207
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
207 points (97.3% liked)
politics
19089 readers
2065 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- 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.
- 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The significance is that if they ask for a speedy trial in Fulton County, the court is obligated to give it to them within the current 2 month court cycle or the next, and if they can't go to trial in that time, the case is dropped and they go free.
Nobody really wants to go to trial that fast, not only because it's hard to prepare the case that quickly, but it also limits the amount of pre-trial motions they can do.
It seems likely they were hoping Fani Willis couldn't go to trial that fast and they could just walk free, but Willis was like "I'm cool with that. I can do this shit tomorrow if you want" and now they'll get their speedy trial, which means their defense will be rushed and a little hamstrung.
These people aren't smart.
I wonder if it’s a ploy to pressure trump. A few have indicated they expected their legal bills to be paid. If their trial can proceed quickly, there is less valid reason to delay his trial. If he offered to pay their legal costs, it might all slow down as they waive their speedy trial.
Also, if they are found guilty and the case is similar to trump, or the details are damaging to him, it also damages his election chances. So, they may not be as stupid as they seem. However, if the speedy trial is asked for, perhaps it won’t be taken away if they can argue justice is better served to continue with the speedy trial. I doubt it would though. Usually fair is the most important.
Thanks for the explanation. Also helps clarify why it's taken so long for trials to begin - if every defendant can demand "trial within a few months or it's free", of course you'd spend years gathering evidence and perfecting your case beforehand, if you felt you could.
In this case it is a bluff. She wants her trial as soon as possible on the assertion that the DA and prosecution are not fully prepared for trial... But I think it will bite her square in the ass because there is no way that they are handing out subpoenas with so much at stake on a whim without having ~~dune~~ done their due diligence.
Remember when this dipshit was the kraken? She's probably all like "these assholes don't have a case at all, I tried doing a law once and it's impossible!!!"
If you take the Accelerationist view, he is draining the swamp. I've always suspected he was a corrupt politician honeypot.
Now that's a thought. An unwitting corrupt politician honey pot.
President Peter Principle.
I mean, if they were willing to hitch to his wagon should we actually feel bad for them when he backs that wagon over them?
To your edit, it’s hard to campaign from jail. Also the warden (or whoever) could decide he doesn’t get internet access or significant phone time, so, that’d be a problem too