This entire thing is a sick farce. The entire point is not to get a conviction but to bankrupt Trump staffers; so no one will want to work with him in the future.
It's to warn anyone else away from supporting Trump, or from publicly questioning dodgy election results, to interfere with next year's election campaigning and Republican presidential nomination, push voters away from supporting Trump, and running cover from the corruption of the Biden family.
"Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done."
This is impossible with any of the Trump indictments, because we all know that if he had retired and was playing golf instead of challenging Biden, none of this would be happening.
As a lawyer once told me: An aggressive prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Lot of flash in the pan in this indictment, not much substance and plenty of questionable reasoning. I can see most of this thrown out of court and any convictions reversed upon appeal. Nothing to do with the law, everything to do with politics and election interference. Luckly, Trump has the backbone and financial resources to fight it out, not everyone does. Imagine piling on all these indictments to a lesser person of limited means...and that could be anyone of us.
What the public does not understand about the Georgia election is that the Democrats "found" 16,000 Biden votes after election day by having a small army engage in "ballot curing" of defective Biden votes. Biden then won Georgia by 12,000 votes. This was all legal and permitted by election rules. For unknown reasons the Republicans did not apparently engage in the same post election day "ballot curing". Asking Republican political leaders why they were not "finding" Trump votes post election day would seem to be a fair question. I would like to understand that myself.
The problem with "ballot curing" and "ballot harvesting" is that it gives an edge to the candidate with the resources to do so. If one candidate benefits from "ballot curing" and the other does not, the ballots are not being counted the same way. We will never know who would have won Georgia if all votes had been counted the same way.
I’m glad you ended with the sentence you did. The case has always seemed weak to me due to the state’s burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of both Trump’s belief about the election and mens rea.
Unless a criminal conspiracy can be proved on the bases of others’ states of mind and beliefs.
Thanks for educating the public in legal analysis, knowledge that the citizenry should not be lacking.
I have a question: if you were defending Donald Trump against the Georgia indictment, would you call Stacey Abrams as a (hostile) witness?
She has refused to concede the governor's election in (?) 2018, and said (paraphrasing) Kemp used his position to manipulate his way to victory.
"For instance, Abrams at various times has said the election was “stolen” and even, in a New York Times interview, that “I won.” She suggested that election laws were “rigged” and that it was “not a free or fair election.” " (Washington Post -September 2022).
Would such a witness help or hinder Trump's case in your opinion?
Mr D - As a matter of “Honesty for Our Legal System and Our Constitution “ Please Help Mr Trump-We are at one of the worst moments in our history- Every single case is a Political Act by the most corrupt people in the government -
Alan, according to news reports, Rudy Giuliani admitted in a court document in relation to a civil defamation suit that "while acting as a lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump, he made false statements by asserting that two Georgia election workers had mishandled ballots while counting votes in Atlanta during the 2020 election." See https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/26/us/politics/giuliani-georgia-election-workers.html. Would he Georgia prosecutor still have to prove Giuliani's corrupt intent since Giuliani admitted he lied in the civil defamation case? Would this fact be grounds to disbar Giuliani? Lastly, would his fact help Trump in the Georgia RICO case, who can assert that Giuliani provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel for contesting the 2020 election, as Giuliani may have relayed the false statement about the Georgia election workers to Trump?
This entire thing is a sick farce. The entire point is not to get a conviction but to bankrupt Trump staffers; so no one will want to work with him in the future.
It's to warn anyone else away from supporting Trump, or from publicly questioning dodgy election results, to interfere with next year's election campaigning and Republican presidential nomination, push voters away from supporting Trump, and running cover from the corruption of the Biden family.
"Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done."
This is impossible with any of the Trump indictments, because we all know that if he had retired and was playing golf instead of challenging Biden, none of this would be happening.
This will be looked at by historians as the beginning of the end of our Republic.
The beginning??? More like the coda.
As a lawyer once told me: An aggressive prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. Lot of flash in the pan in this indictment, not much substance and plenty of questionable reasoning. I can see most of this thrown out of court and any convictions reversed upon appeal. Nothing to do with the law, everything to do with politics and election interference. Luckly, Trump has the backbone and financial resources to fight it out, not everyone does. Imagine piling on all these indictments to a lesser person of limited means...and that could be anyone of us.
What the public does not understand about the Georgia election is that the Democrats "found" 16,000 Biden votes after election day by having a small army engage in "ballot curing" of defective Biden votes. Biden then won Georgia by 12,000 votes. This was all legal and permitted by election rules. For unknown reasons the Republicans did not apparently engage in the same post election day "ballot curing". Asking Republican political leaders why they were not "finding" Trump votes post election day would seem to be a fair question. I would like to understand that myself.
The problem with "ballot curing" and "ballot harvesting" is that it gives an edge to the candidate with the resources to do so. If one candidate benefits from "ballot curing" and the other does not, the ballots are not being counted the same way. We will never know who would have won Georgia if all votes had been counted the same way.
I’m glad you ended with the sentence you did. The case has always seemed weak to me due to the state’s burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt of both Trump’s belief about the election and mens rea.
Unless a criminal conspiracy can be proved on the bases of others’ states of mind and beliefs.
Thanks for educating the public in legal analysis, knowledge that the citizenry should not be lacking.
This is a kangaroo court. The outcome has already been decided. The jury pool already tainted. The mist corrupt country in Africa is better than this.
I have a question: if you were defending Donald Trump against the Georgia indictment, would you call Stacey Abrams as a (hostile) witness?
She has refused to concede the governor's election in (?) 2018, and said (paraphrasing) Kemp used his position to manipulate his way to victory.
"For instance, Abrams at various times has said the election was “stolen” and even, in a New York Times interview, that “I won.” She suggested that election laws were “rigged” and that it was “not a free or fair election.” " (Washington Post -September 2022).
Would such a witness help or hinder Trump's case in your opinion?
Mr D - As a matter of “Honesty for Our Legal System and Our Constitution “ Please Help Mr Trump-We are at one of the worst moments in our history- Every single case is a Political Act by the most corrupt people in the government -
Another cluster F ck brought to you by Dersh's Dems.
Alan, according to news reports, Rudy Giuliani admitted in a court document in relation to a civil defamation suit that "while acting as a lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump, he made false statements by asserting that two Georgia election workers had mishandled ballots while counting votes in Atlanta during the 2020 election." See https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/26/us/politics/giuliani-georgia-election-workers.html. Would he Georgia prosecutor still have to prove Giuliani's corrupt intent since Giuliani admitted he lied in the civil defamation case? Would this fact be grounds to disbar Giuliani? Lastly, would his fact help Trump in the Georgia RICO case, who can assert that Giuliani provided him with ineffective assistance of counsel for contesting the 2020 election, as Giuliani may have relayed the false statement about the Georgia election workers to Trump?
"It appeared to be part of an effort to move past the discovery phase, which had saddled Mr. Giuliani with crippling expenses."
That's possibly why Giuliani made concessions in court. It's called lawfare.