That was Trusty, right? (Who just walked). The pool is even smaller when you consider they will need to br licensed in FL.
That was an interesting discussion, and there are a few points which I think are fairly relevant to Smith's mindset. First, they are charging him with crimes that appear to be transactional in nature, which fits his personality/MO. Second, they chose the Palm Beach/Cannon court, and not any other federal court in south Florida. They literally ticked a box. Third, they gave credit to Smith for only charging Trump with retaining the files, and not also taking the files. As they pointed out, both are the essentially the same, but just different ends of the same action, and sometimes both are charged to "see what sicks." Fourth, they seem to think there are pending charges which will be filed in DC, and also possibly Bedminster. The latter they think so because that is where the recording took place. Regarding Cannon: Fifth, they seem to be saying that Cannon was assigned at random, not with any intent, though it was not unanimous. Sixth, they also seem to expect that Cannon won't be the trial judge. But not really because of her mess previously, because of her experience, specifically with classified documents. One thing which I hope gets addressed in the future is to get into why those 38(?) documents were chosen, and why others were left out. From reporting, he had over 300 Classified or higher documents seized.
I think the guidelines say a maximum of 10 year per conviction, per document. That doesn't include the other charges. And what I have heard so far from the legal people is they believe he will get the max, or close to it, for each conviction, as a message to how serious the actions were.
No, sure it could. A plea is a separate agreement. Defendants agree with to conditions of probation, etc., in plea deals all the time that restrict their constitutional rights in comparison to normal persons who haven't been convicted of a felony.
At this early stage I seem to be the only one who voted for not guilty. Did I miss something? Will he not be tried before a jury? There are significant portions of the citizenry who think Trump can do no wrong and it only takes one juror to stuff things up. I think they will have no trouble finding 3 or 4 jurors who will vote not guilty regardless of any evidence presented.
My hope is the prosecution can suss out the Trumpers Prosecutor "What do you think of Hunter Biden?" Juror "Hunter Biden is the anti Christ who should be buried under the jail" Prosecutor "motion to strike this juror"
Hey, man, it's already been a good couple of days. I don't need you raise my hopes and then get them dashed.
While this is true, I suspect there will a very through questionnaire to potential jurors which will sus out those bent on the pro-Trump conspiracies.
Well, for one thing, that wouldn’t mean a not guilty verdict, that would mean a mistrial. For another thing, think of all the political corruption charges over the years. Has this ever happened before? If it has, I can’t remember it.
Yes your right it will mean a mistrial but I doubt a second trial would ever go ahead. Don't know any American examples but here is one from my country. You will find some details towards the end of the article in the section titled "Aftermath 1988-2003 Joh Bjelke-Petersen - Wikipedia They even made a TV movie about his trial.
It’s extreme but I know for a fact that some debrief forms specifically state “up to and including death” I’m not sure what the stakes are for the following: https://www.clearancejobsblog.com/yankee-white-security-clearance/ Further reading about Former Presidents and Eligibility to Access Classified Information https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020...eligibility-to-access-classified-information/