Missouri attorney general to sue New York over Trump prosecutions | Donald Trump trials | The Guardian
By: the Guardian
This should work just fine.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Andrew Bailey's lawsuit targets New York attorney general and Manhattan DA, who both secured Trump convictions
The Missouri attorney general, Andrew Bailey, has confirmed that he is suing the state of New York for election interference and wrongful prosecution for bringing the Stormy Daniels hush-money case to a trial that saw Donald Trump convicted of 34 felonies.
Bailey, a Republican politician appointed by Missouri's governor, Mike Parson, last year, said in a post on X (formerly Twitter) that he would be filing a lawsuit "against the State of New York for their direct attack on our democratic process through unconstitutional lawfare against President Trump".
"We have to fight back against a rogue prosecutor who is trying to take a presidential candidate off the campaign trail. It sabotages Missourians' right to a free and fair election," he added in a subsequent message.
The lawsuit is anticipated to be a series of similar actions against the New York attorney general, Letitia James, and the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, over a pair of lawsuits brought against Trump or the Trump Organization and its officers. Both resulted in findings against the defendants. Trump is appealing both cases.
New York DA who prosecuted Trump is target of death threats and racial abuseRead more
Bailey claims the hush-money case was brought to smear the presumptive presidential nominee going into November's election and that New York's statute of limitations on falsification of business records, a misdemeanor, expired in 2019.
Moreover, he argues, Bragg never specified "intent to commit another crime" - namely election interference - that would have brought the charges back within time-limitation statutes.
"Radical progressives in New York are trying to rig the 2024 election. We have to stand up and fight back," Bailey told Fox News Digital on Thursday.
But Bailey also told the outlet that he recognized that any attempt by one state to sue another would probably go straight to the US supreme court. He said the investigations and subsequent prosecutions of Trump "appear to have been conducted in coordination with the United States Department of Justice".
skip past newsletter promotion
after newsletter promotion
Next month, Matthew Colangelo, a former federal prosecutor who transferred to New York where he worked on Trump's state and city prosecutions, will be called to give evidence before Congress.
The aftershocks of Trump's 34-count criminal conviction continue to travel. On Friday, it was reported that the presumptive Republican presidential candidate had overtaken his Democratic rival, Joe Biden, in fundraising since the May verdict.
No personal insults
No death wishes of any individual
All of NT's rules apply
PS
Calling members "trolls" or ""dishonest" will result in your comment being deleted.
Get the popcorn. The silly season rocks on. be funny if and when he wins.
Unlikely, sounds to me like someone is looking for a VP job.
If and when he wins
[✘]
Nope. We were very sure he would be convicted and equally sure the verdict will be overturned.
On what grounds?
Provide one legitimate reason that the verdict will be overturned. Not political posturing, speculation or wishful thinking. What is the actual appealable error and what is the supporting authority for your position? "Authority" means case law or statutes, not merely the opinion of someone who might be a lawyer, unless they cite actual authorities as that term is understood in the law.
If you are aware of more than one supportable, legitimate grounds for appeal feel free to provide all of them.
'They're lying
We know they're lying
They know they're lying
They continue to lie'
I already have. I'll stake my life on it. When it happens, I'll make sure that you are first to know.
America is absolute heaven for litigation lawyers - parents should be directing their kids to study law.
The next thing I expect to see is someone starting a lawsuit against Andrew Bailey for starting this lawsuit. Welcome to America, the Land of Litigation, where lawyers need to hire lawyers. Shakespeare could have written a comedy about this debacle.
This silly suit will get thrown out and laughed out of court.
The State of Missouri has zero legal standing in this case.
Trivial lawsuits are going to continue until there is an effective penalty for bringing them to court. In Canada the lawyers who bring trivial matters that waste the court's time are penalized by being required to personally pay all the costs of the opposite party, including their legal fees. Therefore very few trivial or laughable cases are brought to the courts in Canada.
The Previous AG, now the Missouri Senator, couldn't find diddly in 2015 when the CMP videos were found to be heavily edited like the Project Veritas tapes in CA in 2006-2008.
Bailey is just grand standing with a hypothetical case. No real victims, no assistance, no crime.
The "judge" allowed the case to go forward because the Planned Parenthood employee in the video seemed convinced by the subterfuge. Boone County Judge Brouck Jacobs found merit for moving forward with the case. He did not issue an opinion along with his ruling explaining his reasoning.
