Is The Georgia Rico Case falling apart?

[777]

well. I think at the least this judge is going to remove them both - look, there's a reason this guy said that about "within two weeks" last week . It's called "running out the clock":

https://sos.ga.gov/candidate-qualifying-elected-office

McAfee was appointed by Kemp the RINO, and he's up this year for reelection, unopposed. I think he just wants to wait until he's sure he has no challenger in November because the left in Georgia have been show to mobilize and get out the votes, both legally and otherwise, to defeat anybody who stands in their way.

 

[canadyjd]

Just in….

Judge dismisses 6 charges against DT in Georgia case!!!!

This has nothing to do with the upcoming decision to remove Willis (or not) from the case.

Looks like it’s falling apart when judges look at it, as I predicted.

Now, if only judges in NY and Washington had the same kind of integrity.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

The squashed charges don't affect the core case. They were pile on's as the Dems threw the spaghetti at the wall.

I'm thinking this might be drawn out into the election and ultimately not matter.

 

[KenH]

The head of the executive branch of the United States federal government is not an ordinary citizen; he really is above the law when he is in office, unless impeached and then convicted by the Congress. We may talk like "no one is above the law", but that is not the reality when it comes to the president of the United States when in office.

 

[JonC]

The head of the executive branch of the United States federal government is not an ordinary citizen; he really is above the law when he is in office, unless impeached and then convicted by the Congress. We may talk like "no one is above the law", but that is not the reality when it comes to the president of the United States when in office.

We will find out (the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution).

 

[canadyjd]

The squashed charges don't affect the core case. They were pile on's as the Dems threw the spaghetti at the wall.

I'm thinking this might be drawn out into the election and ultimately not matter.

The squashed charges dealt with violating the oath of office, which is very much a “core” charge in the indictment.

Without “violating the oath of office”, DT is clearly operating under his authority as POTUS at that time.

The next important decision will be the dismissal (or not) of Willis. That decision could throw the whole case out for review or even dismissal.

We will see. We live in interesting times.

peace to you

 

[JonC]

The squashed charges dealt with violating the oath of office, which is very much a “core” charge in the indictment.

Without “violating the oath of office”, DT is clearly operating under his authority as POTUS at that time.

The next important decision will be the dismissal (or not) of Willis. That decision could throw the whole case out for review or even dismissal.

We will see. We live in interesting times.

peace to you

But we have to look at the reason they were dismissed.

"As written, these six counts contain all the essential elements of the crimes but fail to allege sufficient detail regarding the nature of their commission, i.e., the underlying felony solicited. They do not give the Defendants enough information to prepare their defenses intelligently".

 

[canadyjd]

But we have to look at the reason they were dismissed.

"As written, these six counts contain all the essential elements of the crimes but fail to allege sufficient detail regarding the nature of their commission, i.e., the underlying felony solicited. They do not give the Defendants enough information to prepare their defenses intelligently".

Correct… The judge is NOT saying the essential elements of the crimes have been PROVEN, only that the accusations reflect the statute, though they do not contain sufficient details to even bring the case, much less prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

For instance… I’m a prosecutor… I file charges against someone for fraud. The charging paperwork simply quotes the statute of what constitutes fraud. I claim the person deceived an elderly person into giving them $100K and then spent it at a casino.

All the elements of fraud are there; the deception, a general target of the “elderly” and so on, But there are no details that connects anything the person has done with the crime.

The prosecution must be able to articulate exactly what activity occurred and why it violated the statute. The prosecution failed in its very first obligation in bringing charges against someone.

peace to you

 

[KenH]

This morning, Judge McAfee ruled that Fani Willis can continue as the prosecuting of the Georgia case against Trump if Nathan Wade leaves the case.

 

[canadyjd]

This morning, Judge McAfee ruled that Fani Willis can continue as the prosecuting of the Georgia case against Trump if Nathan Wade leaves the case.

I saw that. A strange decision, imo. If there is a conflict, it affects both.

I also saw the Georgia Senate is investigating. Also the Georgia Bar Association could look at it.

peace to you