I think the larger issue - in light of the new SCOTUS decision that Ellie cites below - is that the DOJ would have spent valuable time litigating the issue of proper venue, and most likely ended up in SDFL anyway. Jack Smith didn’t want to play that game.
And as I noted in response to conti ben above, it appears that most of the alleged crimes occurred in SDFL, with possibly some of Counts 1-31 occurring in Bedminster NJ.
Add to that the fact that both defendants reside in SDFL, along with a number of likely witnesses, and it’s pretty clearly the most appropriate venue.
Seems like I read somewhere that there are some of the recovered docs that were too sensitive to be used in this case, even with whatever limits there are. Like couldn't be included in the indictment because to secret to even describe them.
A local columnist at the newspaper here in deep red Carroll County -- for whom trump can do no wrong-- called on Sunday for him to drop out, lest all other Republicans go down to defeat with him.
OTOH, the columnist, a retired banker and frothing at the mouth Christian, also thinks that without trump, Republicans are offering America exactly what it wants and will control all gummint for decades.
There is no need for the documents to be classified tosupport the charges, but they are classified, so the gummint will have to deal with that.
I have seen speculation (probably on Liz Dye's funny podcast) that the prosecution has chosen documents whose secrecy has either been compromised anyway, or deal with operations so far in the past as not to be so worthwhile now.
Not only Parlatore is lying. Some former AUSA on Newsmax opined that DOJ policy requires charging the highest provable crime, which no doubt sounded profound to the goobers watching Newsmax but begs the question: how do you then bargain for a plea?
SDFL apparently uses a “wheel” system, which is somewhat akin to pulling out names from a lottery system.
As I mentioned before, there are exceptions that would cause a judge’s name to be removed from the system. Federal judges at the district and appellate court level are required to file disclosure forms. For example, if a federal judge owns $100k in AT&T stock (directly, and not through a mutual fund), then that judge’s name would be removed from possible selection if a case was filed where AT&T was a party. Or let’s say a judge’s spouse was employed by Goldman Sachs, their name would be removed from the assignment of a case involving GS.
The system does not, however, remove a judge from the selection process just because they happened to be appointed by a specific President.
Other decisions for possible recusal would be based on the standard of the “appearance of impropriety,” but that would occur after the random system assigns a case to a specific judge.
He seems to be taking legal advice from Tom Fitton, who, as everyone here points out, is not a lawyer.
I think the larger issue - in light of the new SCOTUS decision that Ellie cites below - is that the DOJ would have spent valuable time litigating the issue of proper venue, and most likely ended up in SDFL anyway. Jack Smith didn’t want to play that game.
And as I noted in response to conti ben above, it appears that most of the alleged crimes occurred in SDFL, with possibly some of Counts 1-31 occurring in Bedminster NJ.
Add to that the fact that both defendants reside in SDFL, along with a number of likely witnesses, and it’s pretty clearly the most appropriate venue.
True, but Jack Smith rather obviously doesn’t want to waste valuable time litigating over proper venue, which would most likely end up in SDFL anyway.
"No, it really doesn’t support your suspicions."
LOL...Probably not! I'm just wondering what the "random generator" is...names in a hat? dice? Like. how is the process protected from tampering
And lemme be clear...I REALLY don't know nor do I pretend to know...Just genuinely curious
Source?
Seems like I read somewhere that there are some of the recovered docs that were too sensitive to be used in this case, even with whatever limits there are. Like couldn't be included in the indictment because to secret to even describe them.
Ha, as we were driving past the courthouse in Fort Pierce the other day, we commented that at least they wouldn't be having the trial there. Oops.
Don't be afraid of the paint! You have lots, use lots.
Wait, what? trump is being defended by a lobbyist for the communists? Has anybody told Joe McCarthy about this? Or Donald trump?
A local columnist at the newspaper here in deep red Carroll County -- for whom trump can do no wrong-- called on Sunday for him to drop out, lest all other Republicans go down to defeat with him.
OTOH, the columnist, a retired banker and frothing at the mouth Christian, also thinks that without trump, Republicans are offering America exactly what it wants and will control all gummint for decades.
There is no need for the documents to be classified tosupport the charges, but they are classified, so the gummint will have to deal with that.
I have seen speculation (probably on Liz Dye's funny podcast) that the prosecution has chosen documents whose secrecy has either been compromised anyway, or deal with operations so far in the past as not to be so worthwhile now.
Not only Parlatore is lying. Some former AUSA on Newsmax opined that DOJ policy requires charging the highest provable crime, which no doubt sounded profound to the goobers watching Newsmax but begs the question: how do you then bargain for a plea?
SDFL apparently uses a “wheel” system, which is somewhat akin to pulling out names from a lottery system.
As I mentioned before, there are exceptions that would cause a judge’s name to be removed from the system. Federal judges at the district and appellate court level are required to file disclosure forms. For example, if a federal judge owns $100k in AT&T stock (directly, and not through a mutual fund), then that judge’s name would be removed from possible selection if a case was filed where AT&T was a party. Or let’s say a judge’s spouse was employed by Goldman Sachs, their name would be removed from the assignment of a case involving GS.
The system does not, however, remove a judge from the selection process just because they happened to be appointed by a specific President.
Other decisions for possible recusal would be based on the standard of the “appearance of impropriety,” but that would occur after the random system assigns a case to a specific judge.
Hope this helps!
Cannon is the surprise you get with your Cracker Jacks.
You understand blackmail, right? Usually “pay me money or I’ll expose this secret information that is damaging to you.”
Graymail, while not specifically illegal, is “drop these charges against me or I’ll expose this top secret government information at trial.”
Does that help?
That makes sense. Thanks.