Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2001
Attorneys for former President Trump on Thursday asked a judge to throw out his classified documents case in Florida, arguing that he is protected by presidential immunity. It's the Republican presidential frontrunner's latest claim that he is shielded from criminal prosecution under a broad theory of immunity. An appellate court rejected the argument earlier this month. The U.S. Supreme Court may address Trump's immunity argument and reconsider the appellate court ruling if the high court accepts an appeal he filed of the decision, which stems from his federal 2020 election subversion case.

In motions filed in the Florida case, Trump's team argued in part that the former president was immune from the classified documents charges because he was acting in his official duties as president. "President Trump's alleged decision to designate records as personal under the PRA and cause them to be removed from the White House ... was an official act by the incumbent president," Trump's lawyers wrote. The former president's lawyers also challenged the decision to appoint special counsel Jack Smith to oversee the case.
https://www.axios.com/2024/02/23/trump- ... l-immunity

SCOTUS hasn't responded to Trump's appeal of the DC Circuit decision that he's not immune.

And SCOTUS hasn't issued a decision in Trump v Anderson over the 14th Amendment and Trump appearing the on the Colorado Primary ballot. There are a lot of amici curiae briefs in that case.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2002
This is a precedent setting case and will go through due process to arrive at the legal conclusion that sitting presidents (much less ex-presidents) are not immune from prosecution less they become a unique class of citizens that stand above the law.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2004
A Fulton County judge will hear arguments on March 1 over efforts to disqualify District Attorney Fani Willis from Georgia's 2020 election interference case against former President Trump. A ruling by Judge Scott McAfee to remove Willis from the case or adjust charges, as Trump and other co-defendants have sought, would have massive implications for the case — even potentially derailing it altogether. If McAfee eventually rules that Willis' personal relationship with lead prosecutor Nathan Wade, who she hired, created a conflict of interest, the case would be assigned to a different prosecutor.

A new prosecutor could change the case significantly, including by adding or dropping charges, or decide to throw out the case completely. The sheer appointment would also delay proceedings likely until after the 2024 election. Willis testified last week and she refuted allegations that her relationship with Wade created any financial or ethics conflict.

Surrounding the case are also questions of when their personal relationship began and how money was exchanged between them. Various reports published this week have corroborated or challenged elements of her testimony. Both Willis and Wade testified that their romantic relationship ended last summer. The allegations around Willis do not change the current facts of the case she brought against Trump.
https://www.axios.com/2024/02/23/georgi ... trump-2024
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2005
papajim2jordan wrote: Sat Feb 24, 2024 8:02 am We’re aboard an airliner in flight. A passenger gets up, yelling mindlessly and tries to open one of the doors. Half the passengers and crew want to restrain him, while the other half tries their best to seat him in the cockpit.

Good B movie plot.
Wut?!?
This all just happened to you on a flight?
Who would suggest crazy passengers be restrained in the cockpit? Sounds a little off after 9/11.
More common for the stewardess to duct-tape said nutzo in the seat.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2007
Bisbee wrote: Sat Feb 24, 2024 4:08 pm
papajim2jordan wrote: Sat Feb 24, 2024 8:02 am We’re aboard an airliner in flight. A passenger gets up, yelling mindlessly and tries to open one of the doors. Half the passengers and crew want to restrain him, while the other half tries their best to seat him in the cockpit.

Good B movie plot.
Wut?!?
This all just happened to you on a flight?
Who would suggest crazy passengers be restrained in the cockpit? Sounds a little off after 9/11.
More common for the stewardess to duct-tape said nutzo in the seat.
Are you kidding? It's a metaphor for The Orange Shit!
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2009
NEW YORK (AP) — Prosecutors in Donald Trump’s New York hush-money criminal case asked a judge Monday to impose a gag order on the former president, citing his “long history of making public and inflammatory remarks” about people involved in his legal cases.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/m ... money-case

Folks are wising up. This is not going to end well at all for the orange spirochete.

CDFingers
Crazy cat peekin' through a lace bandana
like a one-eyed Cheshire, like a diamond-eyed Jack

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2010
Judge determines Fulton County prosecutor’s divorce attorney must return to witness stand in Trump case challenge
A judge has determined that Nathan Wade’s former law partner and divorce attorney must return to the witness stand to testify about the relationship between Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and Wade, the top prosecutor on the election subversion case involving former President Donald Trump and others. Attorney Terrence Bradley had previously attempted to shield what he knew from the court by claiming attorney-client privilege. An emergency hearing in the effort to disqualify Willis from the 2020 Georgia election subversion case could be held as early as Tuesday afternoon. “Based on the in camera hearing with Bradley, the Court believes that the interested parties did not meet their burden of establishing that the communication(s) are covered by attorney-client privilege and therefore the hearing can resume as to Mr. Bradley’s examination,” an email from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee obtained by CNN said.

