what she is doing is a stretch, and notably so. One of the claims is that Trump tweeted about the Georgia hearings on OANN. Willis isn't saying it's a crime to tweet, but she is arguing that the tweet furthers an existing crime, which is sort of ridiculous.
It's not saying it's a criminal act. It's saying it's an act in furtherance of a criminal act.
On the other hand, it's stupid because it's not directed at any of the activities or audiences at issue; it's directed to the world at large, and good luck with that.
https://t.co/MxmOQWa4DP— (((Not That Crown, Maybe))) (@CrownMaybe) August 15, 2023
You don't need to do criminal acts to support criminal acts, RICO or otherwise. But "he tweeted publicly in furtherance of a criminal enterprise" is dumb precisely because of the nature of mass communication. It's just lefties being upset at his tweeting.— (((Not That Crown, Maybe))) (@CrownMaybe) August 15, 2023
But it also looks like Willis also has to go out of her way to re-litigate the Georgia election issues that Trump has raised. And bringing it all up again could be a double-edged sword - it might be enough to raise doubt in any of the jurors on the case.
She also has to prove that Trump didn't think the election was stolen, which might be quite the uphill battle. If Trump is able to convince jurors that he was following the advice of lawyers and really did believe that the election was stolen, that's a blow to the DA's case that she can't recover from. The entire premise of the indictment is that Trump was planning before Election Day to claim the election was stolen, and suggesting that this fact is enough to prove he intended to steal the election in Georgia regardless of what happened.
If she can't prove that, then nothing else sticks. If Trump says he was led to believe that because of what these lawyers and activists in his inner circle convinced him that was going to happen, the case is weaker. He, in his defense, will make himself out to be a person attempting to stop fraud.
The most problematic case for Trump remains the Mar-a-Lago case. He is accused of ignoring subpoenas and attempting to hide evidence. It has nothing to do with his state of mind regarding the election. He (allegedly) willfully ignored a grand jury. But this case is different it's serious - far more so than the New York case - but is still a much tougher sell to a jury.
But, if he's found guilty, it will stick in ways the Mar-a-Lago case won't.
Georgia Senate - 33 Republicans, 23 Democrats
Georgia House - 102 Republicans, 78 Democrats
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_General_Assembly
Republican Brian Kemp is the Governor of Georgia.
It would be very easy to write and pass an election contestation clemency law.
P
I think Kemp would veto it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_General_Assembly
Republican Brian Kemp is the Governor of Georgia.
It would be very easy to write and pass an election contestation clemency law.
I didn't know that you were a comedian.
,
The public polls indicated it would be close:
https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/georgia/
Therefore, cheating from Democrats could be expected.
The reason why Willis threw such a wide net is because her case directly against rump is very weak. What she’s doing is textbook catch as many and hope they get scared and try to get them to flip ion Trump. Tonight Greg Kelly had a great piece on Newsmax that they literally charged Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis for simply leaving voice mails.
The whole premise of Trump believing the election was stolen is simply the words of his overweight attorney general who said in Sept 2020 that mail in voting is ripe with fraud. When Trump saw his margins shrink with
Mail in votes dumped in the middle of the night he had every right
To wonder what the heck was going on. The case against against Trump is incredibly weak but Willis is hoping a bunch of people flip on Trump which is why she charged them to begin with.
I'll just note here what a REAL RICO crime boss would do in the case of Fatti Willis...
“I think Kemp would veto it.”
I believe the Georgia legislature is generally limited to 40 work days maximum annually, normally in March and April.
Kemp would have to call the legislature into special session before March 2024 in order for them to pass a clemency bill before then. It he did so, he would not likely veto the work product.
Kemp is a Republican like Liz Cheney is.
“It took them 2 and half years...”
I suspect ballots can be destroyed two years after elections.
Ballots have fingerprints. Ballot fingerprints can be matched to those of public employees who are fingerprinted. Most election thieves would be public employees.
“Kemp is a Republican like Liz Cheney is.”
Before hiring you for the well-paid position of trust, we like some explanations....
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title52/subtitle2/chapter207&edition=prelim
If Georgia’s “broad” RICO law turns out to be a mechanism to violate Trump’s civil rights under the US constitution, he could file brief before a Federal judge asking for the law to be declared unconstitutional and the indictment dismissed. He could appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court.
You need to pay attention, Brian.
I believe that charges relating to the slate of electors are potentially the most serious.
It will get moved to federal court.
Sounds dire; but the backstop will always be the Supreme Court. SCOTUS could find the whold enterprise unconstitutional and render it toothless.
That is what I think will happen. And if it does, the lefty brownshirts will burn this country down -- unless they are stopped.
It is more simple than that. Do we or do we not have 1st amendment rights?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
