House Republicans Probe Fulton County's Trump Indictments
Category: News & Politics
Via: vic-eldred • last year • 114 commentsBy: Shawn Fleetwood (The Federalist)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee sent a letter to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on Thursday demanding the Democrat prosecutor provide answers over her indictment of former President Donald Trump and his associates.
"Your indictment and prosecution implicate substantial federal interests, and the circumstances surrounding your actions raise serious concerns about whether they are politically motivated," the letter reads.
Last week, Willis announced her office would be charging Trump and 18 of his associates for what she claims was an attempt to "conspire[] and endeavor[] to conduct and participate in criminal enterprise" to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Included in the bogus 98-page indictment are several acts Willis contends contributed to the "furtherance" of the so-called conspiracy, such as tweets issued by Trump encouraging people to watch Georgia legislative oversight hearings on TV and a text message asking for phone numbers sent by former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
In their letter to Willis, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee questioned the Fulton County DA's rationale for charging Trump and his associates and raised several examples indicating her prosecution of the former president is "politically motivated." Among those cited is Willis' purported launch of a new campaign fundraising site "that highlighted [her] investigation into President Trump" several days before her office indicted the former commander-in-chief.
Also referenced are public remarks by Emily Kohrs, the forewoman of the special grand jury convened by Willis, who openly bragged during interviews with regime-approved media "about her excitement at the prospect of subpoenaing President Trump and getting to swear him in." The letter also invoked the decision by Fulton County's superior court clerk to prematurely release "a list of criminal charges against President Trump reportedly hours before the vote of the grand jury."
While a statement issued by the court clerk's office originally claimed the document showing the charges against Trump was "fictitious," the clerk later asserted it was a "mishap" and that "when [she] hit save, it went to the press queue."
In explaining their rationale for federal oversight of the Georgia-based indictments, House Republicans referenced Willis' alleged attempt to "use state criminal law to regulate the conduct of federal officers acting in their official capacities," such as that of Trump and Meadows. The letter additionally raised questions about the involvement of Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith and whether Willis' office "coordinated" with Smith "during the course of [her] investigation."
"News outlets have reported that your office and Mr. Smith 'interviewed many of the same witnesses and reviewed much of the same evidence' in reaching your decision to indict President Trump," the letter reads. "The House Committee on the Judiciary (Committee) thus may investigate whether federal law enforcement agencies or officials were involved in your investigation or indictment."
As such, House Republicans are demanding Willis turn over any and all documents related to her office's "receipt and use of federal funds," communications with the Smith and the DOJ, and communications between her office and any federal agency regarding her investigation into Trump and his associates by Sept. 7.
Tags
Who is online
465 visitors
Should DAs who run on getting a political figure and fundraise off it, be investigated?
Should they be liable for malicious prosecution?
Who was it that said to never let a crisis go to waste? Wasn't that a Democrat?
To be fair, a lot of politicians follow the same play book and will raise funds like this. It will be interesting to watch to see how this case goes. Based on the "phone call" this would seem to be a rather weak case against Trump.
Ya, it was! And a mean-spirited democrat at that. I think he wound up being Chicago's last white mayor.
republicans - the party of law and order...
LOL, not anymore...
The former 'president' is selling his mug shot to his supporters/enablers with the words NEVER SURRENDER after he SURRENDERED for the FOURTH TIME.
LMAO, better spell it out in crayon for him.
funny how trump's also claiming election interference now, because he got indicted for conspiracy to interfere with the results of an election.
There is nothing malicious about prosecuting the former 'president' and his perfect phone call.
He is guilty as sin on all 4 indictments.
First ever 'president' with a mug shot.
You must be so proud.
Donald Trump, dickhead in chief (2017-2020), is on an audio recording asking the senior election official in Georgia to "find" 11, 800 votes somewhere so Trump could be declared the winner of Georgia. This insanity occurred AFTER Georgia had already done a recount and explained every little bit about why the vote in Georgia was what it was. Trump lost Georgia because thousands of people who otherwise voted for Republicans did not vote for him. They left the presidential line blank.
Did you seriously expect there would be no consequences from this asshole trying to meddle in the Georgia election?
To find is not to be confused with "invent votes." Tell us John, how many candidates have sought recounts in close elections?
In other words, elections are not to be questioned when democrats win them.
