Update on Trump Legal Cases

[flockofseagulls104]

It's no coincidence that Former Guy has been channeling his inner fuhrer on the same week that leaked videos from Former Guy's former lawyers Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell--both of whom have already pled guilty in the Georgia RICO case--prove what every normal American has known for years: Former Guy had always intended to ignore the will of the American people in 2020 and had always intended to stay in power no matter how bigly he would lose the election.

I don't want to say that DA Fani Willis's case is now a slam dunk thanks to those videos, but she's clutching the basketball in mid-air while the entire defense is busy bloviating in front of the cameras.

Strange, then, that he didn't. Strange how it's all third-party hearsay. Strange how no one is at all interested in the leaks. Strangely reminiscent of all the other attempts to find a crime for the man. But it all rings true for all you strange people.

[silverscreenselect]

Strange how no one is at all interested in the leaks. Strangely reminiscent of all the other attempts to find a crime for the man. But it all rings true for all you strange people.

Actually, the judge is very interested, and we've found the source of the leaks. From today's Atlanta Journal

A Fulton County judge Wednesday said he would draft an order protecting some evidence from pre-trial disclosure in the Donald Trump election interference case — even as a defense attorney admitted he had already leaked witness interviews to the news media. Prosecutors and most defense attorneys in the case tentatively agreed to an order that would allow some evidence shared during the pre-trial discovery process to be labeled “sensitive” and withheld from public scrutiny, at least initially. At a hearing Wednesday, Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee indicated he would draft a protective order based on the proposed compromise.

The judge’s decision followed a courtroom admission by Jonathan Miller — an attorney for defendant Misty Hampton — that he leaked some previously undisclosed videotaped testimony to the news media earlier this week. Miller said the testimony aided his client’s case and “the public needs to know that.”
McAfee admonished Miller and cited the leak as evidence of the need for a protective order. “It seems like having open (evidence) files for everyone to start litigating the case before we actually get inside of a courtroom comes with a lot of side effects that I don’t know if we’ve thought through,” McAfee said.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/judge-to-i ... WYK3UDE5M/

[flockofseagulls104]

Still, even if these third-party hearsay leaks are true, he is only guilty of saying something that democrats didn't like. That is supposed to be what the First Amendment to the Constitution allows us all to do. And he never acted upon it, did he?

And no matter how they try and stamp it out, at least half the country believes Trump is right. Confidence in our election system is at an all-time low. Prosecuting Trump is not going to change that. The Election Interference Enablers are the ones preventing all attempts at restoring confidence in the system.

This is what they do in third-world countries. Pressure people to say what they want them to say to go after their targets. If you don't we have ways of breaking you. These people all should be prosecuted themselves. Willis should have been arrested at her fund-raiser in Washington.

It is all thoroughly disgusting. They will ultimately get what they deserve.

[wbtravis007]

Still, even if these third-party hearsay leaks are true, he is only guilty of saying something that democrats didn't like. That is supposed to be what the First Amendment to the Constitution allows us all to do. And he never acted upon it, did he?

And no matter how they try and stamp it out, at least half the country believes Trump is right. Confidence in our election system is at an all-time low. Prosecuting Trump is not going to change that. The Election Interference Enablers are the ones preventing all attempts at restoring confidence in the system.

This is what they do in third-world countries. Pressure people to say what they want them to say to go after their targets. If you don't we have ways of breaking you. These people all should be prosecuted themselves. Willis should have been arrested at her fund-raiser in Washington.

It is all thoroughly disgusting. They will ultimately get what they deserve.

Wow.

Just wow.

[Pastor Fireball]

One of Former Guy's RICO co-conspirators, Harrison Floyd, may soon have his bail revoked and end up back in jail. He violated the terms of his bail agreement by making no fewer than 14 recent attempts to intimidate co-defendants and witnesses--including none other than Georgia's Republican Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, recipient of the infamous phone call where Former Guy tried to "find 11,780 votes".

