The Flaw in Trump’s Georgia Indictment

Quote:Why has DA Willis invoked Georgia’s version of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, which is typically applied to mobsters engaged in the familiar rackets of murder, extortion, trafficking in narcotics and stolen goods, gambling, prostitution and so on? Because there’s a giant hole in her case: the lack of a clear crime to which Trump and his co-defendants can plausibly be said to have agreed.

A conspiracy is an agreement to violate a criminal statute. This takes at least two people.

Moreover, McCarthy explains that “there must be a meeting of the minds about the crime that is the objective of the conspiracy.” If there does not exist an agreement regarding the crime, a conspiracy does not exist.

The constitutional process dictates that Americans cannot be charged with a crime and forced to stand trial unless probable cause exists that a crime has been committed.

Willis is charging Trump with a crime for engaging in a completely legal action (trying to reverse the 2020 election results).

Quote: Even though prosecutors bear the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt before there can be a conviction, we can easily understand why the defendants have been charged. If they are charged with conspiracy, the indictment will clearly state the crime they allegedly agreed to commit — e.g., drug trafficking, bank robbery, murder, extortion.

That is what’s so strange about DA Willis’s indictment. She alleges that the 19 people named in her indictment are guilty of conspiracy because they agreed to try to keep Donald Trump in power as president — specifically, to “change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.”

Trying to change an election outcome is legal; the end doesn’t become illegal if pursued by illegal means — instead, those illegal means can be charged as crimes. But there is no conspiracy unless the objective itself is clearly a crime. You don’t see prosecutors alleging, say, that defendants were in a “conspiracy to unlawfully” commit murder or robbery. Murder and robbery are crimes.

If two or more people agree to commit murder or robbery, that is an agreement to commit a crime — a conspiracy. To the contrary, an agreement to try to reverse the result of an election is not an agreement to commit a crime.

RICO conspiracy is an agreement to participate in such an enterprise — to belong to the group and sustain the group so that it continues to generate power and profits.

There was no organized effort and no crime. The fact is that Trump is getting charged by a partisan prosecutor for exercising his constitutional rights.

Meanwhile, there do seem to be RICO crimes with the Biden*s pay-for-play from Russia, Ukraine and China.

There are plenty of crimes they are being charged with. Giving false statements on election fraud to the SOS, filing false documents, forgery, and the illegal access to voting machines that wasn’t conducted by any of the indicted but was conducted at the direction of Sidney Powell (one of the conspirators).

The real Elvis would laugh his azz off like the rest of us…

(08-20-2023 03:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

The real Elvis would laugh his azz off like the rest of us…

I guess that is the best response when you cannot actually rebut the above.

Awesome.

(08-20-2023 02:50 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  There are plenty of crimes they are being charged with. Giving false statements on election fraud to the SOS, filing false documents, forgery, and the illegal access to voting machines that wasn’t conducted by any of the indicted but was conducted at the direction of Sidney Powell (one of the conspirators).

So if Georgia loses to Georgia Tech and the fans say the refs cheated them, are they going to be indicted for it???

Crimes for which Trump is actually being charged with:

1. Living rent free in their heads

2. Causing much butthurt amongst rinos and liberals

3. Being competent, which makes libs and rinos look like the incompetent twits that they are

4. Mean Tweets!

5. Crushing DeSantis like the establishment hack that he is

(08-20-2023 03:01 PM)450bench Wrote:  

The real Elvis would laugh his azz off like the rest of us…

Plus he was an Ole Miss fan

(08-20-2023 02:50 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  There are plenty of crimes they are being charged with. Giving false statements on election fraud to the SOS, filing false documents, forgery, and the illegal access to voting machines that wasn’t conducted by any of the indicted but was conducted at the direction of Sidney Powell (one of the conspirators).

Whats the underlining crime where they conspired under RICO?

Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

(08-20-2023 04:52 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

This is still the part that I find troubling. The purpose of the Espionage Act is to prevent sensitive information from ending up in enemy hands. As far as I have been able to tell, there is no indication that Trump did anything to cause any sensitive information to end up in enemy hands. On the other hand, by placing sensitive information on a non-secure server and communicating such information over uncovered circuits, Hillary clearly did expose such information to any enemy who could hack her system.---and any enemy almost certainly could and did. So you prosecute Trump for process crimes and let Hillary walk for substantive violations.