So your only argument is semantics?
Don't forget, Trump did not ask him to check for missed votes, he asked for a very specific number of votes.
remind us again how many recounts were done in georgia.
Semantics is the basis of the prosecution in GA according to JR. One has to interpret what Trump meant and prosecute him for it.
That is exactly the point. A recount was done. I think two were done BEFORE Trump asked Raffensberger to find 11,800 votes for him.
What is your point today? There doesnt seem to be any other than there will be "retribution'. Retribution for what? You cannot explain it.
I don't know how many recounts GA did.
Recounts either confirm or call into question the counting of ballots. They may reveal ballots that went uncounted etc.
What a recount does not do is reveal if there was any fraud committed.
I guess all that can be said is:
(1) Trump got his recount.
(2) He lost a close one.
(3) A judge is conducting a malicious prosecution of a political candidate and if she has been in contact with the DOJ, she may be in a bit of legal difficulty as well.
Bingo!!!!
The case is far more complicated and expansive than just what Trump might have meant in the one phone call. It's a RICO case so the prosecutor will use the action of the 'phone call', the multiple conversations between co-conspirators, the gathering of false electors and the tampering of voting equipment (I'm thinking there also has to be more they have too) to convince the jury of a conspiracy within the state as part of trying to overturn the election. It's an expansive case and a huge undertaking for the prosecution. IF she doesn't have all her ducks in a row she will removed from office and she knows it.
So you can read JR's mind? Quick! What number is he thinking of?
You have provided no evidence of a "malicious prosecution". I'm sure that was a simple mistake, so please provide your evidence that the prosecution is "malicious" in nature.
It is fairly simple. When you have prosecutors like NY AG Letitia James and Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg and Fulton County DA "Fat" Fani Willis running for office in ultra blue districts, campaigning by promising to "get Trump," you inevitably have a malicious prosecution.
It's fairly simple. Don't break the law and AGs and DAs won't come after you to prosecute you.
It IS fairly simple. You have NO evidence to back up your claim.
Thanks for playing.
You say he broke a law.
I don't see a conviction.
They campaigned on getting him. It is called a MASSIVE CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
I forgot. You don't accept evidence. I guess you can join our "critical thinkers" over in the corner.
He was arrested for breaking the law. You're just being obtuse as usual. Don't break the law and you won't get arrested (or in terms you'll understand since its your side's saying, don't break the law and you won't get shot).
Did you see him being arrested? What is it, 4 times now? How many crimes has he been charged with? How many times has he admitted to those crimes when someone points a camera at him?
What a stupid comment; critical thinking means following the evidence to wherever it leads regardless of whether or not you like the outcome.
Learn what critical thinking is before attempting to ridicule those who practice it.
“I guess you can join our "critical thinkers" over in the corner…”
…or you can choose to sit with our “non thinkers” who have not-so-passively aggressively painted themselves into a corner…
There will be 'a reckoning'!
They're so desperate.
So let me see, the congress that is investigating the weaponization of governmental bodies is utilizing its power as an investigative body and weaponizing governmental bodies (itself).... Quick, get a mirror! I think that we can make the whole thing feedback and blow itself up! Freedom!
Congress has that duty.
For example: If congress does not investigate Hunter Biden, nobody is going to.
The whole purpose of Congress investigating the weaponization of government was to chill the various segments of government from investigating and prosecuting the Republican's God and Savior DJT. You know it. I know it. The whole country knows it.
Hunter Biden is Hunter Biden and has nothing to do with DJT.
What you did to Trump is just the tip of the iceberg and btw democrats didn't just question the 2016 election, they resisted the will of the people for 4 years.
We don't forget anything. Even if democrats win the next or all the elections :
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it."
Abraham Lincoln
Where were you for the last 7 plus years of non stop Democrat investigations into all things Trump.
The very same Democrats that wanted to impeach him before he even took office.
If Trump didnt want to be investigated he should have stopped committing crimes. Easy peasy.
So exactly what you people did for 8 years under Obama.
Where were you for the last 30 years of non stop Republican investigations into all things Clinton.
Nope. Not even close.
How many were there?
Tell us how they went.
Yes, its the same fucking thing.
Resistance is synonymous with Trump.
Obama was worshiped. He got questions from a loving media that he seemed embarrassed by.