[flockofseagulls104]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/co ... r-AA1jLsF7

[flockofseagulls104]

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-conte ... motion.pdf

[silverscreenselect]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/co ... r-AA1jLsF7

This ruling is on a motion for summary judgment filed by the state of Georgia. That means that there are no factual issues and that the state is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. As the court said, "the motion should be granted only if no rational factfinder could return a verdict in favor of the non-moving party." There are no witnesses in this sort of hearing. Instead, both sides present documentary evidence, including affidavits and depositions, to support their claims. The court did not find that it believed the claims about the voting machines, only that the Halderman report that Flock has mentioned several times before. The state did not introduce its own evidence on the issue (a mistake in hindsight), instead centering its defense on a contention that the plaintiffs in this case lacked standing to sue. The court said that the evidence in the Halderman report presented a factual issue that would have to be resolved at trial where (a) the state can present its own evidence and (b) the state can attack Halderman's findings under cross-examination. The court summed it up: "Still, the Court reminds the reader that this Order allows Plaintiffs' constitutional claims, with some exceptions, simply means that there are sufficient factual disputes underlying the legal disputes here to require a trial." The "some exceptions" refers to some of Plaintiffs' claims that were thrown out on the motion for summary judgment (including naming Fulton County election officials as defendants in the case).

https://www.ajc.com/politics/georgia-el ... SFRRNV2MM/

[silverscreenselect]

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-conte ... motion.pdf

It's not uncommon for Defendants to move for a mistrial. The motion will be heard by Judge Engoron. You don't have to go far to find out how flimsy Trump's case is. The first authority he cites is an article appearing in the National Review last week. Of course, the National Review is perhaps the leading conservative political publication in the country Yet Trump's lawyers refer to this article as originating from "commentators politically opposed to President Trump." Andrew McCarthy, the author of this article, also wrote a book, Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. That book is about the supposed collusion between Hillary Clinton and Obama to right the 2016 election. You name a right-wing conspiracy theory, Andrew McCarthy buys into it.

Once I saw that argument, I didn't have to read the remainder of the nonsense in this motion.

[flockofseagulls104]

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-conte ... motion.pdf

It's not uncommon for Defendants to move for a mistrial. The motion will be heard by Judge Engoron. You don't have to go far to find out how flimsy Trump's case is. The first authority he cites is an article appearing in the National Review last week. Of course, the National Review is perhaps the leading conservative political publication in the country Yet Trump's lawyers refer to this article as originating from "commentators politically opposed to President Trump." Andrew McCarthy, the author of this article, also wrote a book, Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. That book is about the supposed collusion between Hillary Clinton and Obama to right the 2016 election. You name a right-wing conspiracy theory, Andrew McCarthy buys into it.

Once I saw that argument, I didn't have to think about the remainder of the nonsense in this motion. Whew!

Fixed it for you.

[Bob78164]

The Colorado trial court reached its decision. It found that Donny did engage in insurrection (via incitement) and that his conduct was not protected by the First Amendment. However, the court also found that the Insurrection Clause does not apply to the office of President and it does not apply to those whose only oath was the Presidential Oath of Office. Accordingly, the trial court ruled that Donny gets to remain on the ballot.

The case will undoubtedly be appealed. The factual findings (the opinion is 102 pages long) mean that if appellate courts disagree with the trial court's conclusion about the scope of the Insurrection Clause, there will be no need for a retrial. The appellate courts can simply order judgment against Donny. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

The Colorado trial court reached its decision. It found that Donny did engage in insurrection (via incitement) and that his conduct was not protected by the First Amendment. However, the court also found that the Insurrection Clause does not apply to the office of President and it does not apply to those whose only oath was the Presidential Oath of Office. Accordingly, the trial court ruled that Donny gets to remain on the ballot.

The case will undoubtedly be appealed. The factual findings (the opinion is 102 pages long) mean that if appellate courts disagree with the trial court's conclusion about the scope of the Insurrection Clause, there will be no need for a retrial. The appellate courts can simply order judgment against Donny. --Bob

What a bunch of pure bullshit.

One Judge - Judge Sarah Wallace - decides that?

"Oh yeah, sounds like insurrection to me!"

Just like one judge is joyfully playing around with Trump in NY.

[silverscreenselect]

What a bunch of pure bullshit.

One Judge - Judge Sarah Wallace - decides that?

"Oh yeah, sounds like insurrection to me!"

Just like one judge is joyfully playing around with Trump in NY.

