Trump Trial
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
To Understand The Latest Crazy Trump Indictment, Check Out The 6 Types Of Charges
Bucket 1: RICO
The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) count runs some 70 pages and says all 19 defendants, “while associated with an enterprise, unlawfully conspired and endeavored to conduct and participate in, directly and indirectly, such enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity.” The indictment next defines the “enterprise” as “a group of individuals associated in fact,” who “had connections and relationships with one another” and “functioned as a continuing unit for a common purpose of achieving the objectives of the enterprise,” which Willis maintains was “to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.”There are several problems with the RICO count, most fundamentally, as Andrew McCarthy explained in an enlightening article, RICO requires an “enterprise,” which, while not necessarily a formal entity, needs to be an identifiable group. The RICO crime, then, is “being a member of the enterprise that commits crimes, not the commission of any particular crime.”
But there must be some sort of “enterprise,” and here Willis conflates the objective — keeping Trump in power — with “the enterprise.” “It was that objective, and not the sustaining of any group, that brought them together; and once that objective was attained or conclusively defeated, the group — to the dubious extent it really was an identifiable group — would (and did) melt away,” McCarthy wrote. It’s a “good sign that you’re not dealing with a RICO enterprise,” the former federal prosecutor explained.
Without an “enterprise,” there can be no RICO crime, and the facts alleged in the indictment are such that the defendants will likely soon seek dismissal of that count. Now, Georgia law differs from federal law on RICO, and there is no saying how the state court will interpret its own RICO statute, but from a legal perspective, the claim is exceedingly weak.
The second fundamental problem with the RICO count is factual: Willis portrays the defendants as trying to unlawfully change the election in Trump’s favor, but the many actions Trump and others took involved legal proceedings and efforts to convince the legislative bodies to use their authority to address what the defendants saw as a fatally flawed election. A court is unlikely to toss the complaint on this ground, however, with factual disputes ones only a jury can resolve.
However, if the court holds, as it appears it should, that the RICO count fails as a matter of law because there was no “enterprise,” then that factual dispute is irrelevant. Likewise, the 160-some “acts” Willis included in the indictment — everything from Trump declaring victory on Nov. 4 to tweeting that followers should watch a television newscast — allegedly in furtherance of the “RICO” conspiracy become irrelevant.
Bucket 2: Alternate Electors
Bucket 3: Petitioning the Government for Redress
The crimes charged in Counts 5, 28, 38, and 39 fit into a third bucket that consists of efforts by Trump and others to petition the government for redress. Here, the crimes charged include solicitation of violations of oath by public officers and the making of false statements during those efforts, but the common theme is that the defendants sought to have Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger or the Georgia legislature address Trump’s allegations of voting irregularities or fraud.There is nothing criminal, however, in asking the secretary of state to use his authority to investigate and respond to voting irregularities or to ask the legislature to call a special session to name Trump electors. On the contrary, those activities would seemingly be protected by the constitutional guarantee of the right to petition the government for redress.
Bucket 4: False Statements
Bucket 5: Communications Related to Ruby Freeman
Counts 20, 21, 30, and 31 all involve charges concerning efforts to supposedly influence the testimony of Ruby Freeman, who was an election worker at the State Farm Arena. Here, the theory seems to be that some of the defendants attempted to pressure Freeman to lie about what happened during the vote counting. Again, it may be left to a jury to decide this issue.Bucket 6: Accessing Voting Machines and Election Data
It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I would think if his case is indeed removed to a Federal Court, everything could be.
The DA is in fantasy land with this indictment ... well they all have been, criminally charging Trump for LEGALLY challenging the election results
StmarysCity79
Well-Known Member
Of course it was legal to challenge the results.
What was not legal was:
The fake Elector scheme
Pressuring GA And AZ to come up with additional votes that would show Trump won when he knew no such votes existed.
It remains to be seen whether they will be able to prove that inciting violence once he knew he lost is criminally or solely civilly punishable.
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
You don't care about right or wrong. You don't care about guilt or innocence. The only thing you care about is avenging your butthurt from 2016.
