in ,

Judge McAfee Denies Motion for Trump’s Election Case to Be Thrown Out Based On 1st Ammendment Rights 

Constitutional Crisis: Trump Under Attack by Politicized Justice


A recent ruling in Fulton County saw Judge Scott McAfee denying the plea for dismissal based on the First Amendment presented by former President Donald Trump and his associates in the Georgia election interference case. McAfee declared that even the most potent political speech addressing public matters isn’t immune from prosecution if it is purportedly employed to progress criminal activities.

According to the judge, the charges go beyond mere political statements. He stated, ‘The charges aren’t only expressions of a political nature by the defendants. Instead, the indictment accuses the blame of consciously and deliberately disseminating false information to the public officials and intentionally filing misleading documents within the precinct of the state departments and agencies.’

Check out our NEWEST Product yet!

The lack of any legal precedent protecting the speech and actions alleged in this case as political speech, was something that Judge McAfee highlighted in his ruling. The judge went on to explain that the specific protections intended by the First Amendment’s Petition Clause — which ensures the right to communicate with government officials — don’t cover harmful or dishonest petitions.

McAfee further explained, ‘Put simply, the law does not shield statements allegedly made under fraudulent or criminal circumstances from prosecution, even if they’re presented as an attempt to petition the government.’ This ruling comes after an unsuccessful plea of not guilty to all charges in a racketeering indictment by Donald Trump and 18 others in August of last year.

This indictment claimed that efforts had been made by them to distort the outcome of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. After the charges were made, four of the involved persons accepted plea deals and committed to testify against the remaining accused.

Former President Trump has publicly stated his disdain for the district attorney’s inquiry, denouncing it as politically driven. Supporting this viewpoint, in a recent interview about the case, former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz made a remarkable claim. According to him, the ‘evidence is overwhelming’ against Fani Willis, the Fulton County District Attorney who he believes should be standing trial.

‘In the spectrum of prosecutorial misconduct, the actions of Fani Willis are among the most egregious I’ve seen,’ Dershowitz stated in the interview with Newsmax TV, going on to suggest that Willis ‘should indeed be on trial herself for perjury, an alleged conspiracy to commit perjury, and even potential witness tampering.’

The law professor emphasized the magnitude of the evidence, which he claimed was ‘overwhelming’ and cited technical scientific evidence and multiple witnesses as proof of Willis’s perjury. This was asserted after Donald Trump and eight other defendants filed a motion in the state appellate court seeking the DA’s recusal due to unethical behavior.

Have the best Christmas Gift this year with these SHot Glasses!

Last month, another twist happened when Georgia’s Superior Court Judge, Scott McAfee, made a contentious decision regarding prosecutor Nathan Wade. Wade had to retract from a case due to his relationship with Willis, the DA who had appointed him. McAfee also dictated that Willis would need to recuse herself if Wade continued working on the case.

Despite Wade’s resignation post-ruling, Dershowitz proposed on the same Tuesday that there is ‘overwhelming’ evidence suggesting that Willis received payments, which he referred to as a ‘kickback.’ He stated: ‘She received kickbacks in exchange for appointing a largely unqualified person to spearhead the prosecution.’

Dershowitz, reflecting the outrage of the conservatives who feel that the judicial system is being misused, emphatically stated, ‘I can only hope that the appellate court takes the case seriously, removes her from it, and recommends a thorough criminal investigation. This most certainly requires the appointment of an independent prosecutor to investigate what is a clear-cut case of perjury.’

With the unfolding case, critics argue that both Willis and Wade misled the court presided over by McAfee regarding the start date of their relationship, amongst other suspicious testimonies. These actions underpin the view that there is mounting evidence in support of Dershowitz’s claims.

Consequently, the audacity and the seriousness of these allegations, as portrayed by media outlets, call for a fair trial to provide justice not only to the former president, but also to set a precedent for future political cases to ensure that the pillars of democracy aren’t jeopardized.

In addition to the political implications, it’s essential to remember that the legal process should be upheld not just for individuals, but for the wider respect and integrity of the law itself. At the end of the day, if the legal system can be weaponized for political motives, the Fourth Estate’s role as a check and balance becomes all the more significant.

In conclusion, it’s clear this case continues to evolve, with allegations and counter-claims leaving a complex web of issues to be unravelled. The final judgment will undeniably shape the outlook of political and legal cases in the future, making it even more vital that due process is maintained and any potential manipulation is exposed and sanctioned accordingly.

Real News Now

F*CK FAKE NEWS

Like the products we sell? Sign up here for discounts!