Georgia Indictment

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

Which the judge said was fine as long as they didn't talk about certain information. Also, that only occurred after the special grand jury was no longer empaneled.

What members of the recent grand jury have been speaking to the press?

So then the proceedings aren't secret.

Thanks.

a reply to: JinMI

Who from the grand jury has spoken about anything, let alone the specifics of the evidence that was presented?

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

Who from the grand jury has spoken about anything, let alone the specifics of the evidence that was presented?

Specifics of the case? No one that I know of. But that's not what you claimed.

You said the GJ is secret.

Which isn't accurate now is it based on the now infamous foreperson and the required by law, naming of Georgia grand jurors.

a reply to: JinMI

If you tell someone a secret and they end up telling someone else, it's still a secret.

The proceedings of a grand jury are secret. The only ones who know what occur are the prosecution and the jury. The only way we find out what occurred in a grand jury is if members of the jury talk about it after the fact.

So if no members of the jury are talking, why do certain members keep talking about what evidence was presented to the jury?

a reply to: Threadbare

Do you think the video/audio of the phone call was not shown to the jury?

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: 3000Hard

The Phone call was edited, the whole case in GA depends on it basically. They cut out 3 words in the call to make it sound like he wanted fraud.

That’ll be up to the defense to prove.

a reply to: JinMI

Do you know if an edited version was played?

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: 3000Hard

trump has given up more than enough evidence to bury himself.

If you had to show us your smoking gun evidence, what would it be?

Just curious.

I have no evidence.
That’s all on the prosecution and defense to meet out.

That he has provided enough to bury himself is only an opinion.

But, if trump is found to be guilty, it’d be less of an opinion and more a fact.

We’ll all just have to wait until he is tried.

a reply to: 3000Hard

Help me out here.

Which of these two statements by you are true:

trump has given up more than enough evidence to bury himself.

or

I have no evidence.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI

Do you know if an edited version was played?

Nope.

Do you think it was played?

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: 3000Hard

Help me out here.

Which of these two statements by you are true:

trump has given up more than enough evidence to bury himself.

or

I have no evidence.

Re read my post, or not.
The truth is there.

So lame!

The best you can do is debate what a secret is and not understand an opinion.

It’s no wonder you are a trump supporter.

Let’s chip in and pay this “billionaire’s” legal bills! This time he’ll really build that wall and lock her up.

a reply to: 3000Hard

I'm certainly prone to many silly things.

Yet, recognizing a declarative statement such as:

trump has given up more than enough evidence to bury himself.

is not one of them.

Sorry you can't keep your lies straight.

It hurts you more than me, promise.

a reply to: 3000Hard

You mean nothing to me.

The mere fact that you think whatever you post here affects anyone I’m sure will be identified as some type of mental disorder involving delusion and most likely retardation in the study of “the internet’s effect on adults that live in mom’s basement and keeps the door padlocked.”

"the lady doth protest too much, methinks"

Adieu

originally posted by: IndieA
a reply to: 3000Hard

That advice for Trump seems to be coming from the left.

I would like to see a whole bunch of light shed on the 2020 Georgia election for starters. It could very well be to "domino" that exposes other problems in the 2020 election that could persist if nothing is done to correct them.

Georgia's election was a mess. This is just a summary of some of what was found:

VoterGA.org

WHAT WE FOUND IN GEORGIA

Six sworn affidavits of Fulton counterfeit ballots; (10s of thousands est.)

17,724 more votes than in person recount ballot images required to tabulate votes in Fulton

Drop box video surveillance representing 181,507 ballots destroyed in 102 counties

Improper Chain of Custody forms for 107,000 ballots statewide

Estimated Chain of Custody forms missing for 355,000 ballots statewide

(Georgia Star) 86,860 voters in 2020 have false registration date prior to 2017 but were not on 2017 history file

Over 1.7 million original ballot images are lost or destroyed in 70 counties despite state, federal law

The margin of victory was 11,779 votes, Fulton county alone,was missing over 17,500 ballot images, and the missing chain of custody for 355,000 ballots Statewide is ridiculous.

It appears trump is keeping his “goods” per request from the left/lawyer.

trump’s truth social post:
“ Rather than releasing the Report…the News Conference is no longer necessary.”

Now you guys have to figure out another way to spread your nonsense.

a reply to: 3000Hard

Source

Rather than releasing the Report on the Rigged & Stolen Georgia 2020 Presidential Election on Monday, my lawyers would prefer putting this, I believe, Irrefutable & Overwhelming evidence of Election Fraud & Irregularities in formal Legal Filings as we fight to dismiss this disgraceful Indictment by a publicity & campaign finance seeking D.A., who sadly presides over a record breaking Murder & Violent Crime area, Atlanta. Therefore, the News Conference is no longer necessary!

Okay, I may have had impatient-bias.

I was looking forward to Monday, but waiting a little longer for formal legal filings is good too. I just want the truth to come out, and I would really like a court to have to look at the election evidence, especially from Georgia.

This is going to be an issue....

(a)A civil action or criminal prosecution that is commenced in a State court and that is against or directed to any of the following may be removed by them to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending:

(1)The United States or any agency thereof or any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or of any agency thereof, in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of such office or on account of any right, title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the collection of the revenue.

(2)A property holder whose title is derived from any such officer, where such action or prosecution affects the validity of any law of the United States.

(3)Any officer of the courts of the United States, for or relating to any act under color of office or in the performance of his duties;

(4)Any officer of either House of Congress, for or relating to any act in the discharge of his official duty under an order of such House.

28 USC 1442

Heard Juliani speak of it during some interview.

a reply to: JinMI

The fact that Trump was doing all of this through his personal lawyers and not White House counsel will make it hard for him to argue that he was acting in an official capacity as President.

Meadows has a stronger case. He'll pretty much argue a variation of the Nuremburg Defense and claim he was just following orders, thus he was acting in his role as Chief of Staff.

That said, all this would really be is a change of venue. They'd still be prosecuted under Georgia law and, if found guilty, Georgia's laws for pardoning would apply.

a reply to: Threadbare

The fact that Trump was doing all of this through his personal lawyers and not White House counsel will make it hard for him to argue that he was acting in an official capacity as President.

There's a distinction made in the above:

against or directed to any of the following

I don't think that's a very strong argument.

Meadows has a stronger case. He'll pretty much argue a variation of the Nuremburg Defense and claim he was just following orders, thus he was acting in his role as Chief of Staff.

Why would he argue on the precedent of a failed defense?

That said, all this would really be is a change of venue. They'd still be prosecuted under Georgia law and, if found guilty, Georgia's laws for pardoning would apply.

I don't think that's accurate.