My old pal Ken had a handy reply whenever someone mindlessly claimed that conduct he found offensive violated the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act: “It’s not the RICO.” According to the indictment filed by Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willi against Trump and 18 other defendants, including such legal “luminaries” as Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, John Eastman and Jenna Ellis, it is indeed the RICO. It’s very much the RICO.
Defendant Donald John Trump lost the United States presidential election held on November 3, 2020. One of the states he lost was Georgia. Trump and the other Defendants charged in this Indictment refused to accept that Trump lost, and they knowingly and willfully joined a conspiracy to unlawfully change the outcome of the election in favor of Trump. That conspiracy contained a common plan and purpose to commit two or more acts of racketeering activity in Fulton County, Georgia, elsewhere in the State of Georgia, and in other states.
The Georgia indictment does a number of things that none of the others do, or seek to do. First, and most obviously, it puts the totality of the actions taken by Trump and his cohorts into a single unified conspiracy. Were each of these acts separate and disconnected, bizarre notions that popped into the various players’ heads without any thought about how they fit within a grander scheme, an overarching, multifaceted plan to pull off one of the greatest lies ever attempted?
Georgia RICO isn’t the same as federal RICO. There will be many conflating the two, using the latter to attack the former. Not being a Georgia lawyer, I demur from explaining the differences, but these are two different statutes with the same name. Be wary of conflusion.
The Georgia indictment also lists a fairly deep group of conspirators, largely ignored in the federal prosecutions in order to avoid mucking up the time line for trial by a flurry of lawyers making up reasons for adjournments until the cows come home, or the next election was over. The list of defendants in the Georgia indictment covers all the bold letter names from the scheme as well as a few lesser names, without apparent concern about the dynamic that 18 defendants and their lawyers bring to the table.
Finally, Georgia, unlike the federal courts, allows trials to be televised.
While it’s not directly connected to the indictment, it’s also worth noting that this is a state case, and consequently not within a president’s power to stop or pardon. Federalism, baby. Not even the governor of Georgia can pardon these defendants for five years after completion of sentence and only then on the award of the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole.
But this raises the specter of whether it adds to the realization that The Donald is a malignant criminal who would say or do anything to avoid the humiliation of being a pathetic loser or is the blind faith of his adherents so strong that no amount of evidence will compel them to recognize the obvious? Will this be one more whine of victimization, the Dems trying to convict their greatest adversary rather than win an election against him, or the culmination of Trump’s engaging in a conspiracy to seize the presidency from the jaws of defeat?
While it’s still possible that another state or two will prosecute Trump for trying to coerce government officials to lie about the vote, by presenting his list of fake electors as if that was how it worked, by having his minions tell their legislatures and courts lies about voter fraud. But in all likelihood, there will be no further indictments. Is this what was needed, what was right, to address Trump’s scheming, or is this just a new excuse to fund raise on the backs of true but sad believers?
Is my old pal Ken ready to change his tune and proclaim, “Well yeah, I guess it is the RICO”?
Update: Ken has surfaced.
*Tuesday Talk rules apply within reason.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
He put out a video on YT that’s basically just him saying “Okay, fine, it’s RICO. Are you happy now?”
Round One of Trump Redux-tio is complete. The charges are all tucked in their beds. Now comes the clatter. Will each judge stay each case until after the general election, to “allow” the electoral process to play out as unhindered as possible while in limbo? Will the 45 fund raising slow? Will the vast middle of nevertrumps rise like the phoenix and find someone else more palatable? And will they get that candidate nominated? Will the Current Occupant order pardons on all such federal cases AND to the First Son, then step down in the 2nd day of the Dem Convention? Tune in each afternoon at 3:30 pm Eastern for another intriguing episode of As the Whirl Turns.
The Georgia case thus far feels like Dark Shadows of the 70’s, with GJ names and indicted crines being published as if a stage hand tripping in the back of the set. But it’s real. And we cannot look away.
Rudy “The Ricochet” Giuliani is about to be hoisted with his own petard. Is he the greatest fall from grace of a generation?
