The Georgia Case Against Trump Relies on a Dangerous Application of RICO Law
District Attorney Fani Willis’ preferred weapon wasn’t designed to be used this way.
In 1969, Lawrence Speiser, the director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington, D.C., office, appeared before Congress to testify against a proposed law that would greatly expand the powers of federal law enforcement. "Our constitutional system of government wisely limits the range of methods available to us, reflecting our historical commitment to liberty and justice rather than to efficiency and expediency," Speiser said. "To the extent that this puts us at a disadvantage in dealing with the criminal organization, it is a price we must pay, for ultimately it is this which distinguishes the lawful from the lawless society."
Despite Speiser's warnings, Congress passed and President Richard Nixon signed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Intended to crack down on the mafia, the law enabled prosecutors to build conspiracy cases by using certain state and federal crimes as "predicate acts" to establish an "enterprise." Within a few years, through increasingly aggressive prosecutions, the law's scope expanded to encompass a much wider range of conduct than originally intended. As L. Gordon Crovitz noted in a 1990 Reason article, "Ambitious federal prosecutors have now discovered RICO's many uses, and this poses a great danger to civil liberty and free enterprise."
Since the federal law was established, more than 30 states have adopted RICO statutes of their own. Georgia's version, passed in 1980, is substantially broader than the federal law. In August, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, a Democrat and self-proclaimed "fan of RICO," used Georgia's law to charge former President Donald Trump and 18 co-defendants with racketeering, which is punishable by up to 20 years in prison. But contemptible as the alleged actions of Trump and his cohorts may be, Willis is wielding the RICO statute in a way that is far afield from the law's original intent, and the case threatens to impinge on activity protected by the First Amendment.
The charges in the indictment, Trump's fourth since leaving office, stem from the defendants' collective efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Highlights include a January 2021 phone call in which Trump pressured Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to "find" enough votes to change the election outcome in Georgia (charged as solicitation of a felony); a lawsuit that included numerous "materially false statements" about illegal voting (charged as knowingly filing a false document); and a plan to present "alternate" electors, which the indictment says involved various crimes, including forgery, impersonating a public officer, and false statements on "matters within [the] jurisdiction of state or political subdivisions."
Trump's argument has always been that his claims about election fraud were not lies because he believed them. According to that defense, for example, Trump did not encourage Raffensperger to violate his oath of office when he implicitly threatened him with criminal liability if he failed to "find" the votes necessary to reverse Joe Biden's victory in Georgia; Trump merely asked Raffensperger to do his job by investigating credible allegations of fraud.
If the case goes to trial, a jury will face the unenviable task of psychoanalyzing Trump and determining if he truly believed the cockamamie theories he floated, if he knew them to be false, or if he was willfully blind to the distinction. In the absence of criminal intent, such false statements are constitutionally protected speech.
The case also raises questions about the scope of Georgia's RICO law, which covers many more predicate offenses than the federal version, prescribes a weaker test for establishing an "enterprise," and does not require ongoing racketeering activity. As a result, it is much easier to prosecute someone for racketeering in Georgia even when the alleged offenses bear little resemblance to the activity of La Cosa Nostra.
In 2014, Cherokee County District Attorney Shannon Wallace used the RICO law to prosecute three court reporters for improperly formatting their court records to create extra billable pages. They were accused of collecting more than $485,000 in unearned wages. Instead of settling for fraud or theft charges, prosecutors alleged that the reporters' actions constituted a pattern of racketeering activity. Each pleaded guilty to racketeering and was sentenced to between four and eight months in prison, in addition to financial restitution.
The following year, Willis, then a deputy district attorney, used Georgia's RICO statute to secure 11 convictions and 21 guilty pleas in a case involving Atlanta public school educators who helped students cheat on standardized tests. In that case, the "enterprise" was the school system.
Trump's indictment also includes numerous questionable allegations in service of the RICO charge. The indictment describes 161 overt acts, which need not be crimes; they simply must demonstrate that a conspiracy was more than just talk. The acts include many descriptions of conduct protected by the First Amendment.
Act 1, for example, is the November 4, 2020, speech in which Trump declared that he had won reelection. Act 5 is a November 20 Oval Office meeting with Michigan legislators in which Trump "made false statements concerning fraud." Act 22 involves a December 3, 2020, tweet in which Trump called attention to Georgia Senate hearings on his election fraud claims: "Georgia hearings now on @OANN. Amazing!"
When Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith announced a federal indictment of Trump in August, he noted that Trump "had a right, like every American, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome-determinative fraud during the election and that he had won." What Trump did not have the right to do was pursue "unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results." Notably, Smith decided not to charge Trump with incitement based on his speech preceding the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, perhaps to avoid First Amendment objections.
Trump and his co-defendants' actions in Georgia were disgraceful. If a jury determines that the former president knowingly pressed false claims, criminal punishment may be warranted for specific offenses. But as the latest and most prominent demonstration of RICO's ever-expanding applications, the Georgia indictment reflects the dangers that Speiser perceived half a century ago, when he cautioned that this new prosecutorial weapon would be "more far-reaching than its supporters suggest" and warned that "the possibilities for abuse are manifold."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
For masochists who LOVE to be PUNISHED by Government Almighty…
https://www.google.com/search?q=ricky+don%27t+lose+my+number+lyrics&oq=ricky+don%27t+lose+my+number+lyrics&aqs=chrome..69i57.9377j0j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
RICO don’t lose that number
You don’t want to call nobody else
Send it off in a letter to yourself
RICO don’t lose that number
It’s the only one you own
You might use it if you feel better
When you get home
(CALL me, Baby, and cum on over and PUNISH me!!!!)
PS, sad to say, BUTT-LOADS of hypocrites believe in “punishment for thee, butt not for MEEEE”!!! Often for the exact same acts. What would Trump be saying right now, had Biden done and said all the Trumpy things? No doubt, that Biden (just like now-retired General Milley) needs to be EXECUTED!
SQRLSY is so clueless he assumed it would be impossible to find an example of a liberal doing anything as extreme as threatening violence:
I don’t recall any “HillaryPanzees gone apeshit” and saying “kill him with his own gun”? Got any cites on that?
Because SQRLSY forgot about James Hodgkinson, who did a lot more than make threats.
Yes, you read that right.
This pathetic and unfunny character, whose routine revolves around wetting himself at the possibility that stolen election BS will motivate actual violence, didn’t even remember that one of his fellow liberals tried to mass murder Congressmen after months of exposure to RUSSIA HACKED THE ELECTION and PUTIN CONTROLS THE WHITE HOUSE hysteria.
Sandranistas LOVE that them thar whataboutism!!!
Butt, whatabout that them thar whatabouts? Whatabout Hillary? Whatabout OJ Simpson?
How many brain cells does it take to run a socio-political simulation on the following:
Judge and Jury: “Murderer, we find you guilty of murder! 20 years in the hoosegow for YOU! Now OFF with ye!”
Murderer: “But OJ Simpson got off for murder, why not me? We’re all equal, and need to be treated likewise-equal!”
Judge and Jury: “Oh, yes, sure, we forgot about that! You’re free to go! Have a good life, and try not to murder too many MORE people, please! Goodbye!”
Now WHERE does this line of thinking and acting lead to? Think REALLY-REALLY HARD now, please! What ABOUT OJ Simpson, now? Can we make progress towards peace & justice in this fashion?
(Ass for me, I think we should have PUT THE SQUEEZE on OJ!)
Twatabout Hodgkinson? Ergo, Trumpanzees gone apeshit are totes innocent, ’cause Hodgkinson’s Disease? Did Hodgkinson join a RIOTING MOB trying to overturn an election? And is Hodgkinson now being turned into a SAINT by left-wingers?
Whataboutism isn’t fallacious if it’s an apples to apples comparison and points out rank hypocrisy… like in your case, you unfunny Democratic Party shill.
Even when twataboutism isn’t fallacious, Ye Perfect Twat, IT DOES NOT MOVE US FORWARDS towards truth, freedom, benevolence, non-hypocrisy, etc., You Perfectly thick-headed, obtuse Perfect Person!!!!
ADMITTING one’s own sins (and the sins of Our Team), and WORKING ON our OWN sins, is what moves us forwards, Oh Perfectly Obtuse Wonder Child!
Your beloved tu quoque fallacy is still a fallacy.
Correctness and hypocrisy are independent of each other.