Bailey seeks an injunction against things he cannot prove solely because he believes whole heartedly in another Project Veritas altered video .
Bailey also sued PP for health records of any trans persons they may have treated.
Any judge this ridiculous case comes in front of is going to dismiss it immediately unless, of course, it comes before Matthew Kacsmaryk, the reactionary activist masquerading as a judge. It does make Missouri a laughingstock, though.
Can you give us your reasons for calling this a "ridiculous" case?
Are you trying to sell us the story that all these prosecutions of Trump, coming all together right before an election, are not blatant election interference?
NO standing. The crimes were alledged in NY, tried and convicted in NY.
NY has an appeals process for Trump.
Can you imagine the choas in American law if states were allowed this kind of grandstanding?
Two could have been disposed of already, (probably more guilty verdicts) except for all of the delays created by Team Trump.
The reactionaries' guru Bannon commanded them to bring frivolous suits all over the country. This guy is only following orders.
You'd think they'd be able to add more time on to that walking talking pile of human refuse's sentence though I know they're different matters/cases
Bragg is going to be hard pressed to justify it not being election interference when he used a misdemeanor with an expired statute of limitations as a felony. Especially given he ran as a "get Trump at all costs" dipshit.
Bragg isn't going to have to justify anything. Just for a start, there is no justiciable controversy, and Missouri has no standing to bring this case anyways. This is nothing more than a PR gimmick by a third rate politician.
Remember when Texas tried to sue Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin over the 2020 election? Another failed right wing PR stunt.
That you are going to admit to.
And exactly why would that be?
I think you meant to say "That I am going to admit to". As you should admit, since there is absolutely no justiciable controversy raised by this ridiculous lawsuit.
You're kidding, right? What standing does Missouri have to challenge a New York state criminal conviction on any grounds?
[✘]
Trump broke New York laws committing felony offenses in New York for which he was indicted in New York, charged in New York, tried in New York and convicted by a New York jury in New York!
Missouri has No Standing!
Misdemeanor with expired Statute of Limitations. Try again.
Then Trump must get a New Yorker lawyer to take it to a New York judge in a New York court in New York where Trump's first New York appeal is already DENIED by a New York judge in New York!
What are you waiting for? Missouri has no standing to challenge a prosecution under New York state law. It's as simple as that.[✘]
How does that become a justiciable controversy for Missouri's lawsuit or give Missouri any standing to sue?
A House Committee is going to make him do just that.
Should take about 30 seconds....
"Trump was guilty, that's why.."
Mic drop and walk out the door.
A House Committee run by Jim Jordan? Marjorie Taylor Greene? That will be a joke.
All Bragg needs to state is that his office followed the facts and the law. Nothing else is required.
Instead of a House Committee questioning the legitimacy of Bragg's prosecution, the real question is the legitimacy of a House Committee involving itself in a local criminal trial. That will be viewed by the public as an unjustifiable political witch hunt, the only thing the Republicans in the House seem capable of doing.
Always amusing to see a statement like:
preceded by this type of comment:
Comment 3.1.12 is a feeble parody of an "internet discussion".
Gee, just like 3.1.11 and 3.1.13.
Then we are in agreement that your comment was feeble.
That's imaginative.
I don't know why some are allowed to tirelessly taunt and troll and deflect and deny and lie and whine and piss and moan and never offer a single worthwhile contribution/post/statement
It boggles my mind also.
That commentary is dripping with irony...............SMH
Gsquared, there are 'lawyerly' questions being asked for which the answer is known already as DIRECTLY unknowable because of a lack of direct knowledge to explore, and any INDIRECT answer when given would not suffice (or add anything useful) to a discussion. A trap.
I don't know why either! It's clearly not being done in 'good faith." And it's death to the spirit of discussion, in my opinion.
That’s super common, actually.
First, most DAs run on a promise to prioritize this or that crime or criminal or class of criminals. It gives the people a reason to vote for them.
Second, he didn’t start the investigation. The previous DA did. Bragg just completed a case that was already ongoing when he took office.
And here we are. A DA who run on just that.
You're right. Even the Biden DOJ chose to drop it. But not Bragg. I wonder why.
I wasn’t referring to the DOJ. I said “previous DA.” The investigation was started under the previous Manhattan DA, Cyrus Vance.
Feeling aggrieved and wonderment are not legal grounds to sue another state over an illusion of 'injury.'
