What makes this a RICO case

[Mac1958]

Not really. Since Republicans made up a majority of the witnesses against Trump in the Grand Jury.

Republican Governor and Secretary of State are among those.

These people have to brush that fact off with the RINO tag. From the first day of the Insurrection Committee's hearings on, we've had a non-stop line of Republicans, Trump staffers, and Trump lawyers testifying UNDER OATH against him, while the orange mafia remains in hiding behind the Fifth Amendment. The rubes can't change that.

That said, Willis has gone the opposite direction that Smith did. Smith took much smaller, bite-sized pieces that he's confident he can win. Willis has gone BIG. And the bigger the case, the bigger the risk. I admire her effort, but this case is massive. A lot can go wrong.

 

[Delldude]

Solitary confinement with one S.S. guard on the hall at all times.
Special meal/dining restrictions.
Supervision for rec. time on the yard with one S.S. guard at all times.
Problem solved.

Doesn't work that way.

Hard time at Bedminster or Mar A Lago with an ankle bracelet. Dining on Lobster and Caviar.

 

[MagicMike]

Not to point out the obvious flaw in your petty effort to dismiss the problem, or anything, but ….

Why would the secret service allow some prison guards to have any access to the former President? If he tried to flee, they’d have to stop him bodily. The secret service would, instead, have to keep the inmate shielded away from correction guards.

Might as well not have him in prison at all.

Well I suppose it's all just going to have to be figured out isn't it.
It is certainly an unpreceded situation that is going to call for unprecedented solutions.
How to incarcerate a former POTUS?
The one thing that does seem clear is that IF he is convicted and sentenced to prison not serving actual time cannot be an option.
That would be a two-tiered system of justice.
The U.S. Constitution makes it clear with it's simplicity in Article II that a U.S. President shall be basically an "ordinary person." Not royalty or celebrity. Nothing special or "above" the common man.
Therefore, once convicted, Trump's sentence shouldn't be any different than any other joe blow convicted of the same crime.
It's the American way.
We can't have one standard of justice for "ordinary" people and another for the "elites."
That's bannanna republic stuff.

 

[Delldude]

Well I suppose it's all just going to have to be figured out isn't it.
It is certainly an unpreceded situation that is going to call for unprecedented solutions.

Now you change your position.....LOL.

We can't have one standard of justice for "ordinary" people and another for the "elites."
That's bannanna republic stuff.

Dude, we been there for several decades....Ask Hillary.

 

[BackAgain]

Well I suppose it's all just going to have to be figured out isn't it.

Not necessarily. But you go on doing you. I gotta say. It is fun to laugh at you.

 

[Flopper]

Well I suppose it's all just going to have to be figured out isn't it.
It is certainly an unpreceded situation that is going to call for unprecedented solutions.
How to incarcerate a former POTUS?
The one thing that does seem clear is that IF he is convicted and sentenced to prison not serving actual time cannot be an option.
That would be a two-tiered system of justice.
The U.S. Constitution makes it clear with it's simplicity in Article II that a U.S. President shall be basically an "ordinary person." Not royalty or celebrity. Nothing special or "above" the common man.
Therefore, once convicted, Trump's sentence shouldn't be any different than any other joe blow convicted of the same crime.
It's the American way.
We can't have one standard of justice for "ordinary" people and another for the "elites."
That's bannanna republic stuff.

If he is convicted of federal crimes, I expect Joe Biden will commute his sentence before he leaves office but the convictions will stand. However, his freedom may be short lived because there is still his crimes in New York and Georgia.

 

[elektra]

Here is link. I assume you can read.

Read the full text of the Georgia Trump indictment document to learn more about the charges and co-conspirators

The Georgia grand jury investigating former President Trump returned indictments on election fraud, racketeering and other charges.

www.cbsnews.com

quote from it and make a point, I mine as well just do this in response:

you are wrong, read it and weep

Google

Search the world's information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you're looking for.

www.google.com

 

[SavannahMann]

MuddledMikey doesn’t know a single thing about the law or the bogus cases against Trump. But he pontificates all day every day. One of the worst cases of TDS seen to date.

