General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOcelot II
(130,534 posts)Get your ass to Atlanta. Now.
DBoon
(24,987 posts)Love that moniker.
DBoon
(24,987 posts)peggysue2
(12,533 posts)And General Grant? Not too shabby either.
ExWhoDoesntCare
(4,741 posts)The one who beat Atlanta like a shag rug was this guy:

DBoon
(24,987 posts)I mean, I couldn't resist "Unconditional Surrender" and Atlanta, even if Grant wasn't actually there
spanone
(141,610 posts)FUCK OFF.
Irish_Dem
(81,266 posts)hlthe2b
(113,971 posts)She's got their "number," that's for sure.
BTW, is a calligraphy rendering of a signature technically legally binding? I like it and perhaps it isn't much different from a signature "stamp," but...? **Never Mind--on edit, I see it is from her email**
Irish_Dem
(81,266 posts)No kid gloves for Trump's friends.
Now she needs to do the same in regard to Trump.
Recycle_Guru
(2,973 posts)ALL will be treated the same as other criminal defendants in this jurisdiction.
Irish_Dem
(81,266 posts)All criminal defendants will be treated the same.
Botany
(77,323 posts)... fellow the rule of law in Georgia.
Mark Meadows: Can you give me more time?
Fani Willis: No.
Meadows is looking @ a RICO charge in Georgia from D.A. Willis. 5 years mandatory time. Time for
you to get chatty Mark.
Tree Lady
(13,282 posts)He is playing his game and enjoying watching hers.
Irish_Dem
(81,266 posts)To keep Meadows happy? Or would Smith want Fani to squeeze Meadows even more?
Botany
(77,323 posts)are working very hard not to talk to each other outside of their peoples working on
the scheduling of "court stuff" in order to avoid any appeals of their verdicts because
of something or other. Now if either team Jack or team Fani exposes stuff during their
trials then the other team might use that "stuff" in their work.
I'm willing to bet that Meadows will sing like a bird to avoid the 5 year mandatory sentence
for RICO charges.
I might be wrong but I bet that Donny is looking to flee America because the walls are closing
in on him PDQ.
Irish_Dem
(81,266 posts)She would not say what they talked about but it appeared to be more than just scheduling issues.
(So I will take your bet!)
Yes it is apparent that fleeing is on Trump's mind.
roamer65
(37,953 posts)getagrip_already
(17,802 posts)I guess he still needs to show for booking.
Ocelot II
(130,534 posts)MLAA
(19,745 posts)Bayard
(29,693 posts)Get your ass to Georgia.
Love,
Fani
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,869 posts)riversedge
(80,810 posts)in and out under cover of the Dark. go for it.
dem4decades
(14,057 posts)Then in the same case he says he can't follow orders.
Fuck these guys.
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,869 posts)miyazaki
(2,650 posts)Throw his ass in the hole.
JohnSJ
(98,883 posts)within a two week time frame
LetMyPeopleVote
(179,869 posts)Last edited Tue Aug 22, 2023, 06:13 PM - Edit history (1)
This motion is very arrogant. Meadows filed to remove to federal court. That statute provides that the state criminal proceeding continues until the case is formerly removed. The federal court ruled earlier that Meadows motion is sufficient to avoid an immediate dismissal and set a hearing for Monday of next week
Meadows motion simply assumes that Meadows is entitled to immediate removal to federal court or a stay. I hope the judge rejects this motion
Link to tweet
Here is a link to the filing
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.319225/gov.uscourts.gand.319225.17.0.pdf
This part of the motion is really concerning
case, not just the charges against Mr. Meadowswhether or not other defendants
wish to remove or have a legal basis to do so. See Heinze, 637 F. Supp. 3d at 1325
n.8 (It is well settled that if one claim cognizable under Section 1442 is present,
the entire action is removed, regardless of the relationship between the Section 1442
claim and the non-removable claims.) (quoting Nadler v. Mann, 951 F.2d 301, 306
n.9 (11th Cir. 1992)). Mr. Meadows, of course, had no control over how the case
was presented to the grand jury and seeks removal only on his own behalf. A district court
court may remand proceedings against remaining defendants after dismissing
charges against federal officials, see Spencer v. New Orleans Levee Bd., 737 F.2d
435, 438 (5th Cir. 1984), and at least one has severed a case after permitting removal
and then remanded the non-removable portion to state court, see Joyner v. A.C. & R.
Insulation Co., No. CIV. CCB-12-2294, 2013 WL 877125, at *9-10 (D. Md. Mar.
7, 2013). But however the Court should proceed, Mr. Meadows has an absolute
right to have the charges against him heard in federal court, Willingham, 395 U.S. at
406, and the Federal Officer Removal Statute calls for prompt consideration of his
Notice
Meadows is swinging for the fences and I hope that the judge tells Meadows to shut up and get arraigned.