What happens if Trump is indicted in Georgia? (Indicted on August 14, 2023)

[PhillyGuy]

@Procrustus

@PhillyGuy

And a much better chance for a pardon, if and when DJT regains the White House

Still a state prosecution

I obviously didn’t know that but found an article that agrees with you (see final paragraph):

Why Trump allies are seeking to move their cases from Georgia to federal court

However, I have to ask: Is there a precedent where a case was moved to federal court, and there was a conviction, and the president pardoned, and the courts vacated the presidential pardon on grounds that it really was a state charge? I think the answer is no, and that Trump will, if he wins re-election, attempt a pardon and dare the courts to send Meadows back into the slammer.

[Aspenglow]

@Ann_Hedonia

The current judge is a Kemp appointed white man and presumably a Republican who seems to be very fair ….he could’ve done a lot worse in the federal court lottery.

The trial judge, Scott McAfee, is a Kemp appointee. He wasn’t the judge who issued this ruling, however.

This ruling was issued by Judge Steve C. Jones of the Northern District of Georgia. An Obama appointee.

Good point about the Supremacy Clause defense, but my understanding is that Judge Jones would have had to completely buy that defense to order the case removed to federal court in the first place. Judge Jones pointed out (properly, in my view) that Meadows’ duties did not include helping his boss attempt to steal an election and therefore did not fall under the protection of the Supremacy Clause.

[OttoDaFe]

No television coverage (unless John Roberts allowed it, which doesn’t seem very likely)?

There’s a world of difference between reading about testimony and seeing it (not to mention seeing the defendant sweat). Won’t make any difference to the MAGAsses — they won’t be watching — but it could to a significant number of voters who wouldn’t be engaged otherwise.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Odesio

Okay, so his case moves to federal court and?

Delay, delay, delay. Appeal appeal. Run the clock and then finally claim “illness” at sentencing.

[Aspenglow]

@OttoDaFe

No television coverage (unless John Roberts allowed it, which doesn’t seem very likely)?

Yes, I’d forgotten about this. This is another good reason why they wanted it in federal court.

[Stratocaster]

@PhillyGuy

I think the answer is no, and that Trump will, if he wins re-election, attempt a pardon and dare the courts to send Meadows back into the slammer.

I think the likeliest outcome in the hypothetical where Trump issues a pardon for a state conviction is that the state says, “Cool story, bro,” and Meadows stays in the slammer.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@PhillyGuy

pardon and dare the courts to send Meadows back into the slammer

I think Trump will attempt pardons even when he loses in 2024. Because, of course, he won’t admit the loss.

[Odesio]

@Aspenglow

AIUI, the primary reason was the more sympathetic jury pool. A jury pool drawn from Fulton County is largely blue-leaning, from the Atlanta area. Had the case gone to the federal court, the jury pool would be more red.

This is literally all they’ve got to hang their hats on.

An act of pure desperation then. I’ve got an image in my head of a man on a small boat in the middle of the ocean on rough seas. Fearing he might fall overboard, he ties himself to a heavy weight in the hopes that this will secure him to the deck, but his foolish actions simply ensure he sinks that much quicker when he inevitably goes overboard.

[PhillyGuy]

@Stratocaster

I think the likeliest outcome in the hypothetical where Trump issues a pardon for a state conviction is that the state says, “Cool story, bro,” and Meadows stays in the slammer.

Yes, the state would refuse — and that would be appealed. Ultimately it would be up to the Supreme Court, which almost surely would still have a GOP majority.

P.S. This assumes that Meadows would be, at that time, in state custody — seems likely but not certain.

[Aspenglow]

@Odesio

An act of pure desperation then.

It definitely fell into the “can’t hurt to ask” category.

[Northern_Piper]

@Ann_Hedonia

I think it has to do with federal court being the only venue where he could assert a Supremacy Clause defense, mostly.

Why is that? the Supremacy clause applies equally to state court judges:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

[Stratocaster]

@PhillyGuy

Yes, the state would refuse — and that would be appealed. Ultimately it would be up to the Supreme Court, which almost surely would still have a GOP majority.

A majority that has fervent allegiance to originalist principles, not to Trump. The Constitution gives no such authority to the president. A re-elected Trump could issue an executive order that no television program may criticize him. It would have the same effect.

[Aspenglow]

Here’s a gift link to Judge Jones’ full ruling.

Read the ruling

[bobot]

@OttoDaFe

No television coverage (unless John Roberts allowed it…

A worthy point, IMO.

[bobot]

Imagine it without television coverage. Bad Guys hold a presser every day after the court session, lamenting how rigged and unfair the proceedings were.
Meanwhile, prosecution exits the building, walks past the microphones, saying nothing.

[Superdude]

Interesting yet disturbing factoid about Flynn: many of the MAGA supporters are suggesting Michael Flynn be named head of the FBI when Trump retakes the presidency.

[wolfpup]

@JohnT

Meadows DENIED in his motion to remove:

This is one of the very few times I actually saw breaking news on CNN before I saw it on the Dope – usually the Dope is way ahead of mainstream news, but I guess I was negligent in keeping up with the threads I’ve been following!

This is great news and sets an excellent precedent for the other criminals, including the unnaturally orange one. The possibility of a pumpkin-coloured inmate in a Georgia jail is growing ever more probable.

[slicedalone]

“Your Honor, I stand accused of abusing my authority as a Federal official to attempt to influence a Georgia official to change election results, but I cannot be tried in a Georgia court because I am a Federal official.” Yeah, that has a shot in an impartial judiciary.

[wolfpup]

@Aspenglow

@Odesio

I really don’t understand what Meadow’s hoped to gain by incriminating himself by testifying.

@bobot

A wider net for the jury to be drawn from, and possibly a more sympathetic judge?

AIUI, the primary reason was the more sympathetic jury pool. A jury pool drawn from Fulton County is largely blue-leaning, from the Atlanta area. Had the case gone to the federal court, the jury pool would be more red.

This is literally all they’ve got to hang their hats on.

According to this, it was much more than that:

His lawyers wanted the case in federal court so they could try to get it dismissed altogether, invoking federal immunity extended to certain individuals who are prosecuted or sued for conduct tied to their US government roles.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/08/politics/meadows-georgia-criminal-case-federal-court-rejected/index.html

[Dinsdale]

I have ZERO experience in complex litigation involving 19 defendants, but every aspect of this just has to be a complete clusterfuck, with 19 lawyers voicing separate objections to every little thing…

I do not envy the judge or prosecutor. Nor do I expect any speedy resolution.

I know they cut it down 50% from the grand jury. I wonder if they had just gone w/ Trump alone? Or Trump and 2-3 others… They could’ve gone after the remaining 15 later.