D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
One expert says the reason Trump is being tried in Florida is due to "venue," which is where most of the crimes took place.
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
Treason and insurrection can get you banned from office. Seditious conspiracy does not. Depends on what the charge is.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
... But what I see, is the Trumpet loyalist will vote for him in jail or not and we will have a screwed up election between and old man and a criminal. What a screwed up country we have. Sad, very sad.
Isn't this the way a cult operates? Followers follow no matter what the leader does.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
Two more in a matter of days? They refuse to perjure themselves in front of a federal judge, or is there some more sinister reasons behind it? I'm thinking of Corcoran where a federal judge approves of the "crime fraud exception". Perhaps Trump is just stiffing them, which is appropriate in a weird way.
Trump's two lawyers for this case, Jim Trusty and John Rowley have just resigned.
Or, Mt. Green is nowhere in sight. :D:eek:


That is no up front $$$$$$$ and this case will need 8 figures.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Seriously, I have no life.
One expert says the reason Trump is being tried in Florida is due to "venue," which is where most of the crimes took place.
Yes, more or less. Smith doesn't want any room to get challenged where the case is charged.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I have just spent this evening reading the Indictment against Trump.

What is clear is that the Federal prosecutor has done his home work. What really stands out, is the Trump like most criminals is not very bright. In fact he is downright "dumb as ditch water." However he had enough smarts to bring off probably the biggest con in history by getting elected POTUS. The ability to Con must reside at some place distant from the cerebral cortex. There must be some unknown center in the lower brain that sets up an auto pilot sequence.
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
Yes, more or less. Smith doesn't want any room to get challenged where the case is charged.
If that were the case isn't FL a bad place? The state is conservative (or DeSantis anyway) and Trump resides there. The link does mention fairness and convenience.


.
Florida Statute § 47.011 provides three places where venue may be proper: the county where the defendant resides, the county where the cause of action accrued, and the county where the property in litigation is located.
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan

Legally speaking, there's nothing stopping Trump from continuing his 2024 bid for the White House amid two historic indictments (and at least two more criminal investigations).

And even if he gets convicted, there's nothing in the U.S. Constitution prohibiting him from holding office. In fact, an individual only has to be at least 35 years old and be a natural-born citizen who has lived in the country for at least 14 years to hold the presidency.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment prevents a person from holding office — the presidency along with other government positions — if they've engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States, but even that can be overcome with a two-thirds vote from Congress.

It's still unclear whether an elected-and-convicted Trump would run the country from behind bars or see his sentence put on hold until after his time in office. Legal scholars told Politico in April that a judge may say an elected president's official duties would override a criminal conviction.

Trump could also try to pardon himself immediately upon taking office, which would be an action consistent with the messaging he's evoked about his indictments so far. "I AM AN INNOCENT MAN," Trump wrote in sharing the news of his indictment on Thursday.
 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
Faux: They show the boxes of documents at Mar-a-Lago. Then state Trump is being accused of "helping" move them to his residence. Like, not poop hahaha.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
I have just spent this evening reading the Indictment against Trump.

What is clear is that the Federal prosecutor has done his home work. What really stands out, is the Trump like most criminals is not very bright. In fact he is downright "dumb as ditch water." However he had enough smarts to bring off probably the biggest con in history by getting elected POTUS. The ability to Con must reside at some place distant from the cerebral cortex. There must be some unknown center in the lower brain that sets up an auto pilot sequence.
Here is the justice.gov link to the indictment:

 
D

Dude#1279435

Audioholic Spartan
Be interesting to know why Trump had these documents relating to foreign countries, military etc?
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
Or, Mt. Green is nowhere in sight. :D:eek:


That is no up front $$$$$$$ and this case will need 8 figures.
I heard a couple of reasons as to why they left.

One is that Trump was disappointed that he got indicted and just fired them.

The other is that once a lawyer represents someone in a criminal case the lawyer cannot leave without the permission of the judge. So the lawyers could be stuck with a nonpaying client for a long and time consuming trial. Trump stiffing people is well known.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
If that were the case isn't FL a bad place? The state is conservative (or DeSantis anyway) and Trump resides there. The link does mention fairness and convenience.


.
Florida Statute § 47.011 provides three places where venue may be proper: the county where the defendant resides, the county where the cause of action accrued, and the county where the property in litigation is located.
§ 47.011 is a Florida (state) civil procedure law. Trump is charged with federal crimes in federal court.

The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure apply to Trump's case:

>>>The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure mirror the Constitution’s requirements: “Unless a
statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district
where the offense was committed. . . .” Statutory provisions supplement the rules, and the
courts implement them in light of constitutional demands."


