DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 14, 2023 16:27:55 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 14, 2023 16:29:59 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 14, 2023 20:05:23 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,270
|
Post by SSHoya on Aug 14, 2023 22:02:37 GMT -5
Congrats "Republicans" for the 4th indictment against the Mango Mussolini and his co-conspirators! (But I guess it is clearly more important to talk about Hunter Biden, right?) ATLANTA — Former president Donald Trump and 18 others were criminally charged in Georgia on Monday in connection with efforts to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in the state, according to an indictment made public late Monday night. The historic indictment, the latest to implicate the former president, follows a 2½-year investigation by Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis (D). The probe was launched after audio leaked from a January 2021 phone call during which Trump urged Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) to question the validity of thousands of ballots, especially in the heavily Democratic Atlanta area, and said he wanted to “find” the votes to erase his 2020 loss in the state. www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/14/trump-indictment-georgia-election-2020/
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 14, 2023 23:52:36 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 15, 2023 0:10:31 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 15, 2023 5:44:28 GMT -5
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,319
|
Post by tashoya on Aug 15, 2023 7:37:29 GMT -5
It's sadly hilarious and poetic that Rudy has been indicted on RICO charges.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 15, 2023 10:51:59 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 15, 2023 13:10:55 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 15, 2023 13:12:24 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,270
|
Post by SSHoya on Aug 15, 2023 14:02:34 GMT -5
One of the newest judges on the Fulton County Superior Court bench, Scott McAfee, has been assigned the sprawling racketeering case that charges former president Donald Trump and 18 allies with scheming to undo Trump’s 2020 election defeat in Georgia and elsewhere. McAfee, a lifelong Georgian who lives in Atlanta, was nominated to fill a vacancy on the bench earlier this year by Gov. Brian Kemp (R), who had previously praised McAfee as “a tough prosecutor” who could “bring those to justice who break the law.” Though McAfee was assigned the case soon after the indictment was handed up on Monday evening, it could be transferred to a different judge later in the process. McAfee has worked off and on in the public realm for more than a decade, including eight years as an assistant U.S. attorney for the Justice Department in the Northern District of Georgia, where he prosecuted drug trafficking organizations, fraud and illegal firearms possession, according to a March 2021 news release from Kemp’s office. McAfee also worked on the state level as an assistant district attorney in Fulton County, where he handled many felony cases, from armed robbery to murder, the news release said. www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/15/judge-scott-mcafee-georgia-trump-case/
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,270
|
Post by SSHoya on Aug 15, 2023 14:18:42 GMT -5
Shortly before noon on Jan. 7, 2021, with the nation still reeling from the aftermath of the attempted insurrection in Washington D.C., a Republican party official ushers a computer forensics team into an elections office in far-away Coffee County, Georgia. According to a combination of court filings, depositions in subsequent litigation, and the indictment filed Monday evening in Fulton County, Georgia, the forensics team—a group of employees of an Atlanta-based firm called SullivanStrickler—has driven into the rural south Georgia town of Douglas at the behest of Sidney Powell, a lawyer working with then-President Donald Trump’s legal team. They are joined by a man named Scott Hall, a bail bondsman and Republican poll watcher who flew down separately from Atlanta. Cathy Latham, a public school teacher and chairwoman of the Coffee County G.O.P., escorts the group inside. There, they are welcomed by two local elections officials, Misty Hampton and Eric Chaney, and a former member of the elections board, Ed Voyles. Video surveillance detailed in the litigation shows what happens next: Over the course of several hours, the forensics team handles, scans, and copies the state’s most sensitive voting software and equipment. All of this takes place without authorization from any court of law. The elections board will later claim it did not authorize the entry or copying, which the Georgia secretary of state’s office has referred to it as “unauthorized access to the equipment that former Coffee County election officials allowed in violation of state law.” www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-the-heck-happened-in-coffee-county-georgia
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,270
|
Post by SSHoya on Aug 15, 2023 16:56:39 GMT -5