McAfee noted there is “a very short window” to make the appearance happen, given “Bradley’s medical emergency brought to the Court’s attention.” The clients and their attorneys, the judge wrote, “may appear virtually via Zoom.” The judge asked that the attorneys confirm their availability with the court. Bradley had been billed as “star witness” for defense attorneys seeking to disqualify Willis’ office and get the case dismissed, but he declined to answer certain questions, citing privilege concerns, during the court hearings two weeks ago. Earlier Monday, McAfee met with Bradley behind closed doors to sort out the privilege issues. Trump co-defendant Mike Roman’s attorney, who initially surfaced the allegations against Wade, wants to hear more from Bradley to refute the claim from Willis and Wade that their personal relationship began after she appointed him as special prosecutor in late 2021 to lead the case against Trump and his allies.

“Bradley has non-privileged, personal knowledge that the romantic relationship between Wade and Willis began prior to Willis being sworn as the district attorney for Fulton County, Georgia in January 2021,” according to a previous court filing from Ashleigh Merchant, Roman’s defense attorney. “Thus, Bradley can confirm that Willis contracted with Wade after Wade and Willis began a romantic relationship, thus rebutting Wade’s claim in his affidavit that they did not start dating until 2022,” the filing said.
A hearing in which attorneys will address cell phone records and other exhibits remains scheduled for Friday, according to the email.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/26/politics ... index.html
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2014
Donald Trump proposed on Wednesday to post a $100 million bond while appealing what he called an “exorbitant and punitive” $454 million fraud judgment in New York. State Attorney General Letitia James opposed the request. A New York judge on Feb. 16 ordered the former president and his namesake company to pay the government for ill-gotten gains from overstating the value of his real-estate. The verdict also barred Trump from doing business in New York for three years, which includes borrowing from New York-based banks. While Trump appeals the judgment, he is asking to postpone paying the full amount because he would have trouble posting the entire amount.

“The exorbitant and punitive amount of the Judgment coupled with an unlawful and unconstitutional blanket prohibition on lending transactions would make it impossible to secure and post a complete bond,” Trump’s lawyers Clifford Robert and Alina Habba wrote. “Appellants nonetheless plan to secure and post a bond in the amount of $100 million.” James opposed the request Wednesday by arguing Trump is unlikely to prevail in his appeal. She argued a full bond is required precisely because of his insufficient cash and need to raise further capital. “There is no merit to defendants’ contention that a full bond or deposit is unnecessary because they are willing to post a partial undertaking of less than a quarter of the judgment amount,” James wrote. “Defendants all but concede that Mr. Trump has insufficient liquid assets to satisfy the judgment; defendants would need ‘to raise capital’ to do so.”

A five-judge panel of the Supreme Court of New York Appellate Division, First Department, will determine whether to grant Trump’s request, according to Mark Zauderer, a senior partner at Dorf Nelson & Zauderer who has practiced in the court for decades. The panel will review the written arguments from Trump and James and typically reach a decision within several weeks, Zauderer said. The appellate panel could set a bond anywhere from zero to the full judgment.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 775766007/
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2015
Trump must come up with the full bond amount to cover the $454 million civil fraud trial judgment, appeals court judge rules

Former President Donald Trump must come up with the full bond amount to cover the $454 million verdict in the civil fraud trial, an appeals court judge ruled Wednesday. Associate Justice Anil Singh, however, lifted a ban on Trump’s ability to obtain loans from a New York bank, which could allow him to access the equity in his assets to back the full bond amount. Singh denied Trump’s request to delay his obligation to post $454 million until a full appellate panel hears his motion to stay enforcement of that judgment until his appeals of the civil fraud ruling are over.

Once the parties file briefs by March 18, the panel will evaluate Trump’s motion and will likely return a decision on the docket by the end of March, according to the clerk’s office. No additional oral arguments are scheduled before the judges render a decision. The ruling also means that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump can continue to run the family company, but they will each have to post more than $4 million or secure a bond in that amount to pursue their own appeals.
The 30 day clock for Trump to come up with the judgment began on February 23 so he will need to post the bond right around March 25, when jury selection begins for his criminal trial on charges relating to a scheme to cover up a hush money payment made before the 2016 presidential election. Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/28/politics ... index.html
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2017
Welp, SCOTUS has agreed to Trump’s request to help him run the clock out on his election interference trial. The trial will remain in limbo till after they decide if presidents have blanket immunity from criminal prosecution. Of course they’ll rule that presidents don’t have total immunity, but not till sometime later this summer.

No trial before the election (if at all). I had some hope they wouldn't debase themselves, but …
Whatever I said above, just pretend I included the obligatory “both sides,” especially if I said something mean about Trump (don’t want to hurt any feelings).

www.schayden.com

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2018
The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it would decide whether former President Donald Trump is entitled to broad immunity from prosecution for acts allegedly committed while in office, teeing up another blockbuster election-year showdown that could have major ramifications for the federal criminal cases against him. The unsigned order from the high court granted special counsel Jack Smith's request for the justices to decide the issue. The justices are set to decide the question: "whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."

