Jump to content

Trump trial in Fulton County will be televised, judge says


Social Media

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Justice Antonin Scalia’s politics and jurisprudence weren’t to everyone’s liking, but there was general agreement that he was the Supreme Court’s finest writer during his tenure. Ask practicing lawyers, editors of the New Republic (not exactly Scalia’s target demographic), or even his liberal colleague, Justice Elena Kagan — who declared Scalia to be “indubitably [the Court’s] greatest writer.”

 

https://abovethelaw.com/2016/11/how-justice-scalias-writing-style-affected-american-jurisprudence/

And what relevance does that have to the claim of hypocrisy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Justice Antonin Scalia’s politics and jurisprudence weren’t to everyone’s liking, but there was general agreement that he was the Supreme Court’s finest writer during his tenure. Ask practicing lawyers, editors of the New Republic (not exactly Scalia’s target demographic), or even his liberal colleague, Justice Elena Kagan — who declared Scalia to be “indubitably [the Court’s] greatest writer.”

 

https://abovethelaw.com/2016/11/how-justice-scalias-writing-style-affected-american-jurisprudence/

That doesn't detract from the fact that he was a despicable human being.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Note to the above from the NY Times version of the ruling:

 

The ruling, which is likely to be appealed, came after Mr. Meadows’s lawyers took the unexpected step of putting their client on the witness stand to make the case for removal in a hearing on Aug. 28 in Judge Jones’s courtroom in downtown Atlanta.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/us/mark-meadows-georgia-federal-court-denial.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2023 at 11:19 AM, jerrymahoney said:

Georgia prosecutors in Trump election case estimate four-month trial

September 6, 2023 at 5:36 p.m. EDT


McAfee did not reject a joint trial of Trump and his 18 co-defendants, but he peppered prosecutors with questions and appeared deeply skeptical that proceedings for all 19 could begin next month. He noted efforts by some of the defendants to move their cases to federal court and existing motions from Trump and others who have said they will not be ready for trial by late October. ...

 

McAfee said he plans to decide by next Thursday whether all the defendants must be tried at the same time beginning next month.

“I remain very skeptical,” McAfee told prosecutors. “But I’m willing to hear what you have to say on it.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/09/06/trump-georgia-trial-four-months/

 

https://archive.ph/Xeyry

4 months for all 19 defendants, LOL.

 

19 lawyers all questioning every witness is going to take forever.

 

Just jury selection is going to take a very long time, and even finding a jury of undecided people could be challenging, to say the least.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2023 at 6:24 PM, jerrymahoney said:

That quote was from a Supreme Court concurring opinion written by Scalia in which he sided with liberal justices Ginsburg and Breyer. So, at least in this case, if Scalia was a hypocrite, so were Ginsburg and Breyer.

Scalia was very smart, and had a pragmatic side. Clarence Thomas, not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2023 at 8:06 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Anyone think every guilty verdict won't be appealed all the way to the SCOTUS?

 

Every word that the judge utters is going to be scrutinised for grounds for a mistrial.

Yep, its possible some of the defendants will die of old age before they see a jail cell.

 

Or something dramatic will happen some years down the line that will obviate this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Yep, its possible some of the defendants will die of old age before they see a jail cell.

 

Or something dramatic will happen some years down the line that will obviate this case.

I'm going with "something dramatic". If we don't pollute ourselves into extinction we are due for a big war, and the next one will likely include the use of all those nuclear warheads just waiting for a launch order.

  • Confused 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

It does get tiresome when one or more of the same half-dozen or more posters respond to your almost every post and feel they deserve some reply or answer ... then get perturbed when I say i just don't have or want to have the time to follow-up with every one of them.

I do so agree with that, especially when the people complaining don't reply to queries themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, shipwrecked said:

 

 

I see a lengthy list of motions lasting years before WIllis eventually craters and the fulton county DA and her RICO fantasy meets the round file file dust bin ESPECIALLY at the fed level based on removal from county court to a federal court at least in Trump's case.

Almost a 0% chance that Trump's case will be moved to Federal court, based on the Mark Meadows ruling. Even if it were, the charges are still state charges, and Trump can't pardon his way out of them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judge rejects Meadows effort to move election case from Georgia to federal court in big win for Willis
- 09/08/23 6:05 PM ET
 

A federal judge has rejected former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows’s attempt to move his charges in the Georgia election interference case to federal court.

 

The ruling was a broad rejection of arguments from Meadows that his case should be heard in federal court because he was acting in his capacity as chief of staff at the time.

 

Meadows filed an appeal of the ruling to the 11th circuit just hours after Jones’s decision. 

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4194977-judge-rejects-meadows-effort-to-move-election-case-from-georgia-to-federal-court-in-big-win-for-willis/

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Trying to steal the Georgia election seems kind of crimey to me.

 

Seriously, the indictment contains specific Georgia state crimes for every charged individual. RICO is just the icing on the cake. There are 41 violations of Georgia state law cited.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/read-the-full-georgia-indictment-against-trump-and-18-allies

 

 

Can we wait for a conviction before considering him guilty of anything, or is "innocent till proven guilty" only for not Trump defendants?

  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Can we wait for a conviction before considering him guilty of anything, or is "innocent till proven guilty" only for not Trump defendants?

Apparently, your compulsion to spew the talking points sent by your internet friends caused you to ignore the context of my message.

 

Someone had implied that no actual Georgia state laws were broken, per the Georgia RICO indictment. So my message was about the state laws mentioned in the indictment.

 

Nothing to do with guilt or innocence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Apparently, your compulsion to spew the talking points sent by your internet friends caused you to ignore the context of my message.

 

Someone had implied that no actual Georgia state laws were broken, per the Georgia RICO indictment. So my message was about the state laws mentioned in the indictment.

 

Nothing to do with guilt or innocence.

You made a statement that he was trying to steal the election. Sounds like you are assuming he is guilty of that before he's convicted.

 

BTW I don't have any internet friends. Anything I say on here is of my own interpretation.

  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

As can be seen by the Special Grand Jury report, there was a lot more that Fani Willis could have charged Trump with, but she held back.

I'm not familiar with that, but I suppose there is only so much that can be deliberated on in court, and if he gets off the current ones he may yet be indicted for more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...