Meadows has filed to remove the RICO case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. His attorney, George Terwilliger is not a "crackpot" lawyer. He was Deputy Attorney General at DOJ under Bush I before the Republican Party went nuts. Former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows is seeking to move his charges in the Georgia 2020 case to federal court, where he plans to ask a judge to dismiss the case. “Mr. Meadows is entitled to remove this action to federal court because the charges against him plausibly give rise to a federal defense based on his role at all relevant times as the White House Chief of Staff to the President of the United States,” attorneys for Meadows wrote in the Tuesday filing in the Northern District of Georgia. thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4154266-meadows-indictment-remove-georgia-charges-federal-court/28 USC Section 1442 (a) a prosecution that is commenced in a State court and that is against or directed to any of the following may be removed by them to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending: (1)The United States or any agency thereof or any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or of any agency thereof, in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of such office or on account of any right, title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the collection of the revenue. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1442I wonder if DOJ will seek to enter an appearance in Georgia state court under 28 USC Section 517 to argue against removal: The Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States, or in a court of a State, or to attend to any other interest of the United States. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/517
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Aug 15, 2023 17:29:05 GMT -5
Meadows has filed to remove the RICO case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. His attorney, George Terwilliger is not a "crackpot" lawyer. He was Deputy Attorney General at DOJ under Bush I before the Republican Party went nuts. Former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows is seeking to move his charges in the Georgia 2020 case to federal court, where he plans to ask a judge to dismiss the case. “Mr. Meadows is entitled to remove this action to federal court because the charges against him plausibly give rise to a federal defense based on his role at all relevant times as the White House Chief of Staff to the President of the United States,” attorneys for Meadows wrote in the Tuesday filing in the Northern District of Georgia. thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4154266-meadows-indictment-remove-georgia-charges-federal-court/28 USC Section 1442 (a) a prosecution that is commenced in a State court and that is against or directed to any of the following may be removed by them to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending: (1)The United States or any agency thereof or any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or of any agency thereof, in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of such office or on account of any right, title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the collection of the revenue. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1442I wonder if DOJ will seek to enter an appearance in Georgia state court under 28 USC Section 517 to argue against removal: The Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States, or in a court of a State, or to attend to any other interest of the United States. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/517I would be surprised if DoJ entered an appearance because of the, er, appearance it would create. Meadows (and Trump) have very little chance of successfully effecting removal. Neither was operating under color of their office but rather almost indisputably on behalf of the reelection campaign. There's a reason campaigns and the government are kept purposefully separate.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,270
|
Post by SSHoya on Aug 15, 2023 18:36:25 GMT -5
Meadows has filed to remove the RICO case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute. His attorney, George Terwilliger is not a "crackpot" lawyer. He was Deputy Attorney General at DOJ under Bush I before the Republican Party went nuts. Former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows is seeking to move his charges in the Georgia 2020 case to federal court, where he plans to ask a judge to dismiss the case. “Mr. Meadows is entitled to remove this action to federal court because the charges against him plausibly give rise to a federal defense based on his role at all relevant times as the White House Chief of Staff to the President of the United States,” attorneys for Meadows wrote in the Tuesday filing in the Northern District of Georgia. thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4154266-meadows-indictment-remove-georgia-charges-federal-court/28 USC Section 1442 (a) a prosecution that is commenced in a State court and that is against or directed to any of the following may be removed by them to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending: (1)The United States or any agency thereof or any officer (or any person acting under that officer) of the United States or of any agency thereof, in an official or individual capacity, for or relating to any act under color of such office or on account of any right, title or authority claimed under any Act of Congress for the apprehension or punishment of criminals or the collection of the revenue. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1442I wonder if DOJ will seek to enter an appearance in Georgia state court under 28 USC Section 517 to argue against removal: The Solicitor General, or any officer of the Department of Justice, may be sent by the Attorney General to any State or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States in a suit pending in a court of the United States, or in a court of a State, or to attend to any other interest of the United States. www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/517I would be surprised if DoJ entered an appearance because of the, er, appearance it would create. Meadows (and Trump) have very little chance of successfully effecting removal. Neither was operating under color of their office but rather almost indisputably on behalf of the reelection campaign. There's a reason campaigns and the government are kept purposefully separate. DOJ would have to think through the policy implications of permitting a private attorney to seek removal under these circumstances. Private attorneys have sought removal on behalf of federal contractors but I think Meadows's case is inapposite. Typically, removal of a federal officer or employee is done by a DOJ attorney who is representing a federal officer in his personal capacity pursuant to 28 CFR Section 50.15. I have sought removal or advised USAO to do so on behalf of federal officials and employees on numerous occasions as a DOJ trial attorney in the Constitutional and Specialized Torts Section of Civil Division. I agree that Meadows is unlikely to be successful (campaign v. governmental function distinction that you note is exactly correct) but DOJ may wish to weigh in to advise the court on the propriety of a private attorney invoking federal officer removal in these circumstances. I speculate that Mango may also seek removal as well as it is an issue that may reach SCOTUS along with Meadows's attempt. IIRC, an issue exists as to whether the President is a "federal officer" for removal purposes as it may only apply to inferior officers under the appointments clause. If nothing else, it will delay the RICO prosecution beyond the 2024 election. § 50.15 Representation of Federal officials and employees by Department of Justice attorneys or by private counsel furnished by the Department in civil, criminal, and congressional proceedings in which Federal employees are sued, subpoenaed, or charged in their individual capacities. (a) Under the procedures set forth below, a federal employee (hereby defined to include present and former Federal officials and employees) may be provided representation in civil, criminal and Congressional proceedings in which he is sued, subpoenaed, or charged in his individual capacity, not covered by § 15.1 of this chapter, when the actions for which representation is requested reasonably appear to have been performed within the scope of the employee's employment and the Attorney General or his designee determines that providing representation would otherwise be in the interest of the United States. No special form of request for representation is required when it is clear from the proceedings in a case that the employee is being sued solely in his official capacity and only equitable relief is sought. (See USAM 4-13.000) www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/50.15Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution states: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. As to the appearance issue, recall that initially DOJ invoked Westfall substitution in Carroll II defamation suit, finding that Mango's defamatory statements were covered as he made those statements under a broad reading of officials acts (actually supported by DC Circuit precedence) which would have substituted the Unitrd States as defendant and resulted in dismissal of her claims as the US has not waived sovereign immunity for defamation. DOJ subsequently reversed that decision under Garland without regard to the appearance issue. To my surprise, the reversal did not receive much criticism from the right wing press/Fox Propaganda a least that I recall. Now, Mango is on the hook in the Carroll II defamation suit.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,199
|
Post by hoyarooter on Aug 15, 2023 20:24:15 GMT -5
Thanks to you all for these discussions. I enjoy reading about these things that are light years removed from my area of practice. And I do agree, unfortunately, that the likelihood of this matter coming to trial before the election is slim.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 16, 2023 1:22:12 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,518
|
Post by DanMcQ on Aug 16, 2023 1:23:29 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,270
|
Post by SSHoya on Aug 16, 2023 2:02:00 GMT -5
Today’s removal statute traces back to the run-up to the Civil War. Congress enacted a predecessor statute to protect the operation of federal law from southern states seeking to undermine the Union by arresting and prosecuting those carrying out its functions. Yet now Trump would invoke the statute to protect himself from a state prosecution seeking to hold him accountable for the harm he brought upon the Constitution, intruding on the state’s right and obligation to choose its own presidential electors. www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/08/trump-georgia-indictment-motion-remove/675019/An analysis of whether the President is a "federal officer" when removal was denied in the Manhattan DA hush money prosecution. The 1948 statute was not drafted on a blank slate. The phrase “officer of the United States” appears in several important provisions of the Constitution. And drafters of the federal statute can reasonably rely on how that phrase was understood for nearly two centuries. For example, the president has the power to nominate “officers of the United States.” This text strongly suggests that the president himself is not an “officer of the United States.” And the House of Representatives can impeach “the President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States.” Justice Joseph Story explained that the Constitution’s drafters’ listing the presidency and vice presidency separate and apart from the “Officers of the United States” suggests that these appointed positions are distinct from the former elected positions. www.lawfaremedia.org/article/why-the-manhattan-da-trump-case-cannot-be-removed-to-federal-court
|
|