jerrymahoney

Just to keep things simple: If the Georgia trial remains in State Court, it can be televised. If the trial is moved/remanded to Federal Court, it cannot be televised.

Trump’s Georgia trial is readied for TV, while others are hard to see While the former president’s proceedings in other jurisdictions remain largely off-camera, Georgia offers a whole new level of media access Updated September 1, 2023 On Thursday, the Atlanta-area judge overseeing the racketeering case gave the go-ahead for live TV and streaming video coverage of his trial, probably the only occasion the general public could have opportunity to watch him sit through courtroom proceedings amid the heat of a 2024 campaign. The ruling by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott F. McAfee carries several big question marks. First, it’s unclear when exactly Trump will stand trial; the judge hasn’t set a date. Second, Trump’s attorneys could still ask to move the case to federal court; co-defendant Mark Meadows, Trump’s former chief of staff, argued for such a change of venue this week. If that happens, it would render McAfee’s ruling about televising moot. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2023/09/01/trump-trial-livestream-televised/

State election officials prepare for efforts to disqualify Trump under 14th Amendment New Hampshire, Michigan and Arizona are bracing for lawsuits. September 1, 2023 In an interview with ABC News, Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, said that she and other secretaries of state from Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, New Hampshire and Maine started having conversations over a year ago about preparing for the legal challenges to Trump's candidacy. But as conversations grow around the use of the 14th Amendment provision, some legal scholars and election officials are increasingly concerned about the practicality of the emerging lawsuits. "The most difficult aspects of the litigation that the challenges to Trump's eligibility will generate probably aren't so much substantive as they are procedural," Tribe wrote in an email to ABC News, noting that there is a lack of clarity about who has standing to bring the challenges. "You can be sure that many secretaries of state, advised by many legal experts from across the ideological spectrum, are now studying the details of the legislative regimes in place in their respective states for dealing with challenges to the eligibility of candidates aspiring to become president," he continued. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-election-officials-prepare-efforts-disqualify-trump-14th/story?id=102833123

From the above linked Emerson Poll: In a hypothetical matchup between Trump and Biden, 46% would vote for Trump and 44% Biden. Despite losing ground in the Republican Primary, support for Donald Trump in a hypothetical matchup against Joe Biden increased two points since last week’s poll,” Kimball said.

Not correct. The 'removal' would be because the individual was acting 'under the color' of his current Federal position in the Trump administration. If the judge so rules. But the conviction would be under State of Georgia so no federal pardon possible. Correct.

First test in Georgia v. Trump: Can prosecutors keep home-court advantage? At a key Monday hearing, a federal judge will consider a bid to move the case out of the state court system. For the moment, Trump himself has not asked for a transfer — formally known as a “removal” — to federal court. Trump still has plenty of time to seek a transfer. Under federal law, that deadline won’t come for more than a month. Meanwhile, he can sit back and see what happens Monday, sizing up Jones — an appointee of former President Barack Obama — and assessing the judge’s openness to arguments that the case properly belongs in federal court because some of the defendants held posts in the federal government at the time of the 2020 election. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/28/georgia-trump-removal-hearing-federal-court-00113149

Well here's the bell ringer from the NY State complaint: Awarding disgorgement of all financial benefits obtained by each Defendant from the fraudulent scheme, including all financial benefits from lenders and insurers through repeated and persistent fraudulent practices of an amount to be determined at trial but estimated to be $250,000,000, plus prejudgment interest; and Granting any additional relief the Court deems appropriate.

I remember a counter-intelligence guy once saying that we have to get it right every time while the terrorists only have to get it right once. The prosecution in all these criminal trials have to get it right every time while the Trump defense -- as some here have referred to as 'ambulance chasers' -- only have to find one fissure in the prosecution and that may be enough for at least one jury member to say NOT beyond any reasonable doubt.

Sure but not as a serial topic starter.

I guess some when they are not happy just start a new AN topic.

But "Sleepy Joe" doesn't make you tired? No. Joe Biden is a grown-up and can take care of himself. And Joe Biden as President doesn't scare me now or if re-elected. Trump totally scares me as, barring calamity, he'll be the Republican nominee in 2024 and anything could happen after that.

Well this "Donnie boy" stuff to me gets a little tiresome.

Arizona judge nixes suit that wants Trump backers off ballot Published April 23, 2022 (Superior Court Judge) Coury agreed with the lawmakers’ attorneys who said Congress created no enforcement mechanism for the 14th Amendment, barring a criminal conviction. He noted that Congress proposed such a law in the wake of the attack on Congress but it is not been enacted. “Therefore, given the current state of the law and in accordance with the United States Constitution, plaintiffs have no private right of action to assert claims under the disqualification clause,” Coury wrote. He also rejected arguments that state law created an enforcement mechanism that allows people to sue to enforce the 14th Amendment’s provision. And he said, at least for Biggs and Gosar, qualifications for member of Congress are purely a federal affair. “The text of the Constitution is mandatory,” Coury wrote. “It sets forth the single arbiter of the qualifications of members of Congress; that single arbiter is Congress.” https://apnews.com/article/lawsuits-arizona-phoenix-constitutions-paul-gosar-fefc259cdb6cbf7cc9369c5f2f939c61

Again from the above linked NYTimes article: There has been one settled case since Jan. 6 that invoked the 14th Amendment. In September, a judge in New Mexico ordered a county commissioner convicted of participating in the Jan. 6 riot removed from office under the 14th Amendment. He was the first public official in more than a century to be barred from serving under a constitutional ban on insurrectionists holding office.

