Lawyers are expensive AF, and not everyone has an endless pool of PAC money to fall back on. 6 months of lawyer fees vs 3 months when you know it won't change the outcome 😬
Lawyers are expensive AF, and not everyone has an endless pool of PAC money to fall back on. 6 months of lawyer fees vs 3 months when you know it won't change the outcome 😬
Yeah, about that.
I strongly suspect the reason Trump made that post on Twitter/X was to try and get a quick infusion of cash. He's been pretty steadfast about not going back, and took the opportunity to try and get as much cash in as possible.
There is some conflicting info about the guy still in jail. I had read that the reason he was denied bail is because he was already on bail after assaulting an officer so he was determined to be more of a risk of doing more crimes if released
www.forbes.com
I mean still seems like bullshit considering all the crimes these rich men have done and Trump will likely do now that he is released, but I guess that's the legal system for you.
Trump Co-Defendant Harrison Floyd Denied Bond: Why He’s Still In Jail
Floyd is the only one of the 18 co-defendants still in custody.
www.forbes.com
I mean still seems like bullshit considering all the crimes these rich men have done and Trump will likely do now that he is released, but I guess that's the legal system for you.
Sho_Nuff82 SwordsmanofS I think you both hit the nail on the head.
If you're paying for a defense attorney essentially out of pocket for a trial like this where the lawyers can bleed you dry going through tons of discovery, suggesting random motions, and conducting "forensic" investigations, then a speedy trial might help you not live in a cardboard box if you manage to get an acquittal. And if you know you're probably going to prison, then you may just try to get the best plea deal possible and still have some money to go home to after you serve some time.
Trump's sudden return to Twitter (particularly with this indictment and not the prior 3) does suggest this was purely about rebuilding his dwindling war-chest. He did just hire a new attorney, so it's possible they also demanded an upfront payment.
If you're paying for a defense attorney essentially out of pocket for a trial like this where the lawyers can bleed you dry going through tons of discovery, suggesting random motions, and conducting "forensic" investigations, then a speedy trial might help you not live in a cardboard box if you manage to get an acquittal. And if you know you're probably going to prison, then you may just try to get the best plea deal possible and still have some money to go home to after you serve some time.
Trump's sudden return to Twitter (particularly with this indictment and not the prior 3) does suggest this was purely about rebuilding his dwindling war-chest. He did just hire a new attorney, so it's possible they also demanded an upfront payment.
I've been hearing a lot of chatter about the defendants nearly unanimously filing to have the case moved to federal court. As someone who hasn't been following this minute to minute like others, is that likely to happen? I'm assuming if it does, it would likely bode well for the defendants, since they're the ones asking for it? if so, why? I don't know how most of this works lol
Federal RICO laws are much narrower. It's why they're brutal but harder to make a case on. There's no standing tho as the crime was specifically in Georgia and many of the points occurred or involved it as well
They want it so that if Trump wins in 2024, they can get a Presidential pardon, which they can't for state-level convictions.
I think it is unlikely. Meadows is saying his intervention is part of his duties, but that is not true as it is a violation of the hatch act for him as chief of staff to work on election stuff.
OP
OP
It's not "nearly unanimously", as it's only available for people holding federal office or that have federal defenses available - that counts out most of them. So far only MEADOWS and CLARK have any sort of chance at it (and arguably TRUMP). We'll find out soon enough as MEADOWS' hearing is on Monday.
Even if the case moves to federal court it will be applying Georgia law. And in this case specifically Georgia RICO law. That doesn't change just because the court changes.
Convictions in federal court will still be convictions under Georgia law, not federal law. So they will not be pardonable by a president,
Last edited:
Moving to federal court doesn't change the laws being charged. It's just moving into a federal court for the court procedures and jury pool. Willis would still be in charge for the prosecution.
It's a measure to stop states acting inappropriately in prosecuting federal agents.
Ahh, ok. The article I read made it seem like basically all of them were trying to get that done.
So I guess my next question is, why move it to federal court? Is it a real "strategy" in the sense it would benefit them? Or is it merely a stalling tactic to draw the process out longer? (Or, I suppose both?)
Thanks for everyone else's responses! I didn't want to quote/ping everyone but it's appreciated lol
OP
OP
The main differences are:
1) The availability of federal defenses. Especially if the criminal activity was part of your federal job. This is Supremacy Clause stuff and it is why, for example, the US Military can't get caught by Texas' anti-abortion laws.
2) Criminal procedure is different (federal court would apply GA law but use federal procedure). This impacts the jury pool (NDGA v Fulton county), and various arcane rules about court process and filings and suchlike. Bigger jury pool is probably a reason for doing it.
3) the appeals process is different. If the case stays in state court the only appeal is to the GA supreme court, then it stops. In Federal court you get to appeal to the 11th circuit and then to SCOTUS - so more chance of delaying things.
4) Federal prisons are nicer than state prisons.
Gotcha, that clears things up a bit. Thanks for taking the time to clarify!
LegendaryChanged it to that, and filled out the selection screen.
One of the greatest works of art in human history
Any word on that case that could freeze his fraudulent fundraising
OP
OP
Yeah, the idea that it could change the law being applied is incredibly silly. It would mean a person being charged with a crime could say "no, no. I didn't break law X. I broke law Y so we must change courts!" Which would also change who could charge them since Fani Willis wouldn't have the power to make federal charges.
They can all get fucked, but weird how the single black guy is the only one staying in jail.
Really draining the swamp there!
His lawyers must be ecstatic!
Seriously, according to the news, he spent $40 million on legal fees in the first half of this year alone. At that rate, this is barely more than one month's fees.
Trump better hope his fine print "this is a recurring donation" scam (for which he is under investigation) is firing on all cylinders.
Wasn't there something about his bond situation too? Like he did not make arrangements with a bail bondsman?
MEADOWS removal hearing
Please make him be on site for this and every single hearing on this case.
Fucker probably still thinks he's above the law, so he's gonna pull shit like that.
Yeah, this is a development most lawyers/former prosecutors, etc. did NOT think was going to happen. Transcript from the cross-examination could be very, very juicy and very bad for Trump.
Just turned on CNN and saw this, wild. What's the reason I wonder? I've heard he has a very good lawyer
OP
OP
He has the burder of proof here, and it's about evidence. It's always evidence. Obviously he couldn't find anyone else to testify on his behalf, so he has to. Otherwise he has no case.
Makes total sense, thank you. Does this open him to cross examination in a hearing like this?
OP
OP
OP
OP
Evidentiary hearing today in Meadows' attempt to remove the Georgia case against him to federal court.
Usually, it is sound legal doctrine for a defendant to avoid taking the stand in a criminal proceeding; have your lawyer make all your arguments for you. The reason why is because if you take the stand and go up and testify, sure you get to directly tell the court your side of the story and your defense lawyer can make as strong a case as possible with your direct testimony. The flipside of that is that then you have to under oath directly answer questions from the prosecutor on cross examination, which can be disastrous for your case. Even in the case that you are completely innocent, it's a huge risk because the prosecutor can phrase questions in such a way as to make you look guilty. And if you lie on the stand, you can very easily get caught committing perjury if the prosecutor has evidence that any of your testimony is untrue. So, yeah, Meadows going on the stand is a very good thing because he stands to not just incriminate himself, but other people (like Trump) in the conspiracy as well.
Edit: Annnnd I didn't understand what you were asking. gg
Crost posting from Episode 5 since it's equally applicable here:
I think maybe they know how boned they are.
I think maybe they know how boned they are.