People who do know about the Law are who I listen to. People who are, you know, Lawyers. Like this fellow.



Now watching that video it appears as though a Conviction is possible, perhaps even likely.

So the question remains, why do you think the charges are bogus?

 

[Delldude]

So the question remains, why do you think the charges are bogus?

You are aware, the likelihood of Trump being convicted, if so, will be several years down the road after appeals, motions and so on. There is a very real chance He would be in His second term while these things go on.

And, if seated, motions could be made to postpone and/or dismiss these cases as they would be interfering with His official duties as President.

 

[SavannahMann]

You are aware, the likelihood of Trump being convicted, if so, will be several years down the road after appeals, motions and so on. There is a very real chance He would be in His second term while these things go on.

And, if seated, motions could be made to postpone and/or dismiss these cases as they would be interfering with His official duties as President.

Actually. If Trump is elected in 2024 that would be his second term. That is the first factual error.

Second. This is Georgia. And the penalty if Trump is convicted is Prison. No alternative exists in the law. The Governor does not have the power to commute or pardon. So once the Guilty verdict is handed down, then Trump will be taken into custody. They are not going to let him head to Mar A Lago to await the appeals.

Third. There is a good probability that this trial will take place next year. Georgia can drag their feet but there is a desire to get this over with. And when they want to do that they can move quickly.

When the Appeals Court does overturn a conviction. It is almost always because of a serious procedural error. Some evidence was improperly kept out of the trial or the instructions to the Jury were problematic.

Trumps line of defense so far seems to be that the Election was really stolen. And that justifies his illegal activity.

That defense isn’t going to fly. For several reasons. First. The State of Georgia themselves investigated and found no fraud. Second. The position of Trump’s own DOJ is that no fraud took place. His own Attorney General is on record.

Finally. If you have proof of a crime you are required by law to provide that to the Authorities. Trump had accusations, but no proof. The proof he rejected said he lost fair and square.

Finally. Circumstances may allow you to break a law in the interest of safety or some such thing. It is illegal to break into a car. But if you smash the window to rescue a pet or child trapped in the car. That crime is waived because no jury would convict you. There is a time element that didn’t allow you to wait for lawful authority to take action. The Good Samaritan exemption.

You can not conspire to violate the law and then claim it is in the interest of Justice. You can not engage others to violate the law and claim it is legal because of your job.

Trump told the people in authority of his suspicions. They told him they had looked at it and found nothing wrong. He told the Attorney General and the AG said there was no evidence of fraud. He fired people who said they could not launch investigations on his say so. There had to be some evidence. Probable cause. And there was none.

 

[surada]

dog whistles, you must be kidding, are you really that dumb, to believe Trump uses dog whistles? And if so, that is so far from being a crime or conspiracy you are a fool for repeating it.

Of course, we also have tough guy Biden, who should be arrested for assaulting the public, for actually challenging people to fist fights. But we dont, because you are not in charge of deciding that speech is a crime.

all that crap? You know what is crap, running out of baby food, giving ten of billions of dollars of weapons to the taliban, allowing our ambassador in Libya to be murdered, giving Iran the money to build nuclear weapons, looking the other way while they build nuclear weapons.

Trump did not do one damn thing wrong as president and even made america better, despite the fools like you rallying against Trump.

You are on the wrong side of history, foolish enough to listen to what CNN and everyone tells you, dictates to you

You're ignorant on every claim.

 

[Delldude]

Actually. If Trump is elected in 2024 that would be his second term. That is the first factual error.

That is what I said, you must have missed it.

Second. This is Georgia. And the penalty if Trump is convicted is Prison. No alternative exists in the law. The Governor does not have the power to commute or pardon. So once the Guilty verdict is handed down, then Trump will be taken into custody. They are not going to let him head to Mar A Lago to await the appeals.

He'd be free on pending appeals.

Third. There is a good probability that this trial will take place next year. Georgia can drag their feet but there is a desire to get this over with. And when they want to do that they can move quickly.