Do you believe any of that provides grounds, or grants standing, for Missouri to bring this lawsuit?
As Missouri AG, he probably knows the law and what he can do[✘]
So what was the crime? In what way was Missouri damaged? Trump isn't even a resident of that state.
Most Missouri AGs are elected by voters who get to evaluate and pick their candidates.
Bailey was appointed by the current Governor and should be the poster boy for Christian conservative
values and he worships Trump.
He probably knows something of the law but not any better than the two or three lawyers on this thread.
To my knowledge, the previous DA thought Bragg wasn't moving fast enough, I could be wrong though.
how to get him self some grand ole attention from his base, and notoriety, as it seems almost ALL of the GOP are on bended knee, with knee [pads waiting to service Teeny tiny mushroom "man", the Lying clown with the
tiny hands
down some poor girls pants
cause he says they let em', well at least at $135,000.00 per and payment now due in advance.
What a sad state of affairs this Republican party has become, as they'd have to wipe their chins, F Trump could actually
come around to the fact that he has ruined a once respected party, buy surprise, and all from an idiot cult leader constantly spewing LIES the problem, and misinformation from outlets ala media
tell US All what were supposed to a see a, a, I don't fckn think so
cause people need to wake the HELL UP
,The two parties have been an embarrassment, as ole Joe should of been put out to Pasteur,
but, he is light years ahead and above the 45 Disaster
You are correct. Bragg was criticized for not moving faster. Ironic, then, that Trump supporters whined about him rushing the case into court.
He's apparently only been a lawyer for about 10-11 years. Where I come from that means he is still practically a newbie. I doubt that he knows too much. This case is certainly proof of that.
Again, Iggy, I really like your style.
Well, when aren't they whining about something?
I need to find a way to put your posts to music - it would be awesome.
yea, i could just envision possibly a few that are right down from the center for disease control of Texas, bee boppin around while hummin a few of my more creative shitty ditties, while rippin their shirts off while rubbin their mans, titties, a tempting, no one around these parts, with those, parts
cause probably not mamas',
so i'd go with pops'
tarts' n stinkin ole farts lookin for cheaper gas, to propel their as
far away from ...sum of one
Yep, Democrats have spit in the face of "everyone is equal under the law" and have embraced politically targeted prosecutions. In a jurisdiction where arrests for violent crimes are frequently not prosecuted, and where the same DA just let dozens of protestors who trashed Columbia University walk scot-free, they somehow rationalize investing massive resources into a bookkepeing error that isn't even an error, per the experts who actually enforce it. Republicans who defy a congressional subpoena are jailed. Democrats aren't charged.
Resurrecting expired misdemeanors to go after a rival politician using a statute no one has ever been convicted of violating before (despite having a stronger case against the Clinton campaign for the exact same crime) is about as low as you can go, and a complete rejection of the measured approach of an honest prosecutor like Leon Jaworski.
Remember, what goes around, comes around.
Let's start with that post
Scotus material /S
Damn right Iggy..
Like Hunter Biden?
None of that matters, especially the hearsay of experts not in evidence.
It boils down to cooperation. Democrats have apparently been smart enough to comply with their subpoenas, some Republicans have not.
By the Good Book, give it a rest. Because of COVID the previous Governor of NY extended all statutes by 228 days. The New York Supreme Court found that Cummo "tolled" the statutes and set the appropriate and acceptable whig Bragg filed within. There is also a caveat in NY that misdemeanors committed to hide other crimes are felonies. The best lawyers that Trump and the RNC could afford did not win over even one jury member.
It always has. Just study human history.
Thanks for your factual and honest post.
The agnorance from some is unreal.
Actually, Bragg did look into it and saw there was nothing there until the 3rd in line DOJ "resigned" his position to "coincidentally" join Bragg's team only a few days before Bragg brought charges.
None of this changes the fact that trump committed a crime and was tried for it.
Maybe. That’s not quite the way I understand it based on what I’ve read. The case against Trump was halted while Bragg pursued cases against Trump’s CFO and the Trump Organization that were similar to what he ended up doing with Trump. Success in those cases seems to have encouraged him that he could pursue that approach with Trump.
Either way, it makes it kind of absurd for people to claim that Bragg had some kind of irrational, partisan obsession with Trump.
During Covid the NY Governor "tolled" all statutes of limitations by 228 days making Bragg's charges within the statute.