Your side found absolutely nothing in 30 years. You all wasted time and money and found nothing.
As for Obama, you all tried to make him an illegitimate president with your birther nonsense for years and years, you all called him a Muslim, etc., posted pictures of him being hung, watermelons growing in the White House lawn, and more. You all were absolutely disgusting, and you've all only gotten worse since then. Get off your high horse. You have no high ground here.
That isn't quite accurate, is it?
We found that in the Whitewater case the evidence turned up after the statute of limitations ran out.
We found that in the case of Benghazi, Hillary & Susan Rice lied about the cause and the State Department dithered on a quick military response.
We found that in the server case, Hillary was in violation of a legal statute, probably compromised classified information and eventually destroyed classified information that had been subpoenaed.
What didn't happen was Hillary Clinton being prosecuted.
As for Obama, you all tried to make him an illegitimate president with your birther nonsense for years and years, you all called him a Muslim, etc., posted pictures of him being hung, watermelons growing in the White House lawn, and more.
I didn't do any of that and none of that trivia seemed to effect Obama or his campaign. Obama had a lot of good will to work with. He could have united the country. He could have been a good president. He was too full of resentment.
Obama wasn't full of resentment. Your side was full of racists that came out of the closet when he was elected. Your side embraced those racists with open arms. There's no uniting with people like that, or the people who embraced them with open arms.
[Deleted]
There was a photoshopped thingy with Obama posed as a witch doctor with a bone through his nose.
There was the photoshopped image of Obama, his wife and his children pictured as if they belonged in Planet Of The Apes
and many more similar
is that the "good will" you are talking about?
I am not the subject of this article, now am I. You have nothing in 30 years, so whine and cry all you want. Trump is getting what Trump deserves. Just because you are blind to the law, doesn't mean the rest of us are.
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it."
But only to those who follow you, those with the temerity not to swallow your brand of partisan puss can just piss off ... eh?
I'm sure there all kinds of epithets hurled at every president. How does that equate to the resistance that Trump faced.
The very first thing that happened when he got in office was the "Travel Ban." Before airport security got their orders the ACLU was already at the airports with a class action lawsuit. Do you remember that?
How about the massive resistance to the wall. Do you know Biden spent millions to leave already paid for wall materials rotting in the southwest? Do you know he may have secretly sold some of it for pennies on the dollar?
Did you know an editor for the Washington Post predicted that the 2018 midterm election would be the impeachment election. He made that prediction on Trump's first day in office.
They even called themselves "the resistance."
Let us at least be honest about it.
"... paid for wall materials rotting in the southwest?"
Rotting? Perhaps some surface rust is all. But hey, let's not allow an exaggeration get away.
Do wish folks would care about the inflammatory nature of misused words.
Would anyone be surprised if Trump decided to build a wall out of materials that would soon rot? He puts fashion before function in all his decisions.
You mean this one....?
I din't do anything to DJT. He did it all on his own. Weak minded people who couldn't get past their hero worship and needed to move on, well, we call them the enablers.
Blah blah blah... Is that all you've got? Constantly redirecting the focus off of DJT and all of the horrible things that he is known to have done by bleating out, "Clinton! Look at her! Hunter! Look at him!" as if there were an actual comparison of the depths of depravity which DJT sank to.
Aren't you ashamed of yourself? I mean to follow up that sentence with this quote:
You used the pronoun "We" up there, so it is safe to say that you don't care who wins the elections, just as long as you (aka whatever Party that happens to be) are in power, and if you can't win the elections, you will just take over the government by force...
You read it here first, folks.
For emphasis.
They said the same thing about another guy who had a mugshot taken.
These things have a way of coming back to haunt people and I can't think of a more deserving group than those who got so giddy about getting a mugshot!
You are trying to claim that Trump did not cause the indictments that he faces based on his own actions.
I fully expect you to continue to tilt more and more to defense of Trump as you see your options fade away and are stuck with Trump as your nominee.
Gad, what an insult to Dr. King ... comparing him (equating him) to Trump!
Right? Dr. King was an accomplished, intelligent, charismatic man trying to make the world a better place.