It's a bit more complicated for crimes that occur in more than one district:

>>>Section 3237 governs venue for certain multi-district crimes.19 It consists of three parts: one for continuing
offenses generally, another for offenses involving elements of the mails or interstate commerce,
and a third for tax offenses. . . . The first paragraph of Section 3237 . . . provides "Except as otherwise expressly provided by enactment of Congress, any offense against the United States begun in one district and completed in another, or committed in more than one district, may be inquired of and prosecuted in any district in which such offense was
begun, continued, or completed.<<<

The charges in the indictment are largely based on actions that (allegedly) occurred in Florida, after Trump left DC. Conceivably, charges could have been limited (to some degree) to actions in DC (e.g. improper removal of documents) in order to increase the odds of keeping the case in DC, but it would have required the DOJ to pull it's punches.

From a legal standpoint there would not have been a lot of downside risk associated with filing in DC rather than Florida. The same facts and law would apply to the substance of the case. I suspect the DOJ thought the odds of keeping the case in DC were not good and the didn't want to delay the case. Realistically, public perception plays a role in this type of a case. Filing in DC with a weak venue case creates the appearance that the DOJ is more concerned with getting a favorable jury than fairness. If Trump is convicted in Florida, the Trump defenders will not be able to say (plausibly) that it was due to trying him in a district with a jury pool that is highly biased against him.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Audioholic Samurai
I heard a couple of reasons as to why they left.

One is that Trump was disappointed that he got indicted and just fired them.

The other is that once a lawyer represents someone in a criminal case the lawyer cannot leave without the permission of the judge. So the lawyers could be stuck with a nonpaying client for a long and time consuming trial. Trump stiffing people is well known.
In most jurisdictions a client can fire an attorney at any time and the judge's permission is not required (a possible exception is a court-appointed public defender).

Typically, a judge's permission is only required if an attorney is of record in a court case. I highly doubt that Trusty and Rowley filed an appearance in the Trump case (which would require Trump's approval) making them of record, and then quit within 24 hours.

In other words, it appears to me that they quit without filing an appearance, or were fired, neither of which would require the judge's approval.

It's conceivable (but FAR from clear) that one or both are potential fact witnesses, and had to quit for ethical reasons.

>>>Combining the roles of advocate and witness can prejudice the tribunal and the opposing party and can also involve a conflict of interest between the lawyer and client.<<<


The indictment lists 3 lawyers (not by name). One is undoubtedly Christina Bobb, and one appears to be Evan Corcoran.

>>>Two lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump are likely to become witnesses or targets in the investigation into how he hoarded documents marked as classified at his Florida estate — and secretly held onto some even after they claimed all sensitive materials had been returned, legal specialists said.

The lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb, handled Mr. Trump’s interactions with the government over a subpoena in May seeking additional material marked as classified.<<<


I'm curious who the 3rd lawyer named in the indictment is. Legal commentators who have followed this closely will probably be able to figure it out.

Again, it's FAR from clear that the "fact witness ethical issue" scenario applies to Trusty and Rowley. I have not attempted to look into their representation of Trump to determine if they are likely to be fact witnesses.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
In most jurisdictions a client can fire an attorney at any time and the judge's permission is not required (a possible exception is a court-appointed public defender).

Typically, a judge's permission is only required if an attorney is of record in a court case. I highly doubt that Trusty and Rowley filed an appearance in the Trump case (which would require Trump's approval) making them of record, and then quit within 24 hours.

In other words, it appears to me that they quit without filing an appearance, or were fired, neither of which would require the judge's approval.

It's conceivable (but FAR from clear) that one or both are potential fact witnesses, and had to quit for ethical reasons.

>>>Combining the roles of advocate and witness can prejudice the tribunal and the opposing party and can also involve a conflict of interest between the lawyer and client.<<<


The indictment lists 3 lawyers (not by name). One is undoubtedly Christina Bobb, and one appears to be Evan Corcoran.

>>>Two lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump are likely to become witnesses or targets in the investigation into how he hoarded documents marked as classified at his Florida estate — and secretly held onto some even after they claimed all sensitive materials had been returned, legal specialists said.

The lawyers, M. Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb, handled Mr. Trump’s interactions with the government over a subpoena in May seeking additional material marked as classified.<<<


I'm curious who the 3rd lawyer named in the indictment is. Legal commentators who have followed this closely will probably be able to figure it out.

Again, it's FAR from clear that the "fact witness ethical issue" scenario applies to Trusty and Rowley. I have not attempted to look into their representation of Trump to determine if they are likely to be fact witnesses.
Trump has burned a lot of bridges, and the ones he has not burned he has contaminated. He might just have to put up with the public defender. They are paid by the citizens. Trump apparently routinely stiffs his lawyers. This bloke just can't help himself. I think it it will soon be apparent to all that he is totally inept and incompetent. As this all unfolds it will became plain to all what a dumb incompetent ass this man is.
 
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
This bloke just can't help himself. I think it it will soon be apparent to all that he is totally inept and incompetent. As this all unfolds it will became plain to all what a dumb incompetent ass this man is.
As evidenced by our system of election last go round. I trust that system then this current tilting at windmills.
 
adk highlander

adk highlander

pessimistic optimist
As evidenced by our system of election last go round. I trust that system then this current tilting at windmills.
Why is it tilting at windmills when he is caught on tape? So you would suggest just ignoring all his lies and illegal activities? What is your idea of a solution?
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top