Georgia RICO - 5 years, mandatory prison.

Nobody on my side of the aisle wants to think about Trump's hand-picked Supreme Court waiting in place to overturn his convictions.

I believe that both the left AND the right are paralyzed with true-believerism.
That's one malady I must have avoided.
 
For those who want to understand the core of Georgia's RICO laws and not the OAN and Fox news version...


...WHAT DOES GEORGIA’S RICO LAW SAY?

Georgia’s RICO Act, adopted in 1980, makes it a crime to participate in, acquire or maintain control of an “enterprise” through a “pattern of racketeering activity” or to conspire to do so. It’s important to note that the alleged scheme does not have to have been successful for a RICO charge to stick.

An “enterprise” can be a single person or a group of associated individuals with a common goal. “Racketeering activity” means to commit, attempt to commit — or to solicit, coerce or intimidate someone else to commit — one of more than three dozen state crimes listed in the law. At least two such acts are required to meet the standard of a “pattern of racketeering activity,” meaning prosecutors have to prove that a person has engaged in two or more related criminal acts as part of their participation in an enterprise to be convicted under RICO.

The U.S. Supreme Court has said that federal RICO allegations must show continuity, that is to say a series of related underlying acts over an extended period of time, not just a few weeks or months. But the Georgia Supreme Court has made clear there is no such requirement in the state law....
Click to expand...
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Nobody on my side of the aisle wants to think about Trump's hand-picked Supreme Court waiting in place to overturn his convictions.

I believe that both the left AND the right are paralyzed with true-believerism.
That's one malady I must have avoided.
Click to expand...

SCOTUS is under so much fire now that I doubt they'd overturn the conviction of an obviously guilty person.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
well, to be fair I became an attorney in 1978.......add four decades of practicing law to get the 'learned' part.....and no....not more....I expect Willis knows it as well as I do......she's just doing this anyway.......because "TRUMP!".....
Click to expand...

The above makes me sad if true.

I bust your balls and show you up constantly for being the dumbest, least knowledge lawyer possible constantly but it tend to believe that like most here, on the right, you are just lying, all the time, including about being a lawyer. Schooling you on RICO above is just the last in a endless list of legal schooling i have given you.

If you are in fact a lawyer, that is a huge indictment on the system. Even as a slumlord lawyer you should have washed out of the system as a failure as you make mistake after mistake on black letter law, such as Georgia RICO application, that even lay people correct you on.


But then when i doubt you can be lawyer i remember Sydney Powell and have to nod that there is indeed room for lawyers like you and her.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Nobody on my side of the aisle wants to think about Trump's hand-picked Supreme Court waiting in place to overturn his convictions.

I believe that both the left AND the right are paralyzed with true-believerism.
That's one malady I must have avoided.
Click to expand...

I wrote yesterday in my opinion over Trump (and Meadows) likely being able to get this pulled up to Federal court, that the pardon power would then be applicable. That was a mistake. In pulling it to a Federal Court, it is a Federal judge and jury pool but it is still a Georgia State case being tried under Georgia laws. No pardon power or DoJ or POTUS interference would be possible.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I don't, even for a moment; but we'll see, perhaps.
Click to expand...

The reputation of SCOTUS used to be the highest among all branches of government. Now it's headed for the toilet with Congress. It would drop to Congressional levels of it overturns a conviction based upon Republican favoritism, not the law.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/4732/Supreme-Court.aspx
u83wwkjj-kedk6pzojadww.png


https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx
2023 Jul 3-27
Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?
Approve 19% Disapprove 77% No opinion 4%
 
Jarod said:
Racketeering is what Trump did. Look at the definition.
Click to expand...

The irony? Rudy used RICO laws to convict criminals when he was a prosecutor. LOL

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/15/rudy-giuliani-rico-indicted
How Rudy Giuliani got indicted on a law he once championed
Former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani is facing the same law that once propelled him into the spotlight.

Why it matters: Giuliani promoted RICO as a prosecutor at the outset of his rising political career, to take down New York mob bosses. He now faces as many charges as Trump in the latest historic indictment against the former president — including criminal racketeering....

...Flashback: While serving as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York from 1983 to 1989, Giuliani used RICO to prosecute the "Five Families" — Italian American organized crime families operating across the U.S.

  • The indictment accused the leadership of engaging in murder and extortion, among other crimes.
  • The 10-week racketeering trial resulted in eight convictions. Giuliani's prosecutors convicted three mob bosses and four associates, all of whom received 100-year prison sentences.
  • At the time, Giuliani said that without RICO, the convictions and sentencing "might not have been possible," per the Wall Street Journal.
  • Of note: Giuliani used the success of the RICO prosecutions to get elected as New York City mayor.

''Using [RICO] against the [organized crime] commission, that was an idea that no one had until I developed it and went down to Washington and started talking about it," Giuliani told the New York Times in 1989.
  • As mayor of New York City from 1994 to 2001, he made strides to drastically reduce crime.
  • In the aftermath of 9/11, he became known as "America's Mayor."
 
Trump has no defense in the documents case. No avenue to winning it. Perhaps a few years in Gitmo would serve well.
 
Jarod said:
I cheered peaceful protests and condemned rioters. Like most Democrats.
Click to expand...

Same here, like most Republicans and Libertarians. Those assemble for Trump's speech on 1/6 were fine. Those who attacked the police were not. Those who broke through security lines to attack the Capitol and attempt to hang Mike Pence should have been shot down as domestic terrorists. Too bad they only shot one.
 
With all this tyranny and injustice happening, it raises a serious question: how can the United States continue to uphold its reputation as a free and fair country if Americans from one political side of the aisle are systematically banned from voicing their opinions on crucial issues like vaccines or elections? These issues profoundly impact the lives of every citizen, yet were now told we can’t share our thoughts if they don’t align with the regime’s narrative.

Consider this: for more than five years, the left spewed fake allegations about the 2016 election, without any repercussions whatsoever. Hillary Clinton actually paid for a fake dossier to set up her political opponent, and all she did was pay some silly fine. If we’re now in a situation where one side cannot freely express themselves, whether their opinions are deemed right or wrong, for better or worse, then we are facing certain death as a nation.

President Trump was right. They’re not coming after him, they’re coming after us. He just happens to be in the way.

https://revolver.news/2023/08/massi...-sham-indictment-reveals-death-spiral-of-usa/
 
coldjoint said:
Apparently illegal in America now:

– Telling people to watch TV
– Asking for phone numbers
– Renting rooms at the Capitol
– Advocating for signature verification
– Tweets

It’s not just Trump they’re coming after. They’re coming next for our free speech if we dare dissent.

— Liz Wheeler (@Liz_Wheeler) August 15, 2023

https://revolver.news/2023/08/massi...-sham-indictment-reveals-death-spiral-of-usa/
Click to expand...

Nope, that is a very dumb statement, those things are not illegal. They might be a part of a crime, but they are not illegal.

Buying a disguise is not illegal, but it might show intent to engage in a crime.
 
Jarod said:
Nope, that is a very dumb statement, those things are not illegal. They might be a part of a crime, but they are not illegal.

Buying a disguise is not illegal, but it might show intent to engage in a crime.
Click to expand...

They are according to the indictment. You need to stop being so stupid. Somehow I do not think that will happen. You are stuck on stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top