The Fulton CO case goes on.

Your point is moot because just in this case, not to mention others, these people campaigned on "getting Trump".

 

Right out of the anti-Trump's playbook.

 

It GA the law has well defined parameters and it was determined that 19 people's acts were a coordinated attempt in a conspiracy, etc., etc., etc. I do believe, however, proving her case will be an uphill battle. She did use the law to bust a bunch of teachers in a scam they were involved in. So it's not always 'mobsters'.

We shall see.

 

Suspicions aside, there is no conclusive evidence she lied to the court. As a DA, herself, she knows the dangers of lying to a court. Personally, I'm not on board with the suspicion crowd, and, as I've stated before, since there is no crime there, what incentive is there to lie? This idea this idea that she would engage a historic trial, the trial of the century, the indictment of a former US President, and all the national attention and unfathomable pressure it entails and putting her career on the line, that Fani, a $200k per year DA, would do all this in order to score some small time trickle down money from a boyfriend defies credulity.

Some might have a point that she should recuse herself, but since it's the trial of the century, she's not going to let a cheap sensationalism attack on her private life deter her, she's not deterred by sideline barkers and trash talkers.

I wouldn't underestimate her resolve, if I were Trump. In fact, I admire her. She has the courage to indict a former US President, who is clearly someone who deserves to be in jail, having been a despical person his entire adult life, screwing thousands out of millions, and other assorted acts if malfeasance, under the inevitable threats from Trump's equally thug fans. The nattering naysayers on the sidelines are not going to stop Fani, and kudos to her.

You go girl!

 

So you believe it should be legal for a powerful influential individual to conspire with a group of people to excerpt pressure, including veiled threats of physical harm, or financial or political consequences, on government officials to impede constitutionally protected and mandatory acts like, for example, certifying a democratic election?

What would be the difference between that and, for example, how countries like Russia or Venezuela elect their head of state?

 

DA's and AG's often campaign on putting nefarious souls in jail. It's what they do.

BFD.

Your point is moot, therefore.

James campaigned on getting Trump, she was elected, then delivered on that promise. She is doing what she was elected to do, same goes for Fani, doing what she was elected to do. In my entire life, such a thing was always a positive, not a negative, so I have no idea what your problem is.

Only if Trump wasn't a despicable human being, maybe you'd have a point. In New York, before he was elected, he was always hated by New Yorkers. In 2016, in his own state, over 63% didn't vote for him and it was worse than that in NYC. That's unusual for a candidate.

 

Your point is moot.

 

I believe if one's going to call a conspiracy, one should look to find an actual conspiracy rather than a bunch of loosely related threads. A law that used to be about precisely that has now become a law to verbatim mean 'any and every coordination' that we disagree with'.

So much for that right of assembly.

 

Very..

 

Same thing..

 

In the mean time he pretty much ripped the guts out their case via the six charges he dismissed.

 

Fascist gotta Fascist

 

But the cases themselves are a double standard.

 

The "public perception" has been entirely driven by these corrupt prosecutors and the unfairness began before the first indictment was issued and we see playing out as charges are dropped or dismissed against the defendants and she has yet to bring anyone to trial on any of the charges in the indictments. Of course time has been money in her and her married lover boys pockets for all these months. If she had and character she would remove herself and turn it over to a deputy prosecutor in her office or better yet to the state AG and let them determine whether this shoddy case should proceed. She and her loverboy have tainted it enough.

 

Willis and her loverboy are the ones providing the material, too bad it's all based on their abuse of power and corrupt prosecutions.

 

ROFL yea we sure don't want a fair trial do we, Willis would have her arse handed to her if we did.

 

She committed perjury, in coordination with her lover, in conspiracy to mislead the court and obstruct justice. By pretending otherwise and thinking you are fooling anyone, you simply are showing that you have learned nothing since you all claimed that Trump was a Russian spy installed into the WH by Putin. Why some folks think they can just lie their way out of anything, and sell it to the American People, well, there is no conclusive evidence that all the lying is working well for you, at all, and abundant evidence that the American People are more and more progressively sickened by it. But, since it seems to be all they can come up with, by all means continue.

Maybe have Bribed Joe shriek more.

You're still lost. It's not a 'crime' to be someone that you don't like. You can't jail them for it. You can't bar them from office for it, but you can sure launch lawfare against them, which, thank goodness, seems to be failing. Which should put a damper on the next set of idiots trying to rig future elections via lawfare.

Works for me, given what a corrupt lying racist crook she is, I'm fine with her being the face of Lawfare.

Trump's up by nearly 6 points in GA. Bribed Joe will carry Fulton County, which is the electorate for this judge, but the electorate for the appellate judges will be the Trump +6 statewide Georgians.

 

Sure. It must be proven in a court of law. But you didn't answer my question.

You said: "The issue with this interpretation of RICO is that if it's so then RICO becomes all-encompassing, and to me that shouldn't be English/US Law."

Should it be legal for a very powerful person to threatened government officials, threatening them in a veiled way with physical, financial or political harm if they don't do what he needs to elect HIM President?

There is no "right" to assembly for the purpose of overthrowing democratic elections.

 

When I declare someone's point is 'moot', an explanation is given. And moot is offereds as a 'therefore...".

You failed to do that, so your comment is meaningless.

 

My sole reason for wanting a trial;

I’m hoping that the facts/evidence that will be presented in a court of law, will ridicule the Trumpers/prove them wrong…..don’t care about the judge, or jury decision.

 

All the threatening is from Democrats not trump. Begging may be unseemly but it cannot be construed as a threat.

 

Gut? Oh please.

Not at all, noting that only three dismissed were levied against Trump, and overall, the dismissals only amount to a 14% reduction in total (there were 41 charges total). Then, in fact, McAfee explained how she could re-indict with the charges that were dismissed in order to reinstate them, for all she had to do is provide more details so that the defense could better prepare their case. the ONLY reason they were dismissed was due to vagueness in the charges, the charges just needed more detail. So, if those charges are critical to the case, Fani will reindict with more detail, if they are not critical, she'll just move forward. That fact defeats your claim that the 'guts are ripped out'.

 

And the six articles dismissed by the Judge pretty much kill any pretense a RICO. In any case RICO is freqently abused by Prosecutors along with civil forfeiture that both really need to go.

 

But those are at the core. The entire foundation of the case was built on those. What happens to a building when the foundation goes away? It collapses.

 

Yeah, right:



The DELUGE of threats to judges, clerks, etc, is coming from Trump's thug followers prompted into action via his dog whistling to them, which he encourages, and never comes out in any meaningful way to denounce, which is the entire reason he does it, to intimidate without being blamed for it, because that's the kind of weasel he is.