Fulton County Grand Jury Was Totally Unhinged, Reveals Election Lawyer

[bripat9643]

Rumors of this were coming out even before their decision was announced. They were exactly the jury that Fani wanted.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/11/fulton-county-grand-jury-was-totally-unhinged-reveals-election-lawyer/​

​

It was a surreal experience,” attorney and election-law expert Cleta Mitchell told The Federalist, referring to the hours-long questioning she faced when called before the Fulton County special purpose grand jury.​

​

“I knew coming out of there that the whole thing was a loose cannon,” Mitchell said, adding that “they were definitely going to recommend indicting basically all the Trump allies — it was a completely political situation — nothing to do with the law. NOTHING.”​

​

With Friday’s release of the grand jury’s final report, Mitchell, who had represented former President Trump in his challenge to the Georgia 2020 election, is now speaking out. The report confirms Mitchell’s intuition: The grand jury recommended District Attorney Fani Willis charge a total of 39 people — “basically all the Trump allies” — not merely the 19 individuals the get-Trump prosecutor eventually indicted. The large number includes Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both of Georgia. Like Graham, Perdue, and Loeffler, Mitchell was recommended for charges but not named in the sprawling RICO indictment handed down last month.​

​

Now that the report is “all out in the open,” Mitchell is sharing some details of her experience, and they reveal just how unhinged from reality the special purpose grand jury — or at least its forewoman, Emily Kohrs — was.​

​

Mitchell explained to The Federalist that when testifying, she had taken with her copies of the election-contest complaint and the memorandum of law filed with the court in support of that complaint. “At some point, the chairwoman that you’ve seen on TV,” a reference to Kohrs who had made the media rounds shortly after the special purpose grand jury disbanded, “asked me what I had in my hands,” Mitchell explained.​

 

[JGalt]

 

[1srelluc]

Looks unhinged to me.

 

[JGalt]

Looks unhinged to me.

Bad combination there: Female, liberal, feminist, under-fed, under-fucked, batshit crazy, and in power.

Damn that 19th Amendment anyway.

 

[Dragonlady]

Rumors of this were coming out even before their decision was announced. They were exactly the jury that Fani wanted.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/11/fulton-county-grand-jury-was-totally-unhinged-reveals-election-lawyer/​

​

It was a surreal experience,” attorney and election-law expert Cleta Mitchell told The Federalist, referring to the hours-long questioning she faced when called before the Fulton County special purpose grand jury.​

​

“I knew coming out of there that the whole thing was a loose cannon,” Mitchell said, adding that “they were definitely going to recommend indicting basically all the Trump allies — it was a completely political situation — nothing to do with the law. NOTHING.”​

​

With Friday’s release of the grand jury’s final report, Mitchell, who had represented former President Trump in his challenge to the Georgia 2020 election, is now speaking out. The report confirms Mitchell’s intuition: The grand jury recommended District Attorney Fani Willis charge a total of 39 people — “basically all the Trump allies” — not merely the 19 individuals the get-Trump prosecutor eventually indicted. The large number includes Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both of Georgia. Like Graham, Perdue, and Loeffler, Mitchell was recommended for charges but not named in the sprawling RICO indictment handed down last month.​

​

Now that the report is “all out in the open,” Mitchell is sharing some details of her experience, and they reveal just how unhinged from reality the special purpose grand jury — or at least its forewoman, Emily Kohrs — was.​

​

Mitchell explained to The Federalist that when testifying, she had taken with her copies of the election-contest complaint and the memorandum of law filed with the court in support of that complaint. “At some point, the chairwoman that you’ve seen on TV,” a reference to Kohrs who had made the media rounds shortly after the special purpose grand jury disbanded, “asked me what I had in my hands,” Mitchell explained.​

The Federalist??? William F. Buckley is rolling in his grave over what they've done to his newspaper.

• Overall, we rate The Federalist Questionable and far-Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that always favor the right and promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, and numerous failed fact checks.

The Federalist - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[surada]

Rumors of this were coming out even before their decision was announced. They were exactly the jury that Fani wanted.

https://thefederalist.com/2023/09/11/fulton-county-grand-jury-was-totally-unhinged-reveals-election-lawyer/​

​

It was a surreal experience,” attorney and election-law expert Cleta Mitchell told The Federalist, referring to the hours-long questioning she faced when called before the Fulton County special purpose grand jury.​

​

“I knew coming out of there that the whole thing was a loose cannon,” Mitchell said, adding that “they were definitely going to recommend indicting basically all the Trump allies — it was a completely political situation — nothing to do with the law. NOTHING.”​

