Why can’t we just nail this motherfucker?! This shouldn’t be this difficult.
right, he could ‘find’ the votes,and not attempt to change the out-come of the vote. he would have to show the ‘votes’ were legal…after the votes were counted and ceritifed…then what?
1 Like
Well damn.
When I read the indictment last summer, it was fascinating, detailing a sweeping conspiracy. Although disappointed with the Judges ruling guess it just proves details matter.
Thanks for your help!
5 Likes
When’s the last time a white male POTUS attempted a coup? Why didn’t the Founders plan for this?
C’mon, man.
5 Likes
I wouldn’t worry. This is just a procedural consideration, and one that, when rectified, will make a stronger case if (when) appealed.
7 Likes
It’s disappointing to learn that the Georgia Secretary of State gets to oversee elections, and is thus empowered to commit massive fraud, should he so choose, as part of his job and the oath he takes. “Finding” 11,700 votes – A okay! I guess this also falls under the US Constitution, Article II, which gives Donald Trump (and ONLY Donald Trump) the right to do anything he wants.
This is, if nothing else, a bad “look” for the country. And the legal system.
3 Likes
The legal equivalent of the “Continue? Y/N” screen in a video game. You lose some progress, but that’s about it.
5 Likes
Not a hard fix. The judge did not dismiss with prejudice. They simply need to replead with particularity, as directed by the court.
11 Likes
So now when we call him “Mr. 91 Counts”, his supporters can say, “Nuh uh! He’s only facing 85 felony charges!”
Details!
Still not quite sure it’s the defense they think it is.
(No, I’m not certain all the dismissals were of felony charges. Just try to make a broader point.)
((No “Mr. 91 Counts”, I didn’t say anything about “broads”. Sheesh!))
4 Likes
88, not 85 - only three of the dropped charges were against TSF, the others were against his co-conspirators…
8 Likes
88 is a better number anyway – one for every key on a piano.
And now that I think of it, appropriate, too, given the Hitler comments of recent days.
[For those blessedly unaware, there are some neo-nazis who sport “88” tattoos because ‘H’ is the eighth letter of the alphabet, so they get to say “Heil, Hitler” in tat form.]
10 Likes
Tighten it up and refile.
That the judge is down in the weeds on the charges tossing some but keeping the others, might be seen as an indicator he is not going ot DQ Willis and her team (why bother with this if he is going to DQ her and tank the entire case in a day or two?).
8 Likes
Not a lawyer, but I have to think that the biggest weakness of a very broad case (any , not just this one) is that it by definition creates 40 bazillion opportunities for appeal. There’s just too many details and variables, you’re better off with less range but bulletproof arguments. I’m not surprised it’s been trimmed up, and we should be glad. I mean the judge is basically saving her bacon here, not allowing it to go forward with flaws so big it could possibly reverse the valid parts. If they can be resubmitted with the right detail, great. If not, there’s still 80+ problems for Trump to worry about!
7 Likes
This is probably the Judge doing a “One for you; one for the other” kind of call that basketball refs do. The implication, of course, is that Fans Willis is safe to finish her case and love affair in cash.
3 Likes
Not that that concept crossed my mind tons of times regarding all the various complaints about the supposed ‘speed’ that Garland was moving at in terms of Trump’s malfeasance. Would it have been great if Jack Smith brought his charges much earlier? Obviously, but then the possibility of something like what happened to Willis coming up is much greater.
1 Like
“Judge Tosses Six Counts In Trump’s Georgia RICO Case.”
Better Headline:
“Judge Upholds 35 Counts in Trump’s Georgia RICO Case; Opens Door to Six More.”
10 Likes
“Corruption” is not, in fact, a synonym for “a judge made a ruling I don’t like.”
The purpose of an indictment is to tell the Defendant what acts the state is charging. It is a basic protection of individual rights to prevent what lawyers call “trial by ambush,” a thing that was the norm n the 19th Century but progressively eliminated by a new generation of civil and criminal trial rules because trying people on secret facts that aren’t disclosed until introduced at trial looks a lot like a violation of substantive due process.
And it’s not a BFD. All they have to do is add specificity to a superseding indictment that, if Willis is smart, someone was already working on and re-file it.
ETA: I looked back at the indictment in light of the comment by @txlawyer which I somehow missed, and yeah, he’s totally right. They need to let these counts go. They were clearly “throw in some edgy edge-cases so a baby-splitting judge will have something to dismiss” counts."
18 Likes
Didn’t we have a troll around here some years back with a username along the lines of “Ranger88”? Kept claiming it referred to his love for his 1988 Ford Ranger, but wasn’t nobody buying that BS.
3 Likes
Oh, doesn’t that leave him with “88” charges now?
1 Like
Controlling the White House isn’t “real property?”