That's how almost every trial in this country works. One judge decides the case originally and then the losing party has a right to appeal. I assume this case will go to the Colorado Supreme Court and from there, possibly, to the US Supreme Court. In New York, the judge's decision will be appealed to the appellate courts in that state. Those courts all have multiple justices.

[silverscreenselect]

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-conte ... motion.pdf

It's not uncommon for Defendants to move for a mistrial. The motion will be heard by Judge Engoron. You don't have to go far to find out how flimsy Trump's case is. The first authority he cites is an article appearing in the National Review last week. Of course, the National Review is perhaps the leading conservative political publication in the country Yet Trump's lawyers refer to this article as originating from "commentators politically opposed to President Trump." Andrew McCarthy, the author of this article, also wrote a book, Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. That book is about the supposed collusion between Hillary Clinton and Obama to right the 2016 election. You name a right-wing conspiracy theory, Andrew McCarthy buys into it.

Once I saw that argument, I didn't have to read the remainder of the nonsense in this motion.

The judge agreed with me, finding Trump's motion for a mistrial meritless.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-yo ... 2046de0ebc

[flockofseagulls104]

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-conte ... motion.pdf

It's not uncommon for Defendants to move for a mistrial. The motion will be heard by Judge Engoron. You don't have to go far to find out how flimsy Trump's case is. The first authority he cites is an article appearing in the National Review last week. Of course, the National Review is perhaps the leading conservative political publication in the country Yet Trump's lawyers refer to this article as originating from "commentators politically opposed to President Trump." Andrew McCarthy, the author of this article, also wrote a book, Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. That book is about the supposed collusion between Hillary Clinton and Obama to right the 2016 election. You name a right-wing conspiracy theory, Andrew McCarthy buys into it.

Once I saw that argument, I didn't have to read the remainder of the nonsense in this motion.

The judge agreed with me, finding Trump's motion for a mistrial meritless.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-yo ... 2046de0ebc

Of course he did. Unless I missed something, he is the one running the partisan hack job trial to begin with. It should never have been brought in the first place, there are no victims. No one sued anybody. Everybody was happy. Except democrats. But this judge and the AG are playing it out for all it's worth. That's the only reason the case exists: To get Trump on something, as James promised in her campaign. Anyone with a nose can see it's as obvious as the nose on their face. You must not have one. DUH!

[silverscreenselect]

Donald Trump (actually Trump Media & Technology Group) has sued 20 media organizations, including MSNBC, Newsweek, CNBC, Reuters, The Daily Beast, the Miami Herald, Mediatie, The Hill, The New York Daily News, the Daily Mail, Axios, The Hollywood Reporter, Salon, and Deadline, claiming they engaged in a malicious, coordinated effort to defame him when they reported that Truth Social had lost $73 million in 2023. In this case, Trump actually has some facts in his favor, since the actual loss was $31 million. Trump's organization is seeking $1.5 billion in damages. The reports appeared last week, and may have been the result of a misreading of a filing made with the SEC. Once the error was discovered, at least some of the organizations corrected their original reporting.

Trump claims that the reason so many organizations reported the same thing so quickly was a result of coordination on their part. Actually, news organizations continuously monitor what others are reporting to follow up on anything newsworthy, and corrections of this nature (although probably not of this scope) are common and frequent. The suit was filed in Sarasota County, FL state court. Florida juries have reacted favorably to these types of lawsuits in the past, including a big judgment won by wrestler Hulk Hogan against Gawker, which eventually resulted in the organization's bankruptcy.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-tr ... hxx55EunGI

[flockofseagulls104]

Donald Trump (actually Trump Media & Technology Group) has sued 20 media organizations, including MSNBC, Newsweek, CNBC, Reuters, The Daily Beast, the Miami Herald, Mediatie, The Hill, The New York Daily News, the Daily Mail, Axios, The Hollywood Reporter, Salon, and Deadline, claiming they engaged in a malicious, coordinated effort to defame him when they reported that Truth Social had lost $73 million in 2023. In this case, Trump actually has some facts in his favor, since the actual loss was $31 million. Trump's organization is seeking $1.5 billion in damages. The reports appeared last week, and may have been the result of a misreading of a filing made with the SEC. Once the error was discovered, at least some of the organizations corrected their original reporting.