Here, fill this out:
There WAS NO FAKE ELECTOR Conspiracy, that is a Democratic Fantasy ....
In Past 20 Years, Democrats Objected 3 Times to Electoral College Certifications
In 2001, House Democrats challenged the certification of electoral votes for then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush, a Republican, but the objection failed because no senator agreed to sign the written objection.
“The objection is in writing, and I do not care that it is not signed by a member of the Senate,” Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said during the 2001 joint session of Congress.
“The chair will advise that the rules do care,” then-Vice President Al Gore, ceremonially presiding over the session, told Waters. Gore was overseeing the very session that would confirm his loss to Bush.
A similar situation occurred in 2017, when then-Vice President Joe Biden oversaw certification of the electoral votes that handed the presidency to Donald Trump. House Democrats challenged the electoral slate, but to no avail, because they lacked support in the Senate.
“It is over,” Biden told Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who objected to the election results during the 2017 session.
The certification challenge in 2005 was the only instance in recent years in which both a senator and a House member signed a formal objection to an electoral slate. Then-Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, and then-Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., together challenged Bush’s victory in Ohio on grounds of alleged voter irregularities.
The House and Senate adjourned and met separately for no more than two hours, as the Constitution stipulates, but ultimately neither Jones nor Boxer was able to gain enough votes from their respective colleagues to alter Ohio’s electoral slate.
A tweet Monday from conservative author and filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza shared a video compilation of some of the times Democratic lawmakers have objected to Electoral College certification over the past 20 years.
More Democratic Fantasy
I READ THE GEORGIA INDICTMENT, SO YOU DON’T HAVE TO
“Overt Act 6” is a typical example of these allegations:
But again, so what? Taking legal steps to try to overturn the apparent result of an election is not illegal. That is what Al Gore did. It is what Stacey Abrams did. It is how Al Franken got into the Senate. In Trump’s case, his legal arguments were uniformly weak. But it is not a crime to make a bad legal argument. If it were, the U.S. would be suffering from a shortage of lawyers.
Kinnakeet
Well-Known Member
I have no words to describe you and your BS at the moment
Explain why you like biden and do not like Trump
StmarysCity79
Well-Known Member
Because Biden isn't facing over 100 federal and state indictments for betraying his constitutional duty.
Please read this and tell me you still support Trump. If you can then you are not an American. You are a Trump supporter first and foremost.
According to the congressional committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, Trump and his allies sought to overturn his defeat by convincing Republican-controlled legislatures in battleground states to name their own Trump-friendly electors or refuse to name any electors, even though Biden had won the popular vote in those places.
Law professor John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro, an adviser to Trump's campaign, wrote legal memos arguing that state legislatures had the authority to choose their own electors, according to the committee's final report.
Trump and supporters including Rudy Giuliani, his former personal lawyer, urged legislators in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Georgia to take this step, but none did so. (A Georgia prosecutor is investigating attempts to reverse Trump's defeat in that state.)
Nevertheless, Trump and his allies assembled their own slates of electors in seven states that he lost. Those electors met on Dec. 14, 2020, to cast their votes for Trump - the same day when legitimate electors cast their ballots for Biden.
Those ballots had no legal standing, but Trump and his supporters used them to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to discard the actual results from the states in question when he presided over Congress's Jan. 6, 2021 session to certify the election outcome.
That would have left Biden short of the needed 270-vote majority, giving Republicans in Congress a chance to declare Trump the victor.
Pence refused to go along with the scheme, saying he did not have the authority to reject electors.
On Jan. 6, Trump held a rally in front of the White House and told the crowd that it would be a "sad day for our country" if Pence did not do as he wished. Thousands of his supporters then attacked the Capitol in an unsuccessful attempt to derail the proceedings.
Five people died and more than 140 police were injured. The Capitol suffered millions of dollars in damage.
More than 1,000 people have been charged for crimes related to the Jan. 6 attack.