Then should we erase the Trump Administration from history? He ran a "get Hillary at all costs" and "lock her up" campaign
didn't he?
If only...
I would guess they also tolled simply by virtue of the fact that they weren’t going to be allowed to prosecute a sitting president.
Who or what prevented them from prosecuting Trump earlier?
wasnt this already just stated ?
yes it dang sure was. but that doesn't answer my question.
Try again?
because it's not the answer you want to hear.
Please do read post 3.3.2.
Then post 3.3.3.
You are absolutely, 100% correct that I don't want to hear "answers" to questions I don't ask.
Sorry, i thought this was your question, my mistake
hey Tex, iF U Wish to parse my words, be careful 4 what U wish for
In addition to the whole “sitting president” thing I just mentioned, I would guess all the legal fights Trump put up to prevent the state from getting a look at his tax returns (and probably any other business records) had something to do with it.
Yes, that IS my question.
Which, despite a plethora of replies. remains sadly unanswered.
Now. maybe YOU would be so kind and explain who or what PREVENTED Trump from being tried earlier.
No need for you to worry about what I wish for. I merely wish for a REAL answer!
I parsed nothing of yours. don't be silly.
I am merely going by your words. Perhaps "prevented" was the incorrect word to use.
Well Who or What has prevented ALL of Trumps legal cases from being brought forth in time for the American People to actually know for sure what a POS Trump IS, and yes, they should have already known, but with people like you, we see how they don't!?
Cause the Answer is TRUMP, and his lawyers, with help from the politically driven drivers of justice out of Justices' ridiculous decisions that are decidedly in Trumps' favor, as apparently, like you, their favorite flavor is orange you glad Trump did appoint them to apparently anoint him to be the new Dicktater tot n twot grabber, Founding Fathers' back stabber maga ball grabber in an attempt to go home as opposed to jail, and have Bubba stabber him from behind asz up front about purposely dropping the non attached rope soap iz this male , orderin brides from the other sides, butt not always for free, asz a Fe , iz welded on to the irony.
Asz Cannon has proven to be so loose, multiple hot dog vendors have set up shop inside her skif, if ya get my drift, and the Supremes have proven they can fly their partisan frrak flags high while vacationing around the world buy billionaires buying their say in the NON American way
You could save time by just admitting you don't know and can't answer.
No need to make this about me with your flippant comments.
Smart people intimidate you or something?
yes, yes they do. Let me know when one shows up pleas.
Too hard to recognize on your own?
Ok, well let me know if you figure out what your question is.
The question was clear and concise, and based from YOUR post.
You claimed Trump wasn't charged earlier because it was prevented.
Once AGAIN, and I sure hope this isn't misunderstood or misconstrued---What or who PREVENTED Trump from being charged?
And it is perfectly fine if you don't know.
NY Governor Cuomo began the tolling on March 20 2020 during the Trump Administration.
There is no evidence that the tolling had anything to do with Trump, but as Mueller and others have indicated, there can be no prosecution of a sitting POTUS.
The practice ended on November 03 2020.
If the statute had three years to go on November 03, 2020, the remining 1095 days countdown was restarted on 11/20/20
Gee, if he had nothing to hide, what's the problem?
If only someone can point to any law forbidding the indictment or trial of a sitting President.
Awesome Iggy, as usual, simply awesome.
The DOJ.
The DOJ controls NY State laws?
I simply asked for any law forbidding an indictment or trial of a sitting President. I have yet to see anyone provide what is specifically being asked for.
Seems as if it is FORBIDDEN that there would be a written law about it to carve out the exemption for the President.
Do you own research, it's well known DOJ policy since the 1970s, post Nixon.
Tacos used the word "prevented" correctly,
you have now moved the goal post to "forbidden".
Please STOP Trolling everyone on this thread.
Good day.
I certainly did, and could not find a single law preventing a sitting President from being prosecuted, which is WHY I asked. I also know that there are marked differences between policy and law. Now, if you have something that is a law, please, by all means, post the link and I will happily read it as that is all I have been asking for the entire time.
You keep saying that as if I said that. I did not. What i said was:
That does not indicate that they tried in the past and someone prevented it. It indicates they knew if they had tried, there would be resistance in at least two ways that I can think of off the top of my head. If you want to be a grammar nerd, it’s the subjunctive (or suggestive) mood when you’re thinking it’s the indicative (a factual) mood. But I digress . . .