(08-20-2023 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:52 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

This is still the part that I find troubling. The purpose of the Espionage Act is to prevent sensitive information from ending up in enemy hands. As far as I have been able to tell, there is no indication that Trump did anything to cause any sensitive information to end up in enemy hands. On the other hand, by placing sensitive information on a non-secure server and communicating such information over uncovered circuits, Hillary clearly did expose such information to any enemy who could hack her system.---and any enemy almost certainly could and did. So you prosecute Trump for process crimes and let Hillary walk for substantive violations.

to date, the masturbation exhibited by the DOJ, rivals only that of the cumblast web sites ... to have any faith of fairness in our legal system at this level is simply a waste of discussion...

in entirety, it's nothing more than a clown show designed to distract from reality...

@wtfe

(08-20-2023 05:02 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:52 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

This is still the part that I find troubling. The purpose of the Espionage Act is to prevent sensitive information from ending up in enemy hands. As far as I have been able to tell, there is no indication that Trump did anything to cause any sensitive information to end up in enemy hands. On the other hand, by placing sensitive information on a non-secure server and communicating such information over uncovered circuits, Hillary clearly did expose such information to any enemy who could hack her system.---and any enemy almost certainly could and did. So you prosecute Trump for process crimes and let Hillary walk for substantive violations.

to date, the masturbation exhibited by the DOJ, rivals only that of the cumblast web sites ... to have any faith of fairness in our legal system at this level is simply a waste of discussion...

in entirety, it's nothing more than a clown show designed to distract from reality...

@wtfe

And why none of the pompous long winded legal debates hold any meaning.

(08-20-2023 05:07 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 05:02 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:52 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

This is still the part that I find troubling. The purpose of the Espionage Act is to prevent sensitive information from ending up in enemy hands. As far as I have been able to tell, there is no indication that Trump did anything to cause any sensitive information to end up in enemy hands. On the other hand, by placing sensitive information on a non-secure server and communicating such information over uncovered circuits, Hillary clearly did expose such information to any enemy who could hack her system.---and any enemy almost certainly could and did. So you prosecute Trump for process crimes and let Hillary walk for substantive violations.

to date, the masturbation exhibited by the DOJ, rivals only that of the cumblast web sites ... to have any faith of fairness in our legal system at this level is simply a waste of discussion...

in entirety, it's nothing more than a clown show designed to distract from reality...

@wtfe

And why none of the pompous long winded legal debates hold any meaning.

which is why I rarely participate in legalese ... it's too stupid to begin to process at any level of sanity when the rules aren't the same as writ (depending on the defendant and/or prosecution) ... one may as well walk on hot coals and enjoy the blistering from muh gub'mints', boy...

#fkTheArtificials

addendum: of course most (that pay att'n), understand such ... it's the 'ignant' that are too easily swayed by muh corpshite ridden msm ... good luck winning that battle...

(08-20-2023 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:52 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

This is still the part that I find troubling. The purpose of the Espionage Act is to prevent sensitive information from ending up in enemy hands. As far as I have been able to tell, there is no indication that Trump did anything to cause any sensitive information to end up in enemy hands. On the other hand, by placing sensitive information on a non-secure server and communicating such information over uncovered circuits, Hillary clearly did expose such information to any enemy who could hack her system.---and any enemy almost certainly could and did. So you prosecute Trump for process crimes and let Hillary walk for substantive violations.

Charging a President [he obtain the documents as president] under Espionage Act is a novel idea as the Act was written for contractors or federal employees handling classified documents and exposing them; not a President who has a status above all as he is a declassifer in chief and . Going around the Presidential Act is making him a mere contractor who stole documents

(08-20-2023 01:56 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  The Flaw in Trump’s Georgia Indictment

Quote:Why has DA Willis invoked Georgia’s version of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, which is typically applied to mobsters engaged in the familiar rackets of murder, extortion, trafficking in narcotics and stolen goods, gambling, prostitution and so on? Because there’s a giant hole in her case: the lack of a clear crime to which Trump and his co-defendants can plausibly be said to have agreed.

