Georgia grand jury investigating Trump returns indictments

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/AnthonyMKreis/status/1763675626752369077

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/harrylitman/status/1763676692575666296

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/harrylitman/status/1763676692575666296

Yep, and this is the point. We've now wasted all of 2024 so far on this.

[Dan the Roman]

https://twitter.com/AnthonyMKreis/status/1763675626752369077

My theory earlier is that McAffee's problem is he is convinced beyond reasonable doubt Willis and Wade committed perjury in his courtroom. And he cannot easily preside over a trial when he believes the DA lied in his courtroom and could do so again.

However, nothing has been proven. The legal standard to establish, much less prove a conflict does not exist. McAfee is unlikely to believe there is a conflict or ever was. The issue now is solely the likely perjury during this process.

The questions today seemed like the judge searching for a basis to assuage his conflict of interest(assuming he believes Wade and Willis perjured themselves )not to determine whether Wade and Willis had one with Trump

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/harrylitman/status/1763676692575666296

Yep, and this is the point. We've now wasted all of 2024 so far on this.

Ik you're only interested atp in reading all of the posts that make Willis look good & ignoring all of the posts that make her look bad, but it's quite literally not a waste if McAfee ultimately determines that the applicable standard isn't actual conflict or even the appearance of a conflict but just the appearance of an impropriety; & even if it's actual-conflict, it's definitionally not a waste of time to determine whether or not an alleged appearance of a conflict actually amounts to a conflict. And here I thought that the rights of defendants meant something.

[Redban]

Georgia senate committee hearing was not good for Fani. Merchant said they have records of over 10k texts between Fanni and Wade, occuring prior to his being appointed. Merchant claims there is software that allows them to provide the texts with any personal/confidential information redacted, which would easily disprove the allegation; yet for unknown reasons, both Wade & Fani refuse to do so

[Redban]

In related news

https://twitter.com/megynkelly/status/1765475351290159489







https://www.keepjudgemcafee.com/

https://www.ajc.com/politics/civil-rights-attorney-to-challenge-scott-mcafee-judge-in-fulton-trump-case/25EEXCCET5BPTKX26Y4Z6OZHG4/

[Landslide Lyndon]

In related news

https://twitter.com/megynkelly/status/1765475351290159489

Yeah, that's what made the case political. Not the constant whining by Trump himself about Biden and the DoJ being behind his prosecutions by a local DA.
GTFO!

[GeorgiaModerate]

Judge McAfee seems to be a very fair judge.  I doubt that he'll let the fact that someone is running against him affect his decision.  (Is that naive?  Maybe so, but he seems like a good judge.)

[brucejoel99]

Judge McAfee seems to be a very fair judge.  I doubt that he'll let the fact that someone is running against him affect his decision.  (Is that naive?  Maybe so, but he seems like a good judge.)

Great judge whom challenging is a shame.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

This is why the US is one of two countries to have judicial elections.

[brucejoel99]

State Investigations Create More Peril for Trump Prosecutor in Georgia – A claim made about the prosecutor, Fani Willis, at a State Senate hearing proved false, but it hinted at the turbulence she might face even if an effort to disqualify her fails

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/07/us/fani-willis-trump-georgia-state-investigation.html

A new investigation unfolding at the Georgia State Capitol is previewing the turbulence that Fani T. Willis, the district attorney prosecuting Donald J. Trump, may face even if a judge allows her to keep the high-stakes case.

At a hearing on Wednesday before a special committee of the State Senate, which recently began investigating Ms. Willis, the defense lawyer leading the disqualification effort testified that Ms. Willis had once taken a large sum of money from her political campaign for her personal use.

The senator presiding over the hearing, Bill Cowsert, a Republican, was taken aback by the allegation. "I think all of us up here that have campaigns know that you can't take campaign funds for personal use, right?" he asked.

The defense lawyer, Ashleigh Merchant, told Mr. Cowsert that she was "not well versed in that area of law, but that is my understanding." He replied, "It's pretty black and white."

There is no evidence to back up the allegation. In fact, Ms. Willis lent her first campaign nearly $50,000, drawn from a retirement account, and was paid back only a fraction of that, according to her office, campaign finance records and her past remarks.

But the incident reflected that even if Ms. Willis survives the effort to disqualify her, she would face tough inquiries by Georgia Republicans that could perpetuate questions about her character and uncertainty around the Trump case for months to come.

[emailking]

Ok so one of these crooks' attorneys lied about her in court, she didn't do anything wrong though.

[emailking]

Judge dismisses 6 charges against Trump, dealing with solicitation of violation of an oath by a public officer.

[emailking]

It is a technicality, there is not enough specificity of the oath alleged to be violated. The prosecution can replead these counts if they can fix it.

[wbrocks67]

How in the world are we dismissing the charges related to the phone call to Raffensberger?!

https://twitter.com/john12948833/status/1767918803654988261

[wbrocks67]

However, this doesn't seem like something that would happen if Willis was to be kicked off the case.

[emailking]

Judge dismisses some Trump Georgia election subversion charges but leaves most of the case intact

The presiding judge in the Georgia criminal case against Donald Trump and his allies has thrown out some of the charges against the former president and several of his co-defendants.

The partial dismissal by Georgia Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee leaves most of the sprawling racketeering indictment intact.

McAfee ruled that six charges in the 41-count indictment related to Trump and some co-defendants allegedly soliciting the violation of oath by a public officer lacked the required detail about what underlying crime the defendants were soliciting.

...

“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,” McAfee added. “They do not give the Defendants enough information to prepare their defenses intelligently, as the Defendants could have violated the Constitutions and thus the statute in dozens, if not hundreds, of distinct ways.”

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/13/politics/georgia-trump-mcafee-election-interference-case/index.html

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

How in the world are we dismissing the charges related to the phone call to Raffensberger?!

https://twitter.com/john12948833/status/1767918803654988261

I think I read that the charges weren't specific enough and that they can be refiled, but not a lawyer ofc ofc. 

[OSR stands with Israel]

Judge McAfee seems to be a very fair judge.  I doubt that he'll let the fact that someone is running against him affect his decision.  (Is that naive?  Maybe so, but he seems like a good judge.)

Great judge whom challenging is a shame.

What would happen if he loses while the trial is going on

[Neo-Malthusian Misanthrope]

Regarding the dropped charges, this is such a case of getting off on a technicality that it's ridiculous. If you can dodge being charged with soliciting somebody to violate their oath of office just by using weasely language and not explicitly mentioning the oath itself, then what's the point of even having a broad oath to preserve/protect/whatever the constitution? I had a feeling this whole Fani Willis case was going to collapse under sheer incompetence so I can only hope this is just a legal mechanism for the charges to be re-filed with more specificity.

[Steve from Lambeth]

Does this mean that the Democrats now have to say "Trump has been charged with 85 felonies?"

[GeorgiaModerate]

Does this mean that the Democrats now have to say "Trump has been charged with 85 felonies?"

88.  Trump had three charges dropped (for now).  The other three applied to some of the other defendants.

As has been pointed out above, the DA's office can refile the charges with more detail if they choose.

[emailking]

Note that the call itself can still be used as evidence and as an overt act in the RICO charge. That has not been thrown out. But the individual counts relating to the call were problematic, the judge ruled (but not in a way that can't possibly be overcome).

[emailking]

Does this mean that the Democrats now have to say "Trump has been charged with 85 felonies?"

88.  Trump had three charges dropped (for now).  The other three applied to some of the other defendants.

As has been pointed out above, the DA's office can refile the charges with more detail if they choose.

Yes I was wrong when I said 6 charges were dropped against Trump. 6 overall but only 3 against Trump.