Trump claims that the reason so many organizations reported the same thing so quickly was a result of coordination on their part. Actually, news organizations continuously monitor what others are reporting to follow up on anything newsworthy, and corrections of this nature (although probably not of this scope) are common and frequent. The suit was filed in Sarasota County, FL state court. Florida juries have reacted favorably to these types of lawsuits in the past, including a big judgment won by wrestler Hulk Hogan against Gawker, which eventually resulted in the organization's bankruptcy.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-tr ... hxx55EunGI

Exactly, none of them do any investigation for themselves, they just parrot each other. Which is why it is so easy to invent and maintain their false narratives. Limbaugh used to do montages of all the MSM talking heads using the exact same wording in their reporting of any issue critical of conservatives. It's been going on for a long time. Again, Trump is the only one with the cajones to fight them.

Going with the 'misreading' angle? Sure, that's the ticket.

[Bob78164]

Donald Trump (actually Trump Media & Technology Group) has sued 20 media organizations, including MSNBC, Newsweek, CNBC, Reuters, The Daily Beast, the Miami Herald, Mediatie, The Hill, The New York Daily News, the Daily Mail, Axios, The Hollywood Reporter, Salon, and Deadline, claiming they engaged in a malicious, coordinated effort to defame him when they reported that Truth Social had lost $73 million in 2023. In this case, Trump actually has some facts in his favor, since the actual loss was $31 million. Trump's organization is seeking $1.5 billion in damages. The reports appeared last week, and may have been the result of a misreading of a filing made with the SEC. Once the error was discovered, at least some of the organizations corrected their original reporting.

Trump claims that the reason so many organizations reported the same thing so quickly was a result of coordination on their part. Actually, news organizations continuously monitor what others are reporting to follow up on anything newsworthy, and corrections of this nature (although probably not of this scope) are common and frequent. The suit was filed in Sarasota County, FL state court. Florida juries have reacted favorably to these types of lawsuits in the past, including a big judgment won by wrestler Hulk Hogan against Gawker, which eventually resulted in the organization's bankruptcy.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-tr ... hxx55EunGI

I understand that Florida has an anti-SLAPP law. I don't think Donny's going to be able to produce evidence of actual malice (which means knowledge of falsity or intentional disregard for the truth), which is a required element for a public figure to maintain a defamation claim. If I'm right, the claim dies early and Donny ends up getting hit for the defense's attorneys' fees. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

Donald Trump (actually Trump Media & Technology Group) has sued 20 media organizations, including MSNBC, Newsweek, CNBC, Reuters, The Daily Beast, the Miami Herald, Mediatie, The Hill, The New York Daily News, the Daily Mail, Axios, The Hollywood Reporter, Salon, and Deadline, claiming they engaged in a malicious, coordinated effort to defame him when they reported that Truth Social had lost $73 million in 2023. In this case, Trump actually has some facts in his favor, since the actual loss was $31 million. Trump's organization is seeking $1.5 billion in damages. The reports appeared last week, and may have been the result of a misreading of a filing made with the SEC. Once the error was discovered, at least some of the organizations corrected their original reporting.

Trump claims that the reason so many organizations reported the same thing so quickly was a result of coordination on their part. Actually, news organizations continuously monitor what others are reporting to follow up on anything newsworthy, and corrections of this nature (although probably not of this scope) are common and frequent. The suit was filed in Sarasota County, FL state court. Florida juries have reacted favorably to these types of lawsuits in the past, including a big judgment won by wrestler Hulk Hogan against Gawker, which eventually resulted in the organization's bankruptcy.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-tr ... hxx55EunGI

I understand that Florida has an anti-SLAPP law. I don't think Donny's going to be able to produce evidence of actual malice (which means knowledge of falsity or intentional disregard for the truth), which is a required element for a public figure to maintain a defamation claim. If I'm right, the claim dies early and Donny ends up getting hit for the defense's attorneys' fees. --Bob

Yeah, it was a misreading.

[Pastor Fireball]

One of Former Guy's RICO co-conspirators, Harrison Floyd, may soon have his bail revoked and end up back in jail. He violated the terms of his bail agreement by making no fewer than 14 recent attempts to intimidate co-defendants and witnesses--including none other than Georgia's Republican Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger, recipient of the infamous phone call where Former Guy tried to "find 11,780 votes".

