The former president files several fresh motions to toss out Fulton County election interference charges

Attorneys for Donald Trump claim that the former president didn’t have “fair notice” that his attempts to reverse his Georgia loss in the 2020 presidential election could result in criminal charges against him.

A flurry of filings in Fulton County Superior Court on Monday argue that the sprawling election interference case against Mr Trump “consists entirely of core political speech at the zenith of First Amendment protections”.

Attorneys for the former president want the case dismissed on grounds that he has “presidential immunity” from actions while in office, that he was already acquitted for similar allegations in his second impeachment trial, and that he was never told that what he was doing in the state – where he is charged as part of an alleged racketeering scheme to unlawfully subvert the state’s election results – could be prosecuted.

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      It worked for Jr. Apparently he was too stupid to collude with Russia, despite his best efforts.

    • mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      ·
      11 months ago

      Not only that, but he was definitely informed. White House counsel and other informed professionals were privy to a bunch of meetings where people were talking about these ideas, and they shared their opinions and sometimes got in shouting matches or resigned.

      I think Trump’s brain genuinely cannot process the concepts of “right” and “wrong” as distinct from whatever he feels like doing, and so you could say: Yes, people whose job it is to be informed experts told him very clearly that these things were illegal, but his brain is so rotten and single-minded that he couldn’t absorb that their advice might be objectively true, any more than a dog can understand a “keep off the grass” sign.

      Fortunately I think the chance of his lawyers advancing that as a defense is pretty remote.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        It boils down to:

        No one stopped me in the moment so that means I’m allowed

        Like if you tell a child not to touch a hot stove, they touch it, then get mad you didn’t stop them.

        You always got to think what would a toddler do if you want to understand trump.

        • mo_ztt ✅@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah. It’s just not a logical frame of mind. If you tried to stop me in the moment, you’re the enemy and you must be destroyed, how dare you, I feel angry, fuck you. If I did it and later it turned out it was wrong, you should have stopped me, how dare you, it’s not my fault, it’s your fault, I feel angry, fuck you.

          • PwnTra1n@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            You just laid out all his platforms. I’m angry and fuck you are maga staples

    • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ignorance of the law is no excuse

      Unless you’re a cop illegally detaining someone for breaking a non-existent law

    • KneeTitts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      Firstly: of course he knew it was illegal.

      Secondly: ignorance of the law does not give you immunity

      Third: he assumed no one was taping him committing said crime, if they had not done that he would have simply denied it and his cult would have accepted that lie, as always

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    “Our country has a longstanding tradition of forceful political advocacy regarding widespread allegations of fraud and irregularities in a long list of presidential elections throughout our history, therefore, President Trump lacked fair notice that his advocacy in the instance of the 2020 presidential election could be criminalized,” according to his attorneys.

    Calling what he did “political advocacy” is a bit like calling what Jeffrey Dahmer did an “alternative diet”…

    • paddirn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      …lacked fair notice that his advocacy in the instance of the 2020 presidential election could be criminalized

      They’re trying to insinuate that it was only just made illegal after the fact, like he didn’t know that trying to commit election fraud was already a crime.

    • thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      I swear they’re about to take the Hitler defense. Just say, “yeah! We did it! We tried to overthrow the government! But only because we looooooove this country so much… And sure, sure, y’all say we’re racist, but it’s clear you don’t understand just how racist we are. We are waaaaaay more racist than you can even conceive.”

      Then his idiot followers will talk about how he speaks the truth and says what’s on his mind and he’ll get locked up for, like, a year, during which time he’ll pen his horrible instruction manual on how to destroy our country.

  • profoundninja@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    11 months ago

    Human so morally bankrupt needs minimum notice period before committing crimes otherwise it’s unfair to judge him on said crimes.

    Right…

  • dQw4w9WgXcQ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    11 months ago

    After getting caught in a bank robbery, stealing thousands of dollars and traumatizing bystanders, the robber can just say: “No one gave me a fair notice this was illegal”

    Is that pretty much the level of this claim?

    • pachrist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’d be like entering Fast 5 into evidence.

      See your honor? The good guys were the robbers! They also love America and occasionally fuck members of their family.

  • DeadNinja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “Hey, I just tried to break into my school principal’s room on a weekend to change my exam grade - because, you know, bad grades don’t look good on me - BUT WHY IS THIS BEING MADE INTO SUCH A TOPIC ???”

  • Furbag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    11 months ago

    This defense doesn’t even work in the context of his specific case. He was told by staffers that what he was attempting to do was illegal and he made the phone call anyway. How much “fair notice” do you need to double check that you’re not committing a crime when told by people whose job it is to do all of the research for you ahead of time?

    Ignorance of the law is not a defense for breaking it, and this should be as damning as a confession of guilt.

    • AstridWipenaugh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      He knows all this. This is just more nonsense to drag it out. The court can’t just say “shut the fuck up Donny” and move forward else he’ll claim unfair treatment. So they have to accept the motions and take the time to carefully disqualify them. This is just a tactic to cast more doubt on the proceedings and make it take longer so he can complain about how they’re dragging it out to make him look bad because he’s innocent and they don’t have the evidence to convict.

    • WolfhoundRO@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Georgia: you should have already known, it’s the law. Not some ordinary contract that you get to sign or decline

  • 108@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    11 months ago

    with all this lack of knowledge it sounds like he shouldn’t be in office.

  • PedroMaldonado@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    11 months ago

    Goddammit. The environments going to shit, 3 people own everything and we’re STILL DEALING WITH THIS ASSHOLE! TRUMP IS A BOIL ON US ALL.