Fani made a huge procedural mistake in trying to put some 19 defendants on trial at the same time.....she blew the trial timeline....motions and appeals prior to the trial will delay that.

Trumps line of defense so far seems to be that the Election was really stolen. And that justifies his illegal activity.

I wasn't aware He did anything illegal.

You can not conspire to violate the law and then claim it is in the interest of Justice. You can not engage others to violate the law and claim it is legal because of your job.

I wasn't aware He conspired at all.

Trump told the people in authority of his suspicions. They told him they had looked at it and found nothing wrong. He told the Attorney General and the AG said there was no evidence of fraud. He fired people who said they could not launch investigations on his say so. There had to be some evidence. Probable cause. And there was none.

So, in the end, Trump didn't believe them, I don't think that's against the law.

 

[SavannahMann]

That is what I said, you must have missed it.

He'd be free on pending appeals.[/Q]

Really? So when people are convicted in court they are turned loose because they will file an appeal?

They may be released on bail depending on the severity of their crimes or they may be held in jail until such time as the sentencing goes forward. It depends on the penalties mandated by law. In this case. The RICO charge alone mandates a minimum of five years in prison.

Fani made a huge procedural mistake in trying to put some 19 defendants on trial at the same time.....she blew the trial timeline....motions and appeals prior to the trial will delay that.[/Q]

The motions so far are going to be viewed as a waste of the Courts time. The argument from Mark Meadows that the case should be moved to Federal Court so he can claim immunity. Come on.

The Constitution specifies that crimes shall be tired in the district in which the crime was committed.

I wasn't aware He did anything illegal.

I wasn't aware He conspired at all.

So, in the end, Trump didn't believe them, I don't think that's against the law.

It is absolutely legal for you to believe anything you want. What is not legal is for you to commit crimes based upon that belief.

In Georgia it is illegal to pressure, threaten, or coerce a public official to violate their oath of office. That was one of a slew of crimes passed by the legislature decades ago to put an end to the small town good old boys club.

Trump did that with his letters and phone calls. It will be bad for you if you don’t do this.

I don’t know why I am writing out what was in the video. A lawyer explained it using simple language. If you choose not to watch and learn what and why, I’m not going to waste any more time on it.

I personally think the case will go to trial in June, or July next year. The good news for Trump is that the Presumptive Nominee will have a lot of time with all the free publicity he could want.

 

[BackAgain]

People who do know about the Law are who I listen to. People who are, you know, Lawyers. Like this fellow.



Now watching that video it appears as though a Conviction is possible, perhaps even likely.

So the question remains, why do you think the charges are bogus?

Because I read the charges. The Bragg one was and is absurd. Charging him based on alleged violations of ?? Well, why bother stating what the underlying alleged violations were? Honestly, that shit should be tossed pre-trial.

Then we turn to Ga. Charging him basically for free speech. Boil down Fani’s allegations, and that’s the main thing. Not just criminal charges for speech, but for political speech. Political speech was the primary thrust of our Constitution’s guarantee of free speech. Fani is a disgrace.

Now let’s turn to the special counsel’s two cases. 1st, Florida. Trump had physical possession of items he was legally entitled to possess. There is zero proof that any of those items were still classified after being removed from the White House. And the PRA suggests that they might be the property of the US. But who (as per the PRA) gets to determine which documents qualify as “Presidential” Records. Ho ahead. Do as I did. Review the PRA. But you won’t find out any more than anybody else. Smith’s case is partisan political crap.

Then, go to his DC case about 1/6. Trump is obviously uninvolved. He never asked anyone to become “violent.” He wasn’t there. He did ask the protestors to behave legally. And he was well within his right to rely on the advice of counsel to seek to have VP Pence refuse to certify. (I disagree that it would have been proper. I happen to agree with Pence. But that doesn’t make a fair reliance on the advice of a lawyer a criminal action.)

Your sources are lawyers. So what? Eastman himself is a lawyer. So was Ms. Powell. So is Rudy. Lawyers can and do often disagree.