Someone can be a total hypocrite and be totally correct at the same time.
True dat!
They can be correct about what they SAY and totes wrong about what they DO! Bill Clinton was all on board about respecting women… When he TALKED! (And this “do ass I say, not ass I do” thing is VERY common!).
“Someone can be a total hypocrite and be totally correct at the same time.”
You demonstrate the former every day, but have yet to achieve the latter.
“Your beloved tu quoque fallacy is still a fallacy.”
For fucks sake, Sarcasmic! Learn what tu quoque means and where it’s applicable!…
You do know, don’t you, and your misusing it on purpose as a troll, right? Nobody’s really that dumb.
What are you talking about? Tu quoque is your favorite argument.
“This guy’s a hypocrite! That means he’s wrong!”
It’s like all you do.
The fact that it is a fallacy makes it not applicable, period. It’s an attack on the person. The entire point is to change the attention from the person’s argument to their personal behavior, show inconsistency in their behavior, and then claim that makes them wrong. You’re not arguing against their argument. You’re arguing against them as a person. That’s the fallacy.
And you’ve got it down to a science.
To be honest I’d be shocked if I saw you try to take someone’s argument down with logic and reason, instead of attacking them for something they said or did in the past and saying that invalidates their argument.
Even your example isn’t a tu quoque….
Honestly one of the dumbest people alive.
You are expert at that sarc.
He didn’t have Hillary prosecuted.
Which was a mistake.
But contemptible as the alleged actions of Trump and his cohorts may be,
How dare someone use the courts to address their grievances. How dare a campaign select alternate electors when ongoing court cases exist as a backstop against constitutionally required dates just like democrats did in 1964 in selecting alternate electors as cases continue. How dare a campaign utilize free speech to address illegal votes presented to the government. Just pure contemptible acts.
If the case goes to trial, a jury will face the unenviable task of psychoanalyzing Trump and determining if he truly believed the cockamamie theories he floated, if he knew them to be false, or if he was willfully blind to the distinction. In the absence of criminal intent, such false statements are constitutionally protected speech.
Trumps team and lawyers identified over 30k votes from voters who were confirmed to have moved prior to the election yet voted in their old districts. This was confirmed by using mail change forms through the post office. These votes were illegal under Ga election laws at the time and currently. Ga refusing to address their illegality doesn’t make them legal nor the claims false. The number is 3x greater than the margin of victory. There were an additional 90k votes also presented to Ga and ignored including 5k people who voted both by mail and in person.
What Trump did not have the right to do was pursue “unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the election results.”
He literally used the courts.
https://reason.com/2022/02/11/sidney-powell-disowns-her-kraken-saying-she-is-not-responsible-for-her-phony-story-of-a-stolen-election/ (Yet another Powell article)
https://reason.com/2021/03/23/sidney-powell-says-shes-not-guilty-of-defamation-because-no-reasonable-person-would-have-believed-her-outlandish-election-conspiracy-theory/
Sidney Powell Says She’s Not Guilty of Defamation Because ‘No Reasonable Person’ Would Have Believed Her ‘Outlandish’ Election Conspiracy Theory
Which particular lies are you wanting to hear and believe today, hyper-partisan Wonder Child?
WHY do you evil people love it SOOOOO much when lawyers LIE in court? Is it the lawyers that You love, the lies, or both?
Conspiracy theories or cunt-spermacy theories; which appeal to ye the MOISTEST?!?!? And twat does Spermy Daniels say about tit all? Are Ye Perfectly titillated yet?
Spermy Daniels for Der TrumpfenFarter-Fuhrer’s new VEEP!!! Government Almighty KNOWS that The TrumptatorShiot will need MANY-MANY (affordable) criminal defense lawyers, and Spermy Daniels can attract MANY “Pro Boner” lawyers!!!
Those two links have nothing to do with what Jesse wrote about. Neither did your rant.
“He literally used the courts.”, wrote Der Dear Leader JesseBahnFarter-Fuhrer.
Ass if “using the courts” excuses one’s LIES (in court) and Perfect Pussy-Grabbing, Ye EVIL ONE who makes EXCUSES for LYING IN COURT!!!
Servant and Serpent of the Evil One… Have Ye EVER been able to READ and THINK, honestly?
FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS, lying in court has been widely condemned (by NON-evil folks, at least) as totally off-limits and EVIL!
For thousands of years people have presented differing claims about matters of fact and law. One side will turn out to be wrong. Perjury is another matter, but if people can be criminally punished for bringing novel legal theories or unpopular claims of fact to court, then we’re fucked.
We’re also fucked if cluttering up the courts with LIES that are THIS absurd, goes unpunished! Courts that are JOKES are NOT effective!
https://reason.com/2022/02/11/sidney-powell-disowns-her-kraken-saying-she-is-not-responsible-for-her-phony-story-of-a-stolen-election/ (Yet another Powell article)
https://reason.com/2021/03/23/sidney-powell-says-shes-not-guilty-of-defamation-because-no-reasonable-person-would-have-believed-her-outlandish-election-conspiracy-theory/
Sidney Powell Says She’s Not Guilty of Defamation Because ‘No Reasonable Person’ Would Have Believed Her ‘Outlandish’ Election Conspiracy Theory
Maybe she deserves some punishment from the bar. The criminal charges are ridiculous.
Did you expect anything less?
Cynical Asshole can’t read or think, either, and is PROUD of shit!
Spastic asshole gonna spastic asshole.
It’s time to have SQRLSY put down. Who ants to take him to the vet?
Voir dire is gonna be fun in Fulton County. Majority Black, majority Democrat.
lol “today we’re here to talk about bias …”
“Having lawyers lie in court, on YOUR Behalf, is the BEST thing that one can do, in the service of the future of the human race, so long ass Ye are on the CORRECT, conforming Political Team, and it helps Me and Mine get and retain the end-all and be-all, which is POLITICAL POWER!!!”
-Noy-Boy Toy-Boy
Institutions are sacred – sarc.
Insurrections are sacred (so long ass they favor MY Team) – JesseBahnFarter-Fuhrer
Democrats have never abused the power of government institutions. Trump is always wrong and always guilty. – sarc.
I like to lie and misconstrue what other people say because I’m a piece of shit excuse for a human being. -JesseAz
Yes, Jesse has pointed that out about you, pussy. Now slither back to your piss soaked garbage can like so much drunken Oscar the Grouch.
I am the one true libertarian, why don’t you say that to my face internet tough guy? – sarc
wHo carz aSs long ass thay gEt trUMp.
Who cares if a re-erected Trumpster destroys (takes to the dumpster) democracy, and brings about the One-Party Perpetual TrumptatorShit? POWER for MEEEE and My Team TRUMPS ALL, right, right-wing wrong-nut?
Some muted person replied LOL!
Nanny-nanny booo-boob, I can’t HEAR you!
(‘Cause both yer brains AND yer boobs are WAAAAAY too small!)
I’m seeing an impressive number of grey boxes on this page. Either there’s a ton of spambots here or someone’s off their meds.
The woodwork squeaks and out come the freaks!
“Trump and his co-defendants’ actions in Georgia were disgraceful. If a jury determines that the former president knowingly pressed false claims, criminal punishment may be warranted for specific offenses.”
How the fuck would a jury “determine”, Lancaster, when actual investigations were fought and failed to happen? Ouija boards?
Fucking Nazis.
If the case goes to trial, a jury will face the unenviable task of psychoanalyzing Trump and determining if he truly believed the cockamamie theories he floated, if he knew them to be false, or if he was willfully blind to the distinction. In the absence of criminal intent, such false statements are constitutionally protected speech.
The jury has to decide if he’s a liar or delusional? That will not be an easy task.
Why can’t He be both? Both a floor wax, AND a dessert topping? Both a tooth paste, AND a hemorrhoid oink-mint?
No it won’t. I don’t see how there can be no reasonable doubt in a case like that.
At this point I’m not sure which is more shameful. Refusing to accept the outcome of the election despite a dearth of evidence proving fraud, or being prosecuted for it.
Sarc are you aware that it was proven in court that Pennsylvania illegal altered their laws concerning absentee ballots for the 2020 election?
And Wisconsin. And evidence shows illegal votes elsewhere that chose not to pursue despite easy evidence like Ga. Florida actually decided to look into voting and is up to 1000 indictments of voters voting as dead relatives and other violations.
