Anonymous ID: 4e6e51 March 13, 2024, 8:15 a.m. No.20561923   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1949 >>2091 >>2114 >>2117

>>20561776

>https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24478979-trump-order-on-defendants-special-demurrers

 

Agreed Anon, they are so fucked

, this is what the court order says in part: 9 pages

 

Our appellate courts have provided a well-used standard for evaluating a special demurrer:

[The test] is not whether [the indictment] could have been made more definite and certain,but whether it contains the elements of the offense intended to be charged, andsufficiently apprises the defendant of what he must be prepared to meet, and, in case any other proceedings are taken against him for a similar offense, whether the record shows with accuracy to what extent he may plead a former acquittal or conviction

 

.The crime of Violation of Oath by Public Officer, O.C.G.A. § 16-10-1, prohibits any public officer from willfully and intentionally violating the terms of his or her oath as prescribed by law. The term of the oath alleged to have been violated must be “expressly prescribed,” meaning it is explicitly

contained in the applicable statutory provisions. Jowers v. State, 225 Ga. App. 809, 812 (1997)

(reversing when a police officer’s oath did not expressly include a provision to uphold state law);

Bradley v. State, 292 Ga. App. 737, 740 (2008) (“the State must present evidence that the defendant violated the terms of the oath actually administeredand that those terms were from an oath ‘prescribed by law’”); see also State v. Greene, 171 Ga. App. 329, 329 (1984) (indictment withstood a general demurrer by specifying the violated term). Criminal Solicitation, O.C.G.A. §

16-4-7, prohibits one from intentionally soliciting, requesting, commanding, importuning, or otherwise attempting to cause another person to engage in felony conduct.

The six counts are similarly structured and can be summarized as follows:

 

Happy Reading Anons

 

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24478979-trump-order-on-defendants-special-demurrers

Anonymous ID: 4e6e51 March 13, 2024, 8:23 a.m. No.20561949   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20561923

The Court’s concern– is less that the State has failed to allege sufficient conductof the

Defendants – in fact it has alleged an abundance.

However, the lack of detail concerning an essential legal element is, in the undersigned’s opinion, fatal.

As written, these six counts contain all the essential elements of the crimes butfail to allege sufficient detailregarding the nature of their commission, i.e., the underlying felony solicited. Kimbrough, 300 Ga. at 884.

 

They do not give the Defendants enough information to prepare their defenses intelligently, as the Defendants could

have violated the Constitutions and thus the statute in dozens, if not hundreds, of distinct ways. Id. at 882. Under the standards articulated by our appellate courts, the special demurrer must be 7 The State’s supplemental citation to Wiggins v. State, 272 Ga. App. 414 (2005) (vacated on other grounds by Wiggins v. State, 280 Ga. 268 (2006)) makes this a closer call, but does not change the result. The indictment in Wiggins may not have listed the specific “crime against the State” that

the defendant committed in violation of his oath, but it did include enough additional detail to create a much smaller universe of possibilities, in contrast to the reference in this indictment incorporating the entirety of both the state and federal constitutions.

Anonymous ID: 4e6e51 March 13, 2024, 8:48 a.m. No.20562037   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2091 >>2114 >>2117

J6 REPORT EXCERPTS, see how much they spent:

 

BUDGET AND STAFF

H. Res 503 empowered and enabled the Select Committee’s partisan agenda with an unlimited budget.54 The Select Committee leveraged its unlimited budget to hire Hollywood producers and consultants to push the Select Committees narrative to the American public.55 The Select Committee also spent a significant amount of taxpayer dollars onoutside contractors.56

 

Based on the House of Representatives Statement of Disbursements, theSelect Committee spent $13,840,833.80 in 2021 and 2022 combined.57 However, it is estimated that the Select Committee spent around $19,000,000 in other expenses.58 ($32,840,833 combined)

In comparison, this amount is significantly higher than the $7,000,000 spent by the Select Committee on Benghazi, which is the only select committee in history to operate with the same blank-check appropriation.59

 

The Select Committee also had the authority and ability tohire an unlimited number of staff.60 In total, the Select Committee had a staff of nearly 80 people, including former television producers hired specifically to choreograph the Select Committee’s made-for-tv hearings.61

The Select Committee alsorecruited hand-picked investigators such as the Select Committee’s Chief Investigative Counsel who, in 2009, was nominated by President Obama to serve as the United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia.62 The Chief Investigative Counsel served as a U.S. Attorney under Attorney General Eric Holder and, according to Holder, the two had “a

long history.”63 While serving as the U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia, the Chief Investigative Counsel even served on Attorney General Holder’s Advisory Committee which advised the Attorney General on “emerging policy issues.”64

Traditionally, budget and staff slots are allocated between the majority and minority on committees and select committees under House precedent and practice.65 However, because Speaker Pelosi hand-picked every member of the Select Committee, there was no division of resources between the majority and minority.

 

The Select Committee, with its unlimited budget, operated as one unified body with no minority or dissenting views.

 

link to report

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2024-03/4F510144C1F427873D3298D955C8E19F.initial-findings-report.pdf

Anonymous ID: 4e6e51 March 13, 2024, 9:22 a.m. No.20562112   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2117

Georgia judge overseeing 2020 election case dismisses some charges against Trump

The judge said three of the charges against Trump must be quashed.

 

Updated: March 13, 2024 10:41am

 

The Fulton County judge overseeing the Georgia 2020 election case dismissed some charges against former President Donald Trump on Wednesday, although other charges remain.

 

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee said six charges listed in the indictment must be quashed, including three counts against Trump, per court documents. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges in the case.

 

"As written, these six counts contain all the essential elements of the crimes but fail to allege sufficient detail regarding the nature of their commission, i.e., the underlying felony solicited," McAfee wrote in his decision.

 

Trump and 18 others were charged with 41 counts related to an alleged scheme to overturn the 2020 election in the former president's favor. Trump was charged on 13 counts, so most of the charges remain intact with McAfee's ruling.

 

Meanwhile,McAfee is expected to rule this week on whether Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and special counsel Nathan Wade should be disqualifiedfrom the case over their romantic relationship and allegations that they benefited financially from the situation.

 

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/georgia-judge-overseeing-2020-election-case-dismisses-some-charges

 

(I think Kemp and Carr got to him, why release this info now, when’s he’s supposed to report on Friday on whether this continues. He’s telling the public he’s not going to shut down the big scam; or punish the criminals.)