Seymour Flops
Diamond Member
How is that "ready?" "As early as" October? That's a meaningless phrase.Willis is ready, and has already said she can go to court as early as october.
If you're not ready to go to trial, don't indict until you are.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
How is that "ready?" "As early as" October? That's a meaningless phrase.Willis is ready, and has already said she can go to court as early as october.
The Trump criminals have started fighting among themselves.Trump’s legal team filed a motion opposing Chesebro’s request
Stupid, really. They must honor a request for a Speedy Trial. Must. There really is no discretion.The Trump criminals have started fighting among themselves.
Jebus, it is not the prosecutor dragging it out. She is prepared for all 19 defendents, on October 23, under Georgia law.Anxiety caused by uncertainty about her future, life on hold as hostage to the justice system, legal bills piling up waiting for the prosecutors to say, "Ok, NOW we really are ready," and damage to her reputation and professional standing due to being under indictment.
All that should not be stretched out due to a lollygagging prosecutor. That's the whole point of the Constitution's guarantee that a defendant get a fair trial.
Yes, I get that. Trump will easily delay all of his trials until he is in the White House. You know what happens then.Jebus, it is not the prosecutor dragging it out. She is prepared for all 19 defendents, on October 23, under Georgia law.
IT IS TRUMP who wants to delay the trial, silly one!
If he can prove that point in court! I think Eastman decided it was unconstitutional in the end, but Trump still did it....is Eastman's claimed defense, I believe....?The fact that other lawyers say after the fact that they disagree with your lawyer, does not make you a criminal for following your own lawyer's advice is the point.
How is that "ready?" "As early as" October? That's a meaningless phrase.
If you're not ready to go to trial, don't indict until you are.
Of course, it is the prosecutor who has the obligation to prove points in court. Trump need only cast reasonable doubt as to the prosecutor's case.If he can prove that point in court! I think Eastman decided it was unconstitutional in the end, but Trump still did it....is Eastman's claimed defense, I believe....?
Yes, they may be forced to sever Powell's case from Trump's.Stupid, really. They must honor a request for a Speedy Trial. Must. There really is no discretion.
Good luck! The phone calls have been heard by millions. Your lord and savior is going down.Of course, it is the prosecutor who has the obligation to prove points in court. Trump need only cast reasonable doubt as to the prosecutor's case.
The week of October23 is the dictated date in Georgia law, that corresponds to the date that a defendant requests a speedy trial for this case...discovery presented by November 9th....How is that "ready?" "As early as" October? That's a meaningless phrase.
If you're not ready to go to trial, don't indict until you are.
Following your lawyer's advice may be a mitigating factor....but I doubt it's exculpatory.Interesting analysis. I don't take it as Trump's lawyers blaming bad legal advice, and I certainly never heard Trump's lawyers say that it was bad advice. Trump's lawyer has said several times that Trump followed legal advice in what he did, and therefore criminal intent cannot be proven.
The fact that other lawyers say after the fact that they disagree with your lawyer, does not make you a criminal for following your own lawyer's advice is the point.
Mitigating only comes into play if they prove he committed a crime. Not one Trump hater on here has met my challenge to name Trump's actions and the criminal statute they violated.Following your lawyer's advice may be a mitigating factor....but I doubt it's exculpatory.
I refer you to the indictment. Both the actions and the appropriate statute are quoted.Mitigating only comes into play if they prove he committed a crime. Not one Trump hater on here has met my challenge to name Trump's actions and the criminal statute they violated.
I'm surprised Rudy doesn't jump on that....The first deal is always the best.
I think we will see Trump on trial well before the General Elections.Yes, I get that. Trump will easily delay all of his trials until he is in the White House. You know what happens then.
Again you read my post without context.
I was addressing okfine 's dismissive question about anxiety being the only reason for Powell to want a speedy trial. I listed the reasons why Powell would want a speedy trial - or any hypothetical defendant. In your mentally clouded state of TDS, you assumed that I was talking about Trump.
Rudy still thinks Donald has his back.I'm surprised Rudy doesn't jump on that....
It's possible, but I doubt it. We have yet to see Trump's side begin its fight, and delaying the trials will be part of the fight. Trump's skilled attorneys against the Affirmative Action hire prosecutors will be a pretty lopsided fight.I think we will see Trump on trial well before the General Elections.
No they are not. Not one time, or you would have quoted it already.I refer you to the indictment. Both the actions and the appropriate statute are quoted.
You are telling me..sniggers..that the Georgia indictment dos not list the charges against Trump? That it does not quote the appropriate statutes?No they are not. Not one time, or you would have quoted it already.