Trump tried to violate the civil rights of millions to elect the POTUS just to stay in power by illegally negating their votes. He was smart enough to know prosecution was likely coming once he was no longer in the White House, but not smart enough to put the damn shovel down and stop making things worse for himself by willfully keeping classified documents he knew he had no right to, and generally running his mouth.
Equating the two is distasteful in the extreme.
Gad, what you've done! That mugshot you all dreuled over is making him a folk hero!
There are some old brits who understand the appeal. Thanks to you the handsome Richard Greene has been replaced by an orange haired hero:
He now appeals to a whole new group of people.
Let us simply call him "the rebel with a cause!"
Fantasyland.
Shall we expect 'Trump the folk hero' themes now in your posts? Trump, the man of the people. A modern day Robin Hood?
I don't think you are well, Richard.
Why do you think so Vulva??
Because she doesn't sound well.
Slurp
Eat my pussy right
Li'l Kim
Feared by the bad, loved by the good...
Robin Hood stole from the rich to give to the poor. Several points here.
1. As much as you rant about Marxism, socialism, communism, etc., are you really going to make your idol into a metaphor for redistribution of wealth? How very inconsistent.
2. Trump has used his charity as a means of enriching himself - essentially, he stole from the poor to give to the rich (himself, according to him).
This renders your attempt to make him into a martyred hero delusional.
Trump stood for the middle class against the elites in the deep state.
1. I think the haters have unleashed something. Yesterday a reporter on Fox News spoke of a black woman in Atlanta who looked at the mugshot and smiled and said he's a gangsta, a man!
2. Did you really think you were going to fool the people with all these charges during a Presidential campaign? Trump is 77 years old and was never arrested. He runs for a second term and suddenly he is arrested 4 times. Not everyone is as gullible as a feeble-minded college student.
Donald Trump tried to overthrow the US government in order to keep himself in power. He's lucky no one is advocating he face a firing squad.
I'll speak for the best of America: BULL SHIT!
The only people who believe he is innocent are right wing Republicans and MAGA. A poll yesterday showed 80% of independents saying he is guilty of the Jan 6th charges or they arent sure. Only 20% said they believe he is not guilty for sure.
You are digging yourself a deeper hole by the minute.
Now you are using polls. I thought this was a court case.
You said he tried to overthrow the government. You have to prove that in court. You have all the right venues.
Unfortunately, you won't be able to get a verdict before the election. In the meantime, even independents have to be wondering why the government is going after a political opponent like this? There is a lot you people didn't think about.
And? Any other time, your comments wouldn't be so positive regarding appreciation of "gangstas". I watched that clip. It's Trump bootlickers trying desperately to spin his surrender (while saying he'd never surrender) into something positive. It's blatant gaslighting. The thing is, Vic, they know just how bad this is for Trump. That's why they're working so hard to make this look good. They aren't fooled, but they're going to try to fool others, anyway.
Your comments have become increasingly unhinged since the mug shot and the "never surrender" surrender. I mean, you're accusing me of bringing charges against Trump and fooling people here. I am in no position to bring charges against anybody.
All evidence to the contrary.
Where did you see it?
The thing is, Vic, they know just how bad this is for Trump.
Time will tell, won't it?
Your comments have become increasingly unhinged since the mug shot and the "never surrender" surrender.
You follow his every word. I thought he could have done better with a rally cry, but then again, he is under restraint.
I mean, you're accusing me of bringing charges against Trump and fooling people here. I am in no position to bring charges against anybody.
You are going to try and sell that too?
I am, for every one of those f'n insurrectionists...
Interpretations about to be delivered to friendly audiences.
Remember:
You people had to shut her up. Oh ya, that doesn't mean you shut her up. It means like minded people.
Tough words in front of a computer screen.
show everyone what law she broke...
Not really, and that doesn't address the fact that your comments have been increasingly unhinged.
What do I need to sell? The fact that I'm in no position to bring charges against anybody? Or are you denying your words accusing me of
desperate words on a public forum. plenty more political humiliation for trumpsters on the way...
Exactly as I would expect and this will be a common behavior among GOP loyalists given they are realizing that they are likely stuck with Trump as their nominee.
She's not saying what you'd like to think she's saying. She's explicitly saying that political bias was avoided.
But keep on gaslighting yourself. It's not working on the rest of us.
No rational person believes I meant you personally. I thought you could do better, but everything becomes personal with you.