 

[Lastamender]

This latest indictment in Georgia ties together all the loose ends of Trump's desperate, attempted coup.
A guy like Trump, once installed in The Oval Office, had no intention of ever turning his little fiefdom over to anybody else. Ever.
Election be damned!
His narcissistic hubris allowed him to believe that he could actually get away with STEALING a U.S. election, and the Covid-19 pandemic gave him the perfect "crisis" backdrop to try to pull it off.
These plans for this coup were actually developed long before election day 2020. Trump and his freakish ensemble of indicted co-conspirators were putting together the plans to steal the election in the event Trump lost WAY before the first ballots were even cast.
This was a sweeping, multi-faceted, illegal conspiracy to subvert U.S. Democracy and seize power through illegal means up to and including violence as evidenced by Trump's minions storming the U.S. Capitol in a hail-mary, last ditch attempt to keep the votes from being certified once stealing the election through pseudo- "legal" avenues had failed.
This attempted coup had numerous moving parts....and these Georgia indictments are going to put them all together with overwhelming EVIDENCE showing that none of it happened randomly....in isolation.
It was a HUGE criminal conspiracy with Trump's lust for absolute power right at the center of a tangle of evil syncophants.
And now they are all going down!

As the indictment notes, Trump "made a nationally televised speech falsely declaring victory in the 2020 election" on Nov. 4, 2020 — days before the vote-counting was actually complete. When the ultimate tally showed that Democrat Joe Biden won both the popular and electoral votes, Trump began falsely claiming the election was "rigged" with fraudulent votes.

But according to the indictment, that message was one he had planned even before the election took place.

From the indictment: "Approximately four days [before the 2020 election], on or about October 31, 2020, Donald John Trump discussed a draft speech with unindicted co-conspirator number 1, whose identity is known to the Grand Jury, that falsely declared victory and falsely claimed voter fraud. The speech was an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

SmartNews - Discover your world every day

Trusted by over 40+ million worldwide readers, SmartNews provides the best news, stories and events across 200+ local news sites.

l.smartnews.com

Nothing makes this a RICO case. They will find that out in court.

 

[SavannahMann]

Because I read the charges. The Bragg one was and is absurd. Charging him based on alleged violations of ?? Well, why bother stating what the underlying alleged violations were? Honestly, that shit should be tossed pre-trial.

Then we turn to Ga. Charging him basically for free speech. Boil down Fani’s allegations, and that’s the main thing. Not just criminal charges for speech, but for political speech. Political speech was the primary thrust of our Constitution’s guarantee of free speech. Fani is a disgrace.

Now let’s turn to the special counsel’s two cases. 1st, Florida. Trump had physical possession of items he was legally entitled to possess. There is zero proof that any of those items were still classified after being removed from the White House. And the PRA suggests that they might be the property of the US. But who (as per the PRA) gets to determine which documents qualify as “Presidential” Records. Ho ahead. Do as I did. Review the PRA. But you won’t find out any more than anybody else. Smith’s case is partisan political crap.

Then, go to his DC case about 1/6. Trump is obviously uninvolved. He never asked anyone to become “violent.” He wasn’t there. He did ask the protestors to behave legally. And he was well within his right to rely on the advice of counsel to seek to have VP Pence refuse to certify. (I disagree that it would have been proper. I happen to agree with Pence. But that doesn’t make a fair reliance on the advice of a lawyer a criminal action.)

Your sources are lawyers. So what? Eastman himself is a lawyer. So was Ms. Powell. So is Rudy. Lawyers can and do often disagree.

Rudy has had his law license revoked. I’m certain you can’t call him to represent you.

Eastman is arguing since he is indicted the case to revoke his law license should be put on hold. The Judge said no. So his legal acumen seems in question.

Sidney Powell kept hers because of a technicality. So she wouldn’t be my first choice as a lawyer.

 

[BackAgain]

Rudy has had his law license revoked.

Nope. It has been suspended. Not quite the same thing.

But even if he had, already, been disbarred, he had not been at the time.