First, they knew that there would be extensive litigation over the constitutionality of prosecuting a sitting president. It’s not settled law because it hasn’t been pursued before. I would guess the DA’s office assumed it wouldn’t be worth the trouble, and I’d agree with that.
Second, Trump the citizen no longer officially resided in New York. His residence is in Florida. Living continuously outside the jurisdiction tends to toll the Statute of Limitations.
But additionally, as president, is his residence the White House? That alone, would be a court case. Extraditing him from Florida would be effectively automatic - I don’t know that Governor DeSantis considered any move to slow the process, but he could have probably.
I have no idea how it works with federal territory (probably the same in most cases) but as president, Trump might have authority to block his own extradition. And that would be another court case.
By the time you’re done with all that shit, he probably could have served out a second term. Might as well wait til he leaves office.
Same with his attempts to disqualify the prosecutors in the federal case and the Georgia case. If he’s innocent, he should just do the trials. Why does it matter who the prosecutor is?
[✘]
I don’t support Trump at all. That said,
Bragg ran for office campaigning about getting Trump and lying about, “It is a fact that I have sued Trump over 100 times.”
Might that have incentivized him to push the outer boundaries of the law and due process?
And yet you keep trying to make a point using words I didn’t write. E.g.:
I did not use those words or even attempt to make that claim. Your entire trollfest has been a straw man. You have ignored the actual words and points made in both relevant comments.
My only response to that obvious falsehood is but one word:
Bullshit.
I wouldn’t attempt to argue that he wasn’t motivated to get Trump, but there’s nothing particularly wrong with that. Lots of things motivate prosecutors - especially elected ones. As far as pushing the boundaries go, that again is SOP. If he breaks a rule or violates someone’s rights, then we have something to talk about.
The DA office was highly motivated to convict the Central Park Five, perhaps due process wasn’t sufficient motivation.
Sorry but no. That statement is the same is 'If you have nothing to hide, go ahead and let the police search your car'.
Police have to have a search warrant to search your car. All Trump is doing in this case is taking every advantage the law allows. I may not agree with his attempts to disqualify prosecutors, or even to delay the trials but I do agree that he has the right to every advantage the law allows.
a tad ironic, as you rightfully argue for due process for the scumbag that was taking out ads for the CPF to receive the Death Penalty When defending one who spits in the face of any and all, because, he thinks Barren is tall and his hands are way too small as he performs heavy pants, down a womans, cause he's the elected unperfected should have been rejected while Melania defected to not become infected by one who should have been rejected, but when a xcult leader won't consider to concede, what is wrong if done legally, for one fulfilling a campaign promise for a change, to do a good deed, and from the grass, remove the weed, that has planted so much manure in the minds of the simple, surprised no one has yet popped Trumps head, like a pimple, as it would likely bring out many a dimple, as some of US have had enough of mr. Orange limp pull, with mind infirm, US collectively down, as we are the joke of the world, when lead by the unfurled , and not sure about you, but i'll be glad when we discuss something knew he was bad, yet never could have about most any predicted, just how
yet, not too many have the advantage of every Judge they appointed, now do they ?
Sounds like your only genre of response, Bullshit worn falsehoods warn to not disclose the identity politicking off many who've read and seen what and who you a tempt christ, to be, or not, cause bovine excremeant is more than a lot , it a peers to consume all the facts you doom to assumptions, when perfumed is the pig, as bald face lyes on his dome, where his whig thinks it is a toupee, free to roam and grow, by the shimmered fractured golden sunny showers, that feed off the manure and mix, as Trumps brain is apparently wet, and together there is a chance the planted seeds will succeed, but there are sum hear, who know how to spray down what you say each and every day while spouting to knot have a preference , for it is not ok to spread and defend, when Trump and Cump are in deed in need of a final Round Up, and what ever class actions apply in the same suit to flush this absurd orange turd down the drain of humanity, asz he has taken a toll on the US sanity, and that is IN
I agree, but I said it knowing that Trump is the kind of person who would say the “if you have nothing to hide” stuff. Should have used a sarc tag, I guess.
A key difference here, though, is that while illegally obtained evidence - or other violations of due process - violates a person’s rights or unfairly threatens his liberty, the details of how a special prosecutor was appointed or funded, or who they might be sleeping with, probably don’t have any material impact on the defendant’s rights. It’s just a lame delaying tactic.