A conspiracy is an agreement to violate a criminal statute. This takes at least two people.

Moreover, McCarthy explains that “there must be a meeting of the minds about the crime that is the objective of the conspiracy.” If there does not exist an agreement regarding the crime, a conspiracy does not exist.

The constitutional process dictates that Americans cannot be charged with a crime and forced to stand trial unless probable cause exists that a crime has been committed.

Willis is charging Trump with a crime for engaging in a completely legal action (trying to reverse the 2020 election results).

Quote: Even though prosecutors bear the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt before there can be a conviction, we can easily understand why the defendants have been charged. If they are charged with conspiracy, the indictment will clearly state the crime they allegedly agreed to commit — e.g., drug trafficking, bank robbery, murder, extortion.

That is what’s so strange about DA Willis’s indictment. She alleges that the 19 people named in her indictment are guilty of conspiracy because they agreed to try to keep Donald Trump in power as president — specifically, to “change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump.”

Trying to change an election outcome is legal; the end doesn’t become illegal if pursued by illegal means — instead, those illegal means can be charged as crimes. But there is no conspiracy unless the objective itself is clearly a crime. You don’t see prosecutors alleging, say, that defendants were in a “conspiracy to unlawfully” commit murder or robbery. Murder and robbery are crimes.

If two or more people agree to commit murder or robbery, that is an agreement to commit a crime — a conspiracy. To the contrary, an agreement to try to reverse the result of an election is not an agreement to commit a crime.

RICO conspiracy is an agreement to participate in such an enterprise — to belong to the group and sustain the group so that it continues to generate power and profits.

There was no organized effort and no crime. The fact is that Trump is getting charged by a partisan prosecutor for exercising his constitutional rights.

Meanwhile, there do seem to be RICO crimes with the Biden*s pay-for-play from Russia, Ukraine and China.

The Leftists are fully aware that all these nonsensical indictments are not worth the paper they are scribbled on, and will never stand up on appeal if they ever see the inside of a courtroom. Their primary goals are to create as much Trump fatigue as possible, and to spend Trump out of business.....

(08-20-2023 04:41 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 02:50 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  There are plenty of crimes they are being charged with. Giving false statements on election fraud to the SOS, filing false documents, forgery, and the illegal access to voting machines that wasn’t conducted by any of the indicted but was conducted at the direction of Sidney Powell (one of the conspirators).

Whats the underlining crime where they conspired under RICO?

There are 39 underlying predicate criminal acts, each of the named Defendants being tagged with at least 2 including the RICO. (Meadows, Jeff Clark, and Jenna Ellis being the low counts each with the 1+1, iirc)

Maybe read the indictment instead of what 'slurpconservativekoolaid.com' tells you to ask rhetorically.

(08-20-2023 04:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-20-2023 04:52 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  Doesn't matter. Remember Trump was indicted in the Federal case under the Espionage Act, not the Presidential Records Act. What adversary benefitted from him refusing to turn over records?

This is still the part that I find troubling. The purpose of the Espionage Act is to prevent sensitive information from ending up in enemy hands. As far as I have been able to tell, there is no indication that Trump did anything to cause any sensitive information to end up in enemy hands. On the other hand, by placing sensitive information on a non-secure server and communicating such information over uncovered circuits, Hillary clearly did expose such information to any enemy who could hack her system.---and any enemy almost certainly could and did. So you prosecute Trump for process crimes and let Hillary walk for substantive violations.

I guess the vast majority of Espionage Act charges should disappear then, in your book.

Most are unlawful possession.

That doesnt sound really smart.

Bring it…..

The main evidence in the indictment is literally tweets. He is being prosecuted over mean tweets.

I won’t say he won’t be convicted given the jurisdictions chosen for these trials, but no conviction on any of the charges will stand on appeal.

(08-20-2023 11:38 PM)banker Wrote:  The main evidence in the indictment is literally tweets. He is being prosecuted over mean tweets.

I won’t say he won’t be convicted given the jurisdictions chosen for these trials, but no conviction on any of the charges will stand on appeal.

And the pesky audio recordings, memos, notes, testimony from unnamed conspirators, and the tweets (and DMs).