GA Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meadows is trying to get the case moved to federal court. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/15/politics/mark-meadows-fulton-case-federal-court/index.html

I guess this could work for Meadows and Trump (sorry Rudy). But as a taxpayer I'd feel pretty insulted if the judge determines that helping Trump overturn the election was part of their official duties.

Me again, would like to also add that in normal administrations that aren’t crawling with criminals, the actual White House employees don’t do anything for the presidential campaign which is supposed to be entirely separate from the administration.

[Anonymous]

Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

[Anonymous]

Trump is not going to take a chance that he will be elected because he's been rejected three times and he isn't stupid. He is running because he hoped this would keep him from being indicted. His plan backfired and he knows that the two state cases won't go away. His only hope to avoid a trial and prison is to seek asylum in Dubai or Bahrain. And, I would not be surprised if this happens before Aug. 25, 2023.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

This is not an executive privilege claim. It’s federal officer removal. It is based on a statute (28 USC 1442) and requires the defendant be a federal officer “acting under color of” federal office, and have a plausible federal defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

This is not an executive privilege claim. It’s federal officer removal. It is based on a statute (28 USC 1442) and requires the defendant be a federal officer “acting under color of” federal office, and have a plausible federal defense.

Over turning an election is a plausible federal defense?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

This is not an executive privilege claim. It’s federal officer removal. It is based on a statute (28 USC 1442) and requires the defendant be a federal officer “acting under color of” federal office, and have a plausible federal defense.

Over turning an election is a plausible federal defense?!

dp.. I imagine that if they really believed that the federal election was compromised then that would be their defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meadows is trying to get the case moved to federal court. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/15/politics/mark-meadows-fulton-case-federal-court/index.html

That’s stupid and pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

This is not an executive privilege claim. It’s federal officer removal. It is based on a statute (28 USC 1442) and requires the defendant be a federal officer “acting under color of” federal office, and have a plausible federal defense.

Over turning an election is a plausible federal defense?!

dp.. I imagine that if they really believed that the federal election was compromised then that would be their defense.

The president is barred from getting involved in the electoral college by the constitution. Now SCUTUS will most likely ignore that part of the constitution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is not going to take a chance that he will be elected because he's been rejected three times and he isn't stupid. He is running because he hoped this would keep him from being indicted. His plan backfired and he knows that the two state cases won't go away. His only hope to avoid a trial and prison is to seek asylum in Dubai or Bahrain. And, I would not be surprised if this happens before Aug. 25, 2023.

No, I strongly disagree. He's lying to himself, which is part of his mental delusions. He and a large part of his entourage and base believe these charges won't hold up. There are only a few, very few lawyers on his team that are accurately gauging the risk he's in. These people can't stay in his orbit long, because it's not tenable. Trump et al. believe that unless he's on record saying "I want to crime" they can always explain away all "find me votes" and "fake electors" issues. It's a fine line for normal people to understand, but that's where the delusion is. Trump has always played with words to make others do the criming for him without explicit directions, but he's done it so often, he was bound to cross lines at some point. He was desperate in the Georgia, and his words are now coming back to bite him. But he's still clinging to the belief that "find me votes" isn't illegal.

He will never leave this country. He gets a massive high, *and money*, being a martyr to his slowly dwindling group of supporters. He can never leave that safe space. If he leaves his base will think he betrayed them and the money would stop flowing in. No one else wants him the world, since his only value to enemies of the state is as a potential President.

So the only thing he can hope for is to massively stall the Georgia case for years and years, and continue to grift on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

This is not an executive privilege claim. It’s federal officer removal. It is based on a statute (28 USC 1442) and requires the defendant be a federal officer “acting under color of” federal office, and have a plausible federal defense.

Over turning an election is a plausible federal defense?!

The federal defense would probably be some sort of immunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meadows is trying to get the case moved to federal court. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/15/politics/mark-meadows-fulton-case-federal-court/index.html

The big thing I take away is a lot of these conspirators will never face justice. This GA case is just one state. These people were active in multiple states and yet no federal charges? Meadows, Eastman, Cruz, Graham, all the staff of these people, etc? Guess planning and implementation of a coup is not against federal law?

Democrats should take note, if Trump wins.

Yep Kamala Harris can decertify the election results. It is good to know we have that in our bag of tricks.

Ha!
Gotta keep that on file somewhere!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Give this man a cigar.

https://twitter.com/MattAttack009_/status/1691485043338743808

I don’t know about you, but I’m wary of anyone who inserts “globalist socialists” into casual conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump is not going to take a chance that he will be elected because he's been rejected three times and he isn't stupid. He is running because he hoped this would keep him from being indicted. His plan backfired and he knows that the two state cases won't go away. His only hope to avoid a trial and prison is to seek asylum in Dubai or Bahrain. And, I would not be surprised if this happens before Aug. 25, 2023.

1) he is stupid
2) he is running to stand a chance of a self pardon or a pardon from an acolyte.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes Lindsay Graham already lost that battle all the way up to the Supreme Court, although that was for the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution, not executive privilege.

Pretty sure Meadows already lost on claiming executive privilege for the Jan 6 committee. I can't see what additional grounds he could get it moved to Federal court.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/01/us/politics/supreme-court-lindsey-graham-georgia.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics/trump-aides-executive-privilege-meadows/index.html

This is not an executive privilege claim. It’s federal officer removal. It is based on a statute (28 USC 1442) and requires the defendant be a federal officer “acting under color of” federal office, and have a plausible federal defense.

He is charged for participating in the phone calls and text messages to Georgia officials pressuring them to throw out the election results and declare Trump the winner and for sending them all the crazy election fraud theories with no supporting evidence or law in an attempt to justify the demand to blow up democracy.

None of that is remotely related to his official government duties. They are fraudulent campaign activities that he is supposed to be barred from doing while working in the White House.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meadows is trying to get the case moved to federal court. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/15/politics/mark-meadows-fulton-case-federal-court/index.html

The big thing I take away is a lot of these conspirators will never face justice. This GA case is just one state. These people were active in multiple states and yet no federal charges? Meadows, Eastman, Cruz, Graham, all the staff of these people, etc? Guess planning and implementation of a coup is not against federal law?

Democrats should take note, if Trump wins.

Yep Kamala Harris can decertify the election results. It is good to know we have that in our bag of tricks.

Have to agree. If everything Trump and co. did was legal and acceptable behavior for the White House, then Kamala and the Biden White House can do the same.