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/UFPOKM4PTJLEFGB22INWJQ73RE.jpg)
Explainer: What is the 'fake electors' scheme Trump supporters tried after his 2020 loss?
A federal indictment of Donald Trump issued on Tuesday included a charge that the Republican then-president and co-conspirators sought slates of phony electors to support his false claims that he won the 2020 election against Democrat Joe Biden.
Kinnakeet
Well-Known Member
I do support TRUMP and I know that all of this BS is just that BS,they are trying to stop him from winning the white house that is all, and you know god dam well that biden is corrupt and you also know that their is no way he got 81 million votes because there is no way that there is that many dumb ass people in AMERICA to vote for him! except for you,so please stop with your BS get back in your cellar hole and keep playing some stupid game you got for X-mas on your XboxBecause Biden isn't facing over 100 federal and state indictments for betraying his constitutional duty.
Please read this and tell me you still support Trump. If you can then you are not an American. You are a Trump supporter first and foremost.
According to the congressional committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, Trump and his allies sought to overturn his defeat by convincing Republican-controlled legislatures in battleground states to name their own Trump-friendly electors or refuse to name any electors, even though Biden had won the popular vote in those places.
Law professor John Eastman and Kenneth Chesebro, an adviser to Trump's campaign, wrote legal memos arguing that state legislatures had the authority to choose their own electors, according to the committee's final report.
Trump and supporters including Rudy Giuliani, his former personal lawyer, urged legislators in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona and Georgia to take this step, but none did so. (A Georgia prosecutor is investigating attempts to reverse Trump's defeat in that state.)
Nevertheless, Trump and his allies assembled their own slates of electors in seven states that he lost. Those electors met on Dec. 14, 2020, to cast their votes for Trump - the same day when legitimate electors cast their ballots for Biden.
Those ballots had no legal standing, but Trump and his supporters used them to pressure then-Vice President Mike Pence to discard the actual results from the states in question when he presided over Congress's Jan. 6, 2021 session to certify the election outcome.
That would have left Biden short of the needed 270-vote majority, giving Republicans in Congress a chance to declare Trump the victor.
Pence refused to go along with the scheme, saying he did not have the authority to reject electors.
On Jan. 6, Trump held a rally in front of the White House and told the crowd that it would be a "sad day for our country" if Pence did not do as he wished. Thousands of his supporters then attacked the Capitol in an unsuccessful attempt to derail the proceedings.
Five people died and more than 140 police were injured. The Capitol suffered millions of dollars in damage.
More than 1,000 people have been charged for crimes related to the Jan. 6 attack.
Explainer: What is the 'fake electors' scheme Trump supporters tried after his 2020 loss?
A federal indictment of Donald Trump issued on Tuesday included a charge that the Republican then-president and co-conspirators sought slates of phony electors to support his false claims that he won the 2020 election against Democrat Joe Biden.www.reuters.com
StmarysCity79
Well-Known Member
So i take it you didn't read the article.?
Why would you want to be willfully ignorant?
If you believe that Pence ahd the power to choose the president you msut believe Kamala harris has that same power to choose the next president no?
I showed you facts with quotes and proof and all you spewed was a bunch of insults.
Your argument is not convincing.
You sound like a brain washed 12 year old child.
Trump couldn't win last time. Why would anyone need to stop him from winning? He's done nothing but lose his whole life
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
My malware program just identified you as a potential Chinese virus.
Congratulations!
Aren't all Democrats Viruses?My malware program just identified you as a potential Chinese virus.
Congratulations!
gemma_rae
Well-Known Member
Well, yes. But I figured SMC already new that though.
Hey dumbass, she does have that power in one instance. Probably need to explain it to a rube like you. Here goes - VP Harris can call for invoking the 25th Amendment and if she gets the majority of the cabinet to agree with her, she could become the President.
StmarysCity79
Well-Known Member
Whats your point?
Pence could have done the same and on more than one occasion discussed doing so because of Trumps unstable behavior and his near death from Covid.
The question is do you believe Pence followed the constitution and did his duty under it on January 6th?