Was the Manhattan DA influenced by that shit?
of course he was
not that i would could ever know
what i'm saying, cause i sure as hell no
watt you're amplifying
and knot shore you want to go that root
but, don't matter to me, as i go as high as many
and
asz low as N E
Perhaps Bragg, like millions of other New Yorkers, Jersey and PA residents are just exhausted by Trump's
MO over the past 40 years.
As far as Braggs previous job as the Chief Deputy AG of New York State, 2017 - 2018 which initiated over 100 lawsuits against Trump, the Trump Organization, The Trump Charity, and the Trump Administration...
I think NY’s, bankers, media decision makers, lawyers, and the public that continued to express interest in his celebrity made the political Trump.
Our country has some real losers in it that simply can't abide being critically judged and paying the consequences for their own actions. Some Conservatives simply want the country SERVED UP TO THEM ON A SILVER PLATTER by all the citizenry. Yawn.
Wow, who knew conservatives were such a dire threat to the country.
Trump wasn’t convicted of being a conservative.
Actually, now that I think on that, if he had been charged with that, he might have had a better chance at acquittal.
Probably a good thing that isn't something I claimed, eh?
CB wrote "some conservatives", the operative word is the indeterminate 'some'. It would behoove this site if some members could get a better grip on a few or several of the many non-numerical identifiers.
I know exactly why he always writes "some".
Do digress, I harbor a fondness for such assuredness.
Either one knows or they don't, but certainly not digressing since the topic is in his post.
In your case neither/nor ...
I, and a few others, I'm sure know.
Seems the ones asking are in the dark, though!
Where was that claim made?
Did I say someone made a claim?
OMG this is dumb.
The article says this is an anticipated series of similar lawsuits.
Dumb and Dumber.
I mean, how is the election damaged? There is nothing in Trump’s conviction that prevents any state’s electors from voting for him. Hell, dead people get elected all the time. By comparison, merely being a felon hardly seems worth worrying about.
The election isn't damaged. If Trump's candidacy is damaged maybe he shouldn't have committed the crimes.
How was an election interfered with by Trump's so-called crime? That was a main contention in bringing up these spurious charges.
Hard to believe the NY case had any effect on the election.
Of course, some of the same people who believed Comey influenced the election against Hillary believe it.
Indeed, the election has yet to happen. However, recent FOX polls (which are some of the best out there) have noted a 3 point shift in Biden's favor putting him ahead.
indeed, it is clearly the 2016 race I referred to.
Unless you didn't know Hillary ran against Trump back then, I can see the reason for confusion
He committed fraud to hide information from voters. That's been explained to you over and over and over again.
Awesome!
Why ask irrelevant questions?
No, it wasn’t. He was convicted of falsifying records in the attempt to interfere with an election.
It’s not a crime to try to get someone elected or prevent someone else from getting elected unless you utilize unlawful means to do so.
You think the 34 felonies for which Trump was convicted by a jury of his peers were "spurious charges", but this go nowhere ever case brought by the Missouri Attorney General isn't ridiculous? Interesting.
Painfully so.
Maybe A.G. Andrew Bailey will show up with some more Project Veritas tapes. @!@
Yes he tried to use those edited tapes against Planned Parenthood.
You mean those tapes Planned Parenthood admitted were true in Court?
The content was real, but they were heavily edited to say something they didn't. In the original video, PP employees said 32 times that baby parts were NOT sold to anyone, but in the edited video? Not even once. Weird huh?
Are you referring to the Texas case which Planned Parenthood won in part by getting Project Veritas to admit the tapes were heavily audited and used actors?
Bailey's lawsuit is only in pretrial motions in Missouri. He is alleging interstate trafficking of minors for abortions without parental consent. His only basis is the 11/11/2023 Project Veritas tape rejected by a Texas jury.
The Ole Miss judge allowed the case to move forward on 06/19/2024
Lol. don't fall for Fusion GPS press releases. In Court, under oath, PP couldn't even identify a single misleading edit to the videos.
Weird how Fusion GPS tricked you again, huh?
Or not....
I can't find any reference to that case. Can you cite it for me?
Where's the proof of this case you mentioned and the heavy editing of CMP videos?
The Missouri AG cannot possibly have legal standing to challenge a NY state prosecution
This is a nuisance lawsuit of the greatest proportion
Lawfare.