Is Trump Disqualified? Republicans Prepare to Fight Long-Shot Legal Theory. In New Hampshire, Republicans are feuding over whether the 14th Amendment bars Donald J. Trump from running for president. Other states are watching closely. Aug. 30, 2023Updated 5:27 p.m. ET The theory has been gaining momentum since two prominent conservative law professors published an article this month concluding that Mr. Trump is constitutionally disqualified from running for office. But even advocates of the disqualification theory say it is a legal long shot. If a secretary of state strikes Mr. Trump’s name or a voter lawsuit advances, Mr. Trump’s campaign is sure to appeal, possibly all the way to the Supreme Court, where the 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices nominated by Mr. Trump. Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger of Georgia indicated that previous cases involving Ms. Greene would continue to guide his office, and that “as secretary of state of Georgia, I have been clear that I believe voters are smart and deserve the right to decide elections.” “In Georgia, there is a specific statutory process to follow when a candidate’s qualifications for office are challenged,” Mr. Raffensperger said in a statement. “The secretary of state’s office has and will continue to follow the appropriate procedures in state law for any candidate challenges.” https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/30/us/politics/trump-14th-amendment.html https://archive.is/WtOmu

Last paragraph of the the linked The Hill article: If McAfee approves Willis’s request, the trial could become the first Trump will face. In the former president’s other three criminal matters, he has two trials set for March and a third set for May.

Mark Meadows struggles to distance himself from Trump’s plot August 29, 2023 at 1:04 p.m. EDT The testimony also created some challenges for the prosecution. Raffensperger is supposed to be a key witness for the prosecution. But while the prosecution has charged Meadows with unlawfully pressuring Raffensperger, Raffensperger said of Meadows’s conduct on the call, specifically, “I didn’t think it was inappropriate.” Meadows also pointed to two alleged errors in the indictment. Meadows opted to testify at a time when he doesn’t know precisely what evidence the prosecution has on these fronts. But to the extent the indictment itself contains errors, that would be an inauspicious sign for the prosecution, at the least. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/29/mark-meadows-struggles-distance-himself-trumps-plot/ https://archive.is/1QZ4Z

Thank you . And there is a Conservative establishment who see Trump as a convenient even if boorish vessel and has been engineering plans to overhaul the "Deep State" Government since Reagan. And Trump would have likely implemented Schedule F overhaul of the federal labor force if he had time. AUGUST 2, 2022 In recent weeks, former White House aides from the Trump administration unveiled plans to immediately reinstitute Schedule F the next time a Republican is president. Schedule F was an ill-fated plan to find and reclassify the positions of tens of thousands of career federal workers in “policy-related” roles outside of the competitive service, stripping them of their civil service protections and making it much easier to hire and fire them. Trump, who is mulling another campaign for president, seemingly endorsed the plan in a speech last week. https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2022/08/senate-dems-join-push-block-schedule-f/375221/ Which is Partly why I say I am much more anxious NOT to see Trump again as President than I am the outcome of any of these criminal trials.

To quote Clark Gable as Rhett Butler: Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn

No I've been on this topic since about 6 AM this morn with your fellow tag team members an I am tired.

Beats me, Mr. Interrogatory

This is from the link I posted above early this morning which prompted the tag team so I will just leave at this: But to convict Trump, the prosecutors will have to show all 31 documents to the jury, making them public and available to anyone — including our foreign enemies. Moreover, my experience in Espionage Act cases has shown that the prosecution often has to disclose additional classified information to explain why the retained documents were potentially damaging. The government will have to reveal vastly more classified information than if it decided not to proceed with the case. And that does not include the additional classified documents the defense will claim it needs to show to make its case. https://archive.is/UJhXJ#selection-1237.0-1237.599

CNN first reported last week that prosecutors had obtained the audio recording of Trump’s 2021 meeting at his Bedminster, New Jersey, resort, with two people working on the autobiography of Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows as well as aides employed by the former president, including communications specialist Margo Martin. The transcript of the audio recording suggests that Trump is showing the document he’s discussing to those in the room. Several sources have told CNN the recording captures the sound of paper rustling, as if Trump was waving the document around, though is not clear if it was the actual Iran document. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/09/politics/trump-tape-didnt-declassify-secret-information/index.html

Probably not but I ran into the Patriot Act buzz saw a few years ago and I do not intend to have it happen again ... and the questions they asked were more than I care to answer if not necessary.

In Florida, they allow you to register even if you no longer live at your last registered address which was the home of my late Mother. To so register you are asked about your intentions to re-patriate at some time or never and that becomes public record which might put my financial accounts in jeopardy if they ever saw that I truthfully never intend to relocate to Florida. ... or else I lie.