I hear that a lot. Thing is, it needed to change the outcome to matter. Nothing to me indicates that it did.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/09/opinions/canadians-fear-us-democracy-collapse-obeidallah/index.html
Even Canadians fear US democracy could end soon
Canadians are smarter than USA conservatives!
So is Tucker CarlShit, when he is honest, at lerast!
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tucker-carlson-privately-called-trump-a-demonic-force-a-destroyer-court-filing_n_63f0fc0fe4b0a1ee149437f1
Tucker Carlson Privately Called Trump ‘A Demonic Force, A Destroyer’: Court Filing
The Canadians who elected Justin Trudeau? I think they need to take a closer look at the state of their own democracy.
“in which Trump pressured Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” enough votes to change the election outcome in Georgia”
Look, would you utter morons stop repeating that deliberately misleading paraphrase? He asked Raffensperger to do nothing of the sort; The fact that only one solitary word there was actually in quotes might have clued you into that.
There’s a reason the media have taken to using paraphrases salted with isolated words in quotes. They hate being constrained by using the words people actually uttered, it gets in the way of promoting the narrative.
Amusingly, the indictment itself even quotes Trump as asking Raffensperger to do it by appropriate legal means.
How can that be a crime?
Were there code words?
I mean the Proud Boys were convicted with an unspoken conspiracy..
He was winking and nodding over the phone, and provided air quotes when he said “legal”.
Over the voice connection.
Except that when you read the transcripts of the call you see Sec. Raffensperger try again and again to explain that the counts are correct. Trump badgered Raffensperger to try to get him to change the count. A person has a right to petition but they also have to accept when they lose that petition. A some point a person has to accept “no”. Trump doesn’t believe is required to accept the results.
Transcript
“Except that when you read the transcripts of the call you see Sec. Raffensperger try again and again to explain that the counts are correct.”
And Trump explaining over and over that he wasn’t claiming there was a math error, but that some of the votes that were in the count weren’t legal. If that’s the problem it doesn’t matter how many times you recount them, you have to examine the question of their legality.
” Trump badgered Raffensperger to try to get him to change the count.”
No, he badgered Raffensperger for access to the records so that his people could look through them for illegally counted ballots.
” Hilbert: Mr. President and Cleta, this is Kurt Hilbert, if I might interject for a moment. Um Ryan, I would like to suggest just four categories that have already been mentioned by the president that have actually hard numbers of 24,149 votes that were counted illegally. That in and of itself is sufficient to change the results or place the outcome in doubt. We would like to sit down with your office and we can do it through purposes of compromise and just like this phone call, just to deal with that limited category of votes. And if you are able to establish that our numbers are not accurate, then fine. However, we believe that they are accurate. We’ve had now three to four separate experts looking at these numbers.
Trump: Certified accountants looked at them.
Hilbert: Correct. And this is just based on USPS data and your own secretary of state’s data. So that’s what we would entreat and ask you to do, to sit down with us in a compromise and settlements proceeding and actually go through the registered voter IDs and registrations. And if you can convince us that that 24,149 is inaccurate, then fine. But we tend to believe that is, you know, obviously more than 11,779. That’s sufficient to change the results entirely in of itself. So what would you say to that, Mr. Germany?
Germany: Kurt, um I’m happy to get with our lawyers and we’ll set that up. That number is not accurate. And I think we can show you, for all the ones we’ve looked at, why it’s not. And so if that would be helpful, I’m happy to get with our lawyers and set that up with you guys.”
Oh, but he didn’t mean they could actually look at the records…
” Meadows: Mr. President. This is Mark. It sounds like we’ve got two different sides agreeing that we can look at these areas ands I assume that we can do that within the next 24 to 48 hours to go ahead and get that reconciled so that we can look at the two claims and making sure that we get the access to the secretary of state’s data to either validate or invalidate the claims that have been made. Is that correct?
Germany: No, that’s not what I said. I’m happy to have our lawyers sit down with Kurt and the lawyers on that side and explain to my him, here’s, based on what we’ve looked at so far, here’s how we know this is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong, this is wrong.”
Over and over through the transcript, Trump asked to have access to the records to look for illegal votes, and he NEVER asks Raffensperger to just change the numbers. NEVER.