Yesterday, Judge McAfee ruled that Floyd had indeed violated his bail but did not throw him back in jail (yet). Instead, the judge drew up a much stricter bail agreement, effectively giving Floyd one last chance to be a good boy and honor the rule of law. Considering that all of Former Guy's sheeple have never believed that the rule of law has ever applied to themselves, this new bail agreement will mean Sweet Fanny Adams to Floyd and Floyd will almost certainly blow his last chance in record time.

[flockofseagulls104]

Somehow Nancy and Liz forgot to show us this at the starchamber hearings

https://twitter.com/i/status/1725645880286408816

[silverscreenselect]

Somehow Nancy and Liz forgot to show us this at the starchamber hearings

https://twitter.com/i/status/1725645880286408816

Congratulations, Flock!!!

Out of 40,000 hours of footage released this week by Mike Johnson, you and whoever posted this tweet originally found a 45 second clip that shows a capitol policeman releasing a man from handcuffs and then talking with a second man who fist bumped the first man. Nothing about when or where exactly that interaction occurred, how the three of them arrived at that point, or what transpired before and after this clip.

I'm sure we'll be treated to other similar clips in the future. Examine enough raw footage and edit it out of context appropriately, and you can get a few minutes that will support any narrative you want.

[flockofseagulls104]

Somehow Nancy and Liz forgot to show us this at the starchamber hearings

https://twitter.com/i/status/1725645880286408816

Congratulations, Flock!!!

Out of 40,000 hours of footage released this week by Mike Johnson, you and whoever posted this tweet originally found a 45 second clip that shows a capitol policeman releasing a man from handcuffs and then talking with a second man who fist bumped the first man. Nothing about when or where exactly that interaction occurred, how the three of them arrived at that point, or what transpired before and after this clip.

I'm sure we'll be treated to other similar clips in the future. Examine enough raw footage and edit it out of context appropriately, and you can get a few minutes that will support any narrative you want.

Maybe you have finally gotten the idea. That's how the 'news' works today. The dems and the swamp have the method down to a tee. So does Hamas.

[silverscreenselect]

Maybe you have finally gotten the idea. That's how the 'news' works today. The dems and the swamp have the method down to a tee. So does Hamas.

No, that's how you work. You don't like the facts, and you deny them because the Democrats, the liberals, the doctors, the scientists, the press, and anyone else you don't like is manipulating or inventing them for their own sinister purposes. So far, they've charged over 1000 people in the January 6 insurrection and convicted or gotten guilty pleas from over 700 of them. Not to mention the dozens of witnesses who testified under oath at the hearings and the various trials. And the hours of footage that have been shown depicting hundreds of rioters. That's a whole heck of a lot of inventing and manipulating. Meanwhile, you, Trump, and Dennis Prager can't produce a single very fine person at the Charlottesville riot or enough evidence to win any of those 60 court cases after the 2020 election.

[flockofseagulls104]

Maybe you have finally gotten the idea. That's how the 'news' works today. The dems and the swamp have the method down to a tee. So does Hamas.

No, that's how you work. You don't like the facts, and you deny them because the Democrats, the liberals, the doctors, the scientists, the press, and anyone else you don't like is manipulating or inventing them for their own sinister purposes. So far, they've charged over 1000 people in the January 6 insurrection and convicted or gotten guilty pleas from over 700 of them. Not to mention the dozens of witnesses who testified under oath at the hearings and the various trials. And the hours of footage that have been shown depicting hundreds of rioters. That's a whole heck of a lot of inventing and manipulating. Meanwhile, you, Trump, and Dennis Prager can't produce a single very fine person at the Charlottesville riot or enough evidence to win any of those 60 court cases after the 2020 election.

I love facts. That's why I try to look at all of them and make my mind up as to whose story holds more water.

As you demonstrate, looking at one side of every issue seems to make you myopic. You could, and probably will, accuse me of the same thing. But I am well aware of the narrative being pushed by the mainstream. It bombards you from all sides. And too much of it holds no water after even a cursory examination.

Somehow, the Star Chamber chose not to interview this guy. Or anyone else who could poke holes in their narrative? Care to wonder why? Does he not count? Tell me why we shouldn't believe what he says.

https://24timescon.us/2023/10/03/watch- ... go-for-it/