​

With Friday’s release of the grand jury’s final report, Mitchell, who had represented former President Trump in his challenge to the Georgia 2020 election, is now speaking out. The report confirms Mitchell’s intuition: The grand jury recommended District Attorney Fani Willis charge a total of 39 people — “basically all the Trump allies” — not merely the 19 individuals the get-Trump prosecutor eventually indicted. The large number includes Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Republican Sens. David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler, both of Georgia. Like Graham, Perdue, and Loeffler, Mitchell was recommended for charges but not named in the sprawling RICO indictment handed down last month.​

​

Now that the report is “all out in the open,” Mitchell is sharing some details of her experience, and they reveal just how unhinged from reality the special purpose grand jury — or at least its forewoman, Emily Kohrs — was.​

​

Mitchell explained to The Federalist that when testifying, she had taken with her copies of the election-contest complaint and the memorandum of law filed with the court in support of that complaint. “At some point, the chairwoman that you’ve seen on TV,” a reference to Kohrs who had made the media rounds shortly after the special purpose grand jury disbanded, “asked me what I had in my hands,” Mitchell explained.​

This is from the Federalist. I wouldn't believe them about anything ever.

 

[JGalt]

This is from the Federalist. I wouldn't believe them about anything ever.

Then start your own publication. You're not the only person in the world.

 

[Rawley]

This is from the Federalist. I wouldn't believe them about anything ever.

Explains a lot.

 

[Winston]

What the hell do you expect Cleta Mitchell to say? "Uh, it was a fair process and the grand jury members asked some really good questions". She is a professional spinmaster, nothing more. Not even an average lawyer, she would be more suited for traffic court. She has spent her entire career feeding at the public trough.

From the article,

We argued that there is precedent under Georgia law for the court to vacate the results and order a new election IF we were able to establish that the evidence proved there were more illegal votes, cast in violation of state law but counted and included in the certified total, than the margin of difference between the two candidates — the remedy is a new election.

Notice, "IF" is in all caps. Like Dad always said, "If" is the biggest word in the dictionary. "If" a frog had wings it wouldn't bump its ass against the ground every time it jumped. And in this case, well the frog didn't have any damn wings, Trump's lawyers never showed the "If" to be true, and every single investigation has rendered the same result, there was no significant fraud.

And Mitchell complains that no one asked her about the phone call. Hell, they didn't have to. The phone call stands on its own, I listened to it in its entirety which not a damn one of you Trumpturds has done. And even Mitchell was trying to back Trump down in that phone call.

This is nothing more than a spinmaster attempting to taint the jury pool, period.

 

[1srelluc]

Bad combination there: Female, liberal, feminist, under-fed, under-fucked, batshit crazy, and in power.

Damn that 19th Amendment anyway.

No woman should set in judgment of a man. I think it's unnatural. I'd say the same thing as far as men sitting in judgment on a woman. Men and women are just wired different.

 

[Winston]

No woman should set in judgment of a man. I think it's unnatural. I'd say the same thing as far as men sitting in judgment on a woman. Men and women are just wired different.

"Of a man"
"On a woman"

Freudian slip.

 

[JGalt]

No woman should set in judgment of a man. I think it's unnatural. I'd say the same thing as far as men sitting in judgment on a woman. Men and women are just wired different.

That's what it's suppose to mean by "jury of your peers."

 

[Leo123]

The Federalist??? William F. Buckley is rolling in his grave over what they've done to his newspaper.

• Overall, we rate The Federalist Questionable and far-Right Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that always favor the right and promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, and numerous failed fact checks.

The Federalist - Bias and Credibility

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no

mediabiasfactcheck.com

The article in the Federalist has a lot of good information 1st hand from a would be defendant. She explains how the jury forewoman did not understand what she was reading. She also shined a light on the anti-Trump bias of the jurors. Why do you reject real information?

 

[Leo123]

This is from the Federalist. I wouldn't believe them about anything ever.

Yeah dis the link when you got nothing.

 

[1srelluc]

"Of a man"
"On a woman"

Freudian slip.

Well sometimes you have to sit on them to get the duct tape on.

 

[Dragonlady]

That's what it's suppose to mean by "jury of your peers."

So what you're saying is that men shouldn't be allowed to make laws which affect only women's lives, like say, Abortion laws???? I'd be good with that.

 

[1srelluc]

So what you're saying is that men shouldn't be allowed to make laws which affect only women's lives, like say, Abortion laws???? I'd be good with that.

Hoser has a point.

 

[Oldestyle]

So what you're saying is that men shouldn't be allowed to make laws which affect only women's lives, like say, Abortion laws???? I'd be good with that.

Would that rule of yours apply to male fetuses as well? (eye roll)

 

[BlindBoo]

attorney and election-law expert Cleta Mitchell

Wasn't she on that call too? That Cleta? Nothing partisan about her opinion........

 

[my2¢]

"Mitchell, who had represented former President Trump"

Being sore losers runs amuck in Trumpland.