I’m certain you can’t call him to represent you.

Wasn’t planning on it.

Eastman is arguing since he is indicted the case to revoke his law license should be put on hold. The Judge said no. So his legal acumen seems in question.

Why? Because a judge disagrees? Judges disagree with lawyers all the time. Judges get reversed too, you know.

Sidney Powell kept hers because of a technicality. So she wouldn’t be my first choice as a lawyer.

Irrelevant to the entire conversation.

You think a client is only allowed to rely on the legal advice of a licensed lawyer when that lawyer is not later subject to legal discipline?

Snap out of it. I don’t care at all what happens to Ms. Powell. OR Rudy. Or Eastman. But I do care that a lawyer like Eastman is being charged (in all practical effect) for providing a legal analysis.

I’m sure you see no danger in such behavior.

 

[SavannahMann]

Nope. It has been suspended. Not quite the same thing.

But even if he had, already, been disbarred, he had not been at the time.

Wasn’t planning on it.

Why? Because a judge disagrees? Judges disagree with lawyers all the time. Judges get reversed too, you know.

Irrelevant to the entire conversation.

You think a client is only allowed to rely on the legal advice of a licensed lawyer when that lawyer is not later subject to legal discipline?

Snap out of it. I don’t care at all what happens to Ms. Powell. OR Rudy. Or Eastman. But I do care that a lawyer like Eastman is being charged (in all practical effect) for providing a legal analysis.

I’m sure you see no danger in such behavior.

Lawyers are required to do certain things. Among the requirements is that they offer advice that is both legal and ethical. Moreover the aforementioned Lawyer can’t enter false evidence into the court, or allow it to be entered in court.

An example. If you told your Lawyer that you robbed a bank, but you have three people who will swear you were with your dying Grandfather. The lawyer can not enter that into evidence.

This is why they keep saying that Trump is where Lawyers go to lose their license. A lot of lawyers have. And it’s not easy to keep your license. You have to be honest. For some people that is incredibly difficult.

 

[Delldude]

Really? So when people are convicted in court they are turned loose because they will file an appeal?

They may be released on bail depending on the severity of their crimes or they may be held in jail until such time as the sentencing goes forward. It depends on the penalties mandated by law. In this case. The RICO charge alone mandates a minimum of five years in prison.



The motions so far are going to be viewed as a waste of the Courts time. The argument from Mark Meadows that the case should be moved to Federal Court so he can claim immunity. Come on.

The Constitution specifies that crimes shall be tired in the district in which the crime was committed.


It is absolutely legal for you to believe anything you want. What is not legal is for you to commit crimes based upon that belief.

In Georgia it is illegal to pressure, threaten, or coerce a public official to violate their oath of office. That was one of a slew of crimes passed by the legislature decades ago to put an end to the small town good old boys club.

Trump did that with his letters and phone calls. It will be bad for you if you don’t do this.

I don’t know why I am writing out what was in the video. A lawyer explained it using simple language. If you choose not to watch and learn what and why, I’m not going to waste any more time on it.

I personally think the case will go to trial in June, or July next year. The good news for Trump is that the Presumptive Nominee will have a lot of time with all the free publicity he could want.

You have found Trump already guilty on all counts. Last I heard, He hasn't been tried.

Your lawyer video................There's other opinions on this whole clown circus out there if you need more lawyerly input.

 

[BackAgain]

Lawyers are required to do certain things. Among the requirements is that they offer advice that is both legal and ethical. Moreover the aforementioned Lawyer can’t enter false evidence into the court, or allow it to be entered in court.

An example. If you told your Lawyer that you robbed a bank, but you have three people who will swear you were with your dying Grandfather. The lawyer can not enter that into evidence.

This is why they keep saying that Trump is where Lawyers go to lose their license. A lot of lawyers have. And it’s not easy to keep your license. You have to be honest. For some people that is incredibly difficult.

Lawyers are free to provide legal opinions with which other lawyers may not agree.

Doing so is not illegal nor unethical.

So, if you were trying to make a point, you failed again.