I’m betting on Giuliani flipping on Il Douche.
Like the scorpion stinging the frog, it’s in his nature. Ratfuckers gonna ratfuck.
I’ve got a feeling it won’t be 18 defendants for long. It isn’t manageable, so the plan and deals are likely well toward fruition.
This indictment and the classified documents indictment seem to me to have the most rhetorical heft. Not necessarily legal heft, but “find me 11,700 votes” and brandishing war plans is something the average person can understand as wrong.
Is this worthy of Racketeering treatment. Replace “Trump” with “Corleone” or “Gambino.” It works. Maybe this is the way to look at dealing with “Don” Trumpleone.
I’m going contrarian this time, as the indictment does an excellent job putting all the pieces of the conspiracy together in a way that even the most ardent Trump supporter of good will can’t easily ignore.
Not that I’m a fan of Fani, but this was a good piece of work
I’m no fan of Trump, but it’s hard not to be impressed that a man his age can maintain an election for so long…
MAGA + FAFO = RICO
1) Hal, you win the internet today.
2) This whole thing is preposterous. Organized crime? Nothing about Rudy or Sidney Powell has been even remotely organized throughout this whole debacle. WITCH HUNT
3) On a serious note for non-lawyers like me, I’m hearing a ton about this thing being remanded to federal court. Would that change much of anything beyond the venue itself for the trial. The charges are still state level, right? Sorry for n00bing all over myself
I’m in VT and Scott is in NY, but I think I heard him groan, “Don’t encourage him”.
At a gathering in Mar-a-Lago, Trump declared, “I want to see Biden in jail!”.
Negotiations are ongoing, but if Trump will agree to a plea deal and spare the nation the cost and embarrassment of a trial, Biden may agree to visit him there occasionally…
There’s a reason you’re not a lawyer–nothing you said is lawyerly or correct. Not even a little.
To be fair, the presence of some of the defendants in this indictment quite strongly suggests that being a lawyer isn’t a guarantee for saying lawyerly or correct things. They just got paid a lot more than me for being inept and wrong.
They aren’t lawyerly, either. But you’re just ignorant. It’s not a bad thing; you just don’t know what you’re talking about.
Bryan, hi. Don’t feel bad. “Experts are divided on whether Trump can potentially force the removal of the Georgia case to federal court.” That’s a sentence Illya Somin wrote in a Volokh Conspiracy post on Trump’s Georgia indictment. Link is here, since Tuesday Talk rules are in effect for this post:
https://reason.com/volokh/2023/08/15/the-georgia-case-against-trump/
His post links to an article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution that quotes Andrew Fleischman, who is a profoundly intelligent Georgia attorney. The article discusses the benefits that might accrue to such a move, and includes what the criteria for removal is. That article is here. Link because Tuesday Talk rules.
https://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta-news/will-georgia-case-against-trump-end-up-in-federal-court/ADQWGZTHJVAXJHXPGQILZ5VOYA/
Also, because Tuesday Talk rules are in effect, the lawyer scorn for imperfectly worded, non-lawyer ignorant questions might have let up a bit. Maybe that will happen next time.
Appreciate it, Mark. I don’t feel bad at all. I asked a question hoping to be more informed, because the talking heads were all either taking a victory lap or screaming that the sky was falling. It’ll take a lot more than Skink’s usual TT schtick to hurt my feelings. Besides, the mean old bartender gives me more rope around here than I deserve on a usual day. TT is my time to shine!
Not likely. This is a blog for lawyers and judges. We discuss legal issues based on our knowledge. We suffer the non-lawyers to the extent they want to understand and learn the law. The same is not true of ignorant statements about “what I read from some guy,” which includes the rumblings of a lawyer you might think is “profoundly intelligent” about something. Smart isn’t enough for lawyers: the question is always whether we know what we’re talking about and whether the law supports our conclusions.
After all, my dog is profoundly intelligent for a dog of her type, but she ain’t intelligent about hunting because she ain’t a hunting dog.
FYI, Andrew’s one of my mentees.
🍌🍌🍌🍌🍌