It may be best to try and defend your arguments. That is a tough sell. It is so glaring that the DOJ and FBI have been corrupted and lawfare is being deployed to defeat a Presidential candidate that the deep state fears.
I respectfully disagree. I think it will be more common among Trump loyalists than GOP loyalists. The two are not the same. Or at least, I'd like to think they're not.
Use your words properly, Vic. If you want to accuse a person other than me of doing so, then use that person's name, or name that group. The English language offers us multiple ways to express ourselves with clarity, to avoid making accusations we then have to say weren't really accusations.
[deleted]
Trump loyalists for sure, but watch what happens when the GOP picks Trump as their nominee. Many (I predict) who wanted others to win the nomination will be loyal to the GOP and support the nominee (whoever that is).
If those individuals had fought the Trump loyalists they might have been able to push Trump out of the running. They did not act. We can see that here even with some who claim they want another nominee yet defended and supported Trump. I often post the shooting one's foot image to individuals like that.
I think it is tragic, with far more negative implication for the country than people realize, that so many millions (most likely many tens of millions) of Americans have hitched their wagon, politically, socially, and psychologically, to Trump and trumpism. We see the result of that here, increasingly desperate comments , denial of reality, denial of Trump's wrongdoing.
As a country we let this go on far too long. Too many people had apathy about Trump or were his true believers and the chickens of all that are coming home to roost. Its a tragedy for American society.
Of course.
if so, it peaked in the 4 years prior to 1/20/21...
They've put hero worship of a very flawed and unrepentant man ahead of their country. Tragic, I agree.
Irrational, irresponsible and unpatriotic.
And on top of that it is ...
Yes, because it is legitimate to personally fear Trump and MAGA loyalists especially as there is a real possibility he may regain power and the ability to exact his revenge upon all those who ever stood up against their unconstitutional unlawful actions including before, during and after Trump's Presidency. Everybody should be afraid...
funny how the self appointed defenders of the constitution seem to get tripped up on equal rights and equal justice so often...
Yeah, I think JBB should have used a word like 'concern' rather than 'fear'. Fear connotes an emotional reaction whereas concern connotes an awareness of something bad and the implication that one would act on that awareness.
Plus it would have mitigated gratuitous taunts like your comment.
I mentally made the substitution because I suspect that is what he is trying to communicate.
I'm with you.
You did predict it and I pooh-poohed it - but damn it TiG, you were correct. It didn't take long.
I agree with you jbb - there is a lot to fear - look at how those who are threatened for doing their jobs - Judges and their families, grand juries and their families, anyone who tries to make him responsible for his actions are threatened with retribution, 'a reckoning' - a lot to fear from a literal thug like the former 'president' and his supporters/enablers and defenders of the indefensible.
I believe he meant fear and I agree.
You act like no one knows what happened. All that proves is that you know next to nothing, or nothing, about what is in the Jan 6th committee report.
Apparently you do not go by what people write because I did not tell JBB what he meant. I stated what I think his words meant to convey.
See?
I'm too old and have experienced to much to be afraid of something that I can't control. I won't vote for him or donate to his campaign, that's the limit of what I can control.
I prefer to enjoy the moment. I recommend that you visit Gerbasi or Antonio's Trattoria for a nice meal and wine. I think that they are close by.
You are doing a good job at it, though. Keep up the good work!
Big picture:
The dysfunctional GOP has just started its campaign to go all in for Trump. It will grow more irrational and shrill as the campaign season progresses.
I look forward to watching all the complicit J6 republicans in congress, that actually survive in office after the 2024 election, get sucked into the vortex of the constitution's 3rd section of the 14th amendment. the RNC's presidential debates at this point are basically the GOP VP auditions...
So, a county district attorney needs to get special permission and clearance from Congress to do her job? That’s pretty arrogant. Also, pretty unconstitutional, and hypocritical coming from the the party of “state’s rights.”
On the other hand, if they really have their Grand Old Panties in this much of a twist, she must have a pretty good case.
... a case that she started 10 months before the chief insurrectionist proclaimed his POTUS run for 2024.
Ah, good to see the house is at work trying to solve actual problems. Just more playing on the emotions of their supporters as opposed to serious legislation because serious legislation actually requires work.
I'd say this "probe" is skating fairly close to being obstruction of justice.