this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
218 points (97.4% liked)

politics

18651 readers
4295 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sidney Powell, a former Trump attorney charged alongside the former president in the Georgia election interference case, has filed a motion for a speedy trial.

Powell’s request makes her the second of the 19 charged in the case to do so.

all 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Speedy trial, as in: "I try to dump my shit first, and if I dump enough shit on Trump I may get out with a slap on the fingers instead of a stay behind bars. Better than waiting and getting shit dumped on by the others."

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I suspect her motives may simply be that she wants this done quickly, and to not be waiting for another 2 years to suit Donald Trump's election bid.

Whatever we may think about the alleged crimes, they're all innocent until proven guilty and this will be highly disruptive for their lives. I can empathise with the desire to get this done rather than allow the trial to be postponed because one person wants to.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

they’re all innocent until proven guilty

While indeed they are, they were not booked for that trial because they were picked at random out of the general populace...

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

She always looks like she's been hit in the face with a pan by a cartoon mouse, and her face hasn't yet gone back to the shape it should be. But yes, by all means finish her trial, and then throw her in prison. I've been waiting long enough to see these creeps go to jail; I'm just as eager for a speedy trial as they are.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hope she hangs and I hope it isn't speedy

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That was a nice little dance...

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

The Fani Willis reaction to Cheseboro doing this ("Speedy trial? Sure, how about October?") speaks loudly to the strength of her case.

With racketeering, you have to prove that there was an overarching criminal conspiracy, and then you prove that the defendant(s) was/were a part of it in the ways that you've charged them to be. So all the defendants (regarding the same conspiracy) will have a lot of identical/shared evidence being used against them at trial.

So tactically, if one or two of the group go first, the rest get to see a preview of most of the body of evidence that will be used against them. If there's any weakness in the presented case, they can craft their defense around it.

And here, Fani Willis pretty much said, "That's fine."

They must have every step of this proven beyond any doubt whatsoever. Based on her reaction to these speedy trial motions, if I were one of those people charged in this conspiracy, I'd be very, very worried.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

So tactically, if one or two of the group go first, the rest get to see a preview of most of the body of evidence that will be used against them. If there's any weakness in the presented case, they can craft their defense around it.

The defendant has a constitutional right to have access to all evidence that will or could be used against them, as well as any exculpatory evidence the prosecutor might have.

So if there's a tactic, it's not to be able to see the evidence to improve their legal defense, it's to be able to spin the evidence to the public in the coming months to try to get Trump elected or rile the mob enough for people to try another J6.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

I, for one, appreciate this wax-faced lady stepping forward to provide content during the WGA/SGA strikes!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

It’s a tactic they use to see what the prosecutor will do and how they present the case.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

My guess for this and cheesebro’s request is so that they don’t become bankrupt over the legal process. tangerine turd can afford to drag out the process indefinitely by soliciting donations from freedumb patriots but not these stooges. Ghouliani is what happens to them all eventually, and I’m giddy with anticipation.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Sidney Powell, a former Trump attorney charged alongside the former president in the Georgia election interference case, has filed a motion for a speedy trial.

Powell’s request makes her the second of the 19 charged in the case to do so.

Kenneth Chesebro, the attorney who drafted the fake electors memo, likewise pushed for a speedy trial, and is now facing an Oct. 23 trial date.

While a Georgia judge agreed to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’s suggested date, he set the October timeline for Chesebro only, despite a suggestion from the prosecutor that she was ready to try all 19 defendants.

Former President Trump opposed Chesebro’s motion, indicating a desire to sever his case from Chesebro if the trial timetable were advanced.

Powell is facing charges on six counts, including conspiracy to commit election fraud, as well as charges related to a voting system breach in Coffee County, Ga.


The original article contains 151 words, the summary contains 151 words. Saved 0%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

What a gaggle of morons.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

No way the strategy here is that Powell and Chesebro are RNC-planted operatives intended to sabotage a defence before primaries. Nope. No way at all.

Don't even @ me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

She's hoping to get in on the rush of precedent

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Lock Her Up :)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Well, there's already a trial scheduled for 10/23... what's one more defendant between friends?