The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, will hear arguments in the case during the week of April 22. Its order indicates that proceedings in the case will remain on hold until it issues a decision, expected by the end of June. The intervention from the court marks the second time in a month that the justices have weighed in on a case with tremendous implications for the former president. Earlier in February, the court heard arguments over whether Trump can be excluded from Colorado's primary ballot over his actions surrounding the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

The court has never before decided whether a former president is immune from criminal liability for allegedly illegal acts committed while in office. Trump is the first former president to be indicted, and he has pleaded not guilty. The high court has, however, said that a president is entitled to absolute immunity from civil liability for official acts.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-immu ... eme-court/

They still haven't decided the Colorado case over the 14th Amendment.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2020
The hacking group responsible for taking down Fulton County's websites in Georgia is threatening to publish documents from the state's court system — including ones related to the criminal case against Donald Trump — unless it gets paid a ransom. In a message posted online Saturday, in both English and Russian, the hacking group called LockBit said the stolen documents "contain a lot of interesting things and Donald Trump's court cases that could affect the upcoming US election." Initially, LockBit set a Saturday, March 2, deadline for the payment, according to the cybersecurity reporter Christopher Krebs. It has since moved up that deadline to 8:49 a.m. ET on Thursday, February 29, LockBit's restored website shows.

It's not clear how much money the group is demanding. The hacking group's demands are often negotiated in private, Dan Schiappa, the chief product officer at the cybersecurity firm Arctic Wolf, said. The group — led by a hacker using the pseudonym LockBitSupp — appeared to become operational again over the weekend after a February 20 law-enforcement raid. A group of agencies, including the FBI and the United Kingdom's National Crime Agency, took down 34 of its servers and changed its website to a series of messages bragging about the law-enforcement operation. The same day, the US Department of Justice unsealed an indictment accusing two Russian nationals of being involved in the group's hacking operations. By Saturday, LockBit was back. On a new website, the group posted a message claiming it had backup copies of documents taken from the Fulton County government's website. It also renewed its ransom demands.

The post claimed that the FBI acted quickly because the leak of documents in Trump's criminal case could affect the 2024 presidential election — although court documents show that the FBI's investigation into LockBit and coordination with international law-enforcement agencies has been ongoing for years. It characterized LockBit's relationship with the FBI as a sort of romantic rivalry and promised that the group would hack more government websites in the future. LockBit's targets go far beyond just the Fulton County government. As of Wednesday, it had ongoing ransom demands for 11 different companies on its website in addition to the one for Fulton County. Over the years, the hacking group has targeted over 2,000 victims and obtained over $120 million in ransom funds, according to the Justice Department. Its targets in recent years include Boeing, the UK's National Health Service and Royal Mail, and the state-owned Industrial and Commercial Bank of China.

The group doesn't always conduct hacks itself, according to law-enforcement agencies. It operates on a service model, in which it develops sophisticated ransomware hacking tools and leases them out to other hackers to deploy against targets, taking a cut of the ransom. It's not clear whether LockBit is in possession of any court documents in the Trump case that are not already part of the public record. George Chidi, an Atlanta-based independent journalist, reported earlier this month that a sampling of files published by LockBit includes sealed court records in other unrelated cases.
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-g ... bit-2024-2
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2022
Two cases in court, Trump's classified documents case in FL and oral arguments in Fani Willis's case involving her affair with her lead prosecutor.

DOJ want's a start date of July 8th and Trump's team want August 23rd.
In a blow to Trump’s legal team, Justice Department officials advised Cannon that the so-called “60 day rule,” which prohibits federal investigators from indicting or publicly investigating candidates near an election, does not apply to legal actions post-indictment, such as trials. The clarification means Trump’s federal criminal cases could take place concurrent to campaign season and during early voting.
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... 234979209/

Jay Bratt, the DOJ lawyer advised Cannon that Trump was already indicted so the "60 Day Rule" didn't apply. DOJ Ethics Division agreed.

We have to see how the judge rules in the Fani Willis case, if he rules today.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2023
As bad as the SCOTUS was in 2000, this is infinitely worse. George W Bush wasn't accused, much less under indictment for multiple state and federal felonies. The 6 know this and just don't give a shit--they want him back as President so they can push more telebangelist restrictions on people's lives.
"Even if the bee could explain to the fly why pollen is better than shit, the fly could never understand."

Re: Orange spirochete indictment thread

2025
YankeeTarheel wrote: Sat Mar 02, 2024 6:28 pm As bad as the SCOTUS was in 2000, this is infinitely worse. George W Bush wasn't accused, much less under indictment for multiple state and federal felonies. The 6 know this and just don't give a shit--they want him back as President so they can push more telebangelist restrictions on people's lives.
Looks like all 9.

I entirely understand the emotional desire to see the guy in tar and feathers. But I also want to see innocent until proven guilty maintained. If Colorado were allowed to remove him from the ballot, think of the ramifications. Any allegation would do, resulting in chaos.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests