Due to the sheer volume of the complaints, Pryor deemed the situation exceptional and ordered the clerk to post the order to the website rather than attempting to send a copy to each complainant.

Pryor also notes that four of the complaints received since May 16th have been considered and dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence of any misconduct. //

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 @McAdooGordon
·
Nothing Judge Cannon has done is judicial misconduct.

Falsely accusing a judge of misconduct & encouraging others to do so IS misconduct by a lawyer, however, in most jurisdictions.

Glenn Kirschner @glennkirschner2
Judge Aileen Cannon's Pro-Trump Bias Is Showing: Here's a step-by-step guide to filing a Judicial Misconduct Complaint with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Because #JusticeMatters https://youtu.be/0MXVfiTa3KM?si=if3qYyfWIHZhUA2q
4:46 PM · May 12, 2024. //

Donner’s Party
8 hours ago
When Merchan disregards Due Process, the Rights of the Defendant to Call Witnesses, on his behalf, doesn’t even insist that the prosecution name the crime, and prods the jury to find the defendant guilty for any reason out of four,(without any chance they won’t find him guilty), he’s a hero!
Cannon insists that the prosecution abide by the laws, that THEY are sworn to enforce, and SHE’s the Villain!
Yeah, we are ripe, bring on the Rapture. //

Fishin'withFredo
5 hours ago
Over 1000 complaints since May 16? Orchestrated is an understatement. Cannon has been the only objective judge in this entire fiasco.

should Trump be reelected (Alvin Bragg may well have just sealed the deal on that), he would be a head of state, and would therefore have diplomatic immunity under the UN Convention on Special Missions of 1969. //

anon-x8p1
4 hours ago
I stand with George Washington, a felon if ever one existed.

anon-x8p1
4 hours ago
Which Founder of our entire country could not be branded as a treasonous felon against the Crown.

Happens from time to time. Go Team Trump.

GBenton anon-x8p1
4 hours ago
When the government is corrupt and the rule of law is persecution, conviction becomes a badge of honor.

First, any civil or criminal defendant in a federal case who plausibly asserts that political or ideological factors may taint a jury pool can veto the Washington DC circuit and receive a hearing in his or her choice of another randomly chosen circuit or the circuit of his or her home dwelling.

Second, regardless of what circuit a federal case is filed in, any civil or criminal defendant who plausibly asserts that political or ideological factors may taint a jury pool shall be entitled to a jury pool that is proportionally selected from a region that did not vote more than 70 percent in favor of one party’s candidate in the most recent presidential, senatorial, or congressional election.

Third, plaintiffs or prosecutors in a federal case may elect to have the case decided in a randomly assigned circuit other than the District of Columbia. This would ensure that corrupt and criminal Democrats do not get a free pass on anything they do simply because they know a DC jury pool would never convict them of anything, no matter how egregious the offense.

Fourth, Congress should mandate that any states receiving federal funds for any legal or law enforcement purposes must abide by the same rules guaranteeing a defendant a politically fair jury pool.

Fifth, state legislators should enact similar laws ensuring political fairness for trials in their state.

In summary, all Americans are entitled to a jury of our peers, or at least a jury that is not politically biased. Unfortunately, conservative Americans are being increasingly subjected to politically weaponized lawfare. //

Indylawyer
10 hours ago
This is a badly needed reform. Excellent point. We also need to eliminate most federal criminal statutes, and make sure the ones that are left are clearly and narrowly defined. They wouldn't be able to wage most of this lawfare without these vague and overweening criminal statutes. //

anon-8gsr
12 hours ago
All this articles says to me is conservatives have been woefully neglectful in preparing to fight the opposition, and still are. We all knew that though.

GBenton anon-8gsr
12 hours ago
If Trump wins in November we have to view this as the last opportunity to right the ship. After what Biden has done, including the lawfare and threats to pack the Supreme Court and end the filibuster, the mission is to destroy the corruption and neutralize the threat should a Democrat win in 2028.

That said, I think if the American people knew the full truth about the left there might not be much of a Democrat party for a while. Trump should declassify anything and everything on the Dems and their corruption going back to JFK (and before, as relevant), since I believe they had JFK killed, they set up Nixon, and they have their fingerprints on a whole lotta bad stuff including Waco, etc, not to mention what Hillary and Obama did.

Expose all the dirt. make it public.

GBenton Arik
12 hours ago
Stealing elections needs to carry a price similar to treason since it interferes with the peaceful tranfer of power and threatens the stability and survival of the republic and invites tyranny. //

I would only note it's not really "