****
Now, to be clear, while I think Trump had some legit complaints in Georgia, I think he was probably wrong in thinking that, even with the access he wanted, he could prove he was the actual winner. The most he could have proven was that there were enough illegal votes counted to exceed the margin of victory.
Something no court was going to take as sufficient to change the official winner in a Presidential election.
But my point here is just THAT REASON SHOULD STOP USING THAT DAMNED PHONY PARAPHRASE!!!! That represents something Trump never actually said.
First, I stick by the saying that the former President was badgering the Georgia SOS and his staff. In the transcript we see again and again Trump throwing out lies about the Dominion machines, about poll workers, about counts in Michigan. The con man looking for weakness in his mark. Brad Raffensperger did not take the bait.
As for your example, Ryan Germany clearly states that they cannot give Trump’s people some of the information he wants as that is prohibited by law. Trump like anyone is entitled to petition but that does not mean he get what he wants. He wanted 1 more vote than Biden and he was not entitled to get it.
I don’t argue that he wasn’t badgering them. Of course he was. The question is what he was badgering them to do.
And it’s clear that he was demanding access, not vote fabrication.
“As for your example, Ryan Germany clearly states that they cannot give Trump’s people some of the information he wants as that is prohibited by law.”
Which is why they then discussed how this could be lawfully managed:
“Hilbert: To get to this issue of the personal information and privacy issue, is it possible that the secretary of state could deputize the lawyers for the president so that we could access that information and private information without you having any kind of violation? ”
The point here, so far as I’m concerned, is that Reason is using a phony paraphrase that’s been circulating, which grossly, and I think deliberately, misrepresents the conversation. And I find that objectionable, as a matter of simple journalistic ethics.
To my knowledge the offer for access has been made in several states. That access requires that people are sworn in as election workers and with that comes a level of responsibility that no one to my knowledge has been willing to accept.
In fact it is just after this that Trump asserts that Georgia has to give them the information. So my belief that Trump wanted election counts changed remain. We can see how a jury feels about this.
You can believe that all you want, and for all I know you’re right.
But, it’s not what he asked for. And it is journalistic malpractice to use a paraphrase that misrepresents what he asked for.
“Trump and his co-defendants’ actions in Georgia were disgraceful.”
There are conclusory OPINION statements like that peppered throughout this nonsense. While first amendment freedom to print garbage allows this nonsense, you should probably consider changing the name of this fraudulent publication to Unreasonable.
If they continue on this track, “Unreadable” might be appropriate…
LOL
Oh, SNAP! That’s a good one.
Start now making every month extra $19k or more by just doing an easy online job from home. Last month I have earned and received $16650 from this job by giving this only 3 hrs. a day. Every person can now get this job and start earning online by:-.
Follow details: → →salarybitcoinpay.COM
But contemptible as the alleged actions of Trump and his cohorts may be…a jury will face the unenviable task of psychoanalyzing Trump and determining if he truly believed the cockamamie theories he floated…Trump and his co-defendants’ actions in Georgia were disgraceful.
Fuck man, we get it. Unless you spit three times every time you utter Trump’s name, your invitations to cocktail parties and opportunities to hang with the likes of Walter Duranty, Jayson Blair, Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, Brian Williams and Michael Bellesiles, to name just the first few high-profile, sleazeball fabulists who come to mind, might dry up.
Or you could try journalistic advocacy for liberty without the parenthetical noise.
Just spitballin’.
Or you could try journalistic advocacy for liberty without the parenthetical noise.
Crazy talk!
“Journalistic advocacy for liberty” means “sucking Orange Dick” and “lusting for the demise of democracy in the USA”, and “parenthetical noise” means “questioning Dear Leader”, no doubt! Get ON BOARD or GET OUT! MAGA, love it or leave shit!
Ask, and ye shall receive wisdom! Knock, and the doors will be opened wide for ye! The pearls will yea verily be cast even unto the swine! Now it is up to YE, having been led to the water, whether ye will DRINK deeply, or if ye will just horse around!
Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!
We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!
See The Atlantic article https://feedreader.com/observe/theatlantic.com/politics%252Farchive%252F2016%252F10%252Fdonald-trump-scandals%252F474726%252F%253Futm_source%253Dfeed/+view
“The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet” or this one…
https://reason.com/2019/09/02/republicans-choose-trumpism-over-property-rights-and-the-rule-of-law/
He pussy-grab His creditors in 6 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me realty schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!
Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!
Orange Man Bad-Ass Pussy-Grabber all right!
We CAN grab all the pussy, all the time, and NONE will be smart enough to EVER grab our pussies right back!
These voters simply cannot or will not recognize the central illusion of politics… You can pussy-grab all of the people some of the time, and you can pussy-grab some of the people all of the time, but you cannot pussy-grab all of the people all of the time! Sooner or later, karma catches up, and the others will pussy-grab you right back!
https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/02/politics/john-kelly-donald-trump-us-service-members-veterans/index.html Trump is a scumbucket… PERIOD!!!
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/17/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-praise-00116414
‘I like that he said that’: Trump revels in praise from Putin
The Russian leader recently praised Trump for repeatedly promising to end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours.
Ego-Trumping Trump is DELIGHTED with ANYONE who is delighted with Emperor Trump!
Fuck off and die, TDS-addled pile of shit.
Show us how it’s done, hypocrite!
Lancaster, you TDS-addled pile of shit, fuck off and die.
>>District Attorney Fani Willis’ preferred weapon wasn’t designed to be used this way.
hope the plot blows up in her stupid face
Trump and his co-defendants’ actions in Georgia were disgraceful.
Phew, that’s the line I was looking for.
is there a TL:DR for “thanks for reading it for me”?
Putting the cunt back in cuntspiracy.
When the term “Congress shall make no law…” can be twisted to mean “Congress can make lots of laws…”, in regard to the entirety of the Bill of Rights, what’s a little envelope-pushing on the RICO statutes?
You can’t see the little “except” written in 1 point font and invisible ink written under each item of the bill of rights?
Shouldn’t everyone in Congress be charged under RICO for conspiring to defraud the public and benefit themselves?
They are the most dangerous organized crime ring in this country after all.
What they are really saying, “HOW DARE Trump try to drain the Nazi-Swamp taking over the USA!”.. It truly is amazing how much protection a Nazi-Empire conquering the USA gets.
I do not see the defense argument that Trump believed he had won will work without Trump actually testifying. And I cannot see how any reasonable lawyer will let a client like Trump testify. So, I do not see how the proposed defense will work. I think Trump pleads or his lawyers think up a better defense, whatever that might be.
The defense argument should be that the charges are bogus and don’t constitute an actual crime. You can’t (constitutionally) make bringing legal arguments to court (even if they are bad ones, that’s what the court is there to decide) or petitioning legislatures for redress of grievance crimes if you even want to pretend there is any such thing as justice in this country.
Essentially you are asking a jury to nullify the law. A possible strategy but risky. The lawyers would be saying that yes Trump tried to get the count changed but that is not against the law?
“Trump tried to get the count changed”
Wow… You TDS cases just make-up sh*t in your heads all the time.
Read the transcripts.
“All I want to do is this: I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more that we have because we won the state.”
So what if he did?
*Finding* votes = Trying to get the count changed?
Do you always read a statement and make sh*t up about it?
Trump has-been itching to get a court to evaluate his claims of electoral fraud, and now is his chance.
I agree here. This is the opportunity for the former President to prove there was fraud. I doubt very much he can do prove it. It is one thing to throw out accusations in public another to do it in a court room where evidence is needed.
The real question is will the Nazi-Empire actually allow the evidence or will it get rubbed away with BS excuses and propaganda like the IP – Logs and fraudulent Executive Order changes just did by insisting the proof of actual vote-count fraud being dismissal of the undeniable massive amount of process law violation? As well as rubbing out all the legal processes as stamps of validity when they clearly have no legitimate foundation.
There’s not a non-biased person anywhere who would buy “the most secure election ever” BS line precisely because the evidence of legal violations and count abnormalities was undeniable in the 2020 election. For F’Sake’s there’s video recording of Trumps votes being deleted on live TV.
We need a RICO prosecution of the Federal Government. The Federal Government is the largest criminal enterprise.
Cash generating easy and fast method to work part time and earn an extra $15,000 or even more than this online. By working in my spare time I made $17990 in my previous month and I am very happy now because of this job. you can try this now by following
the details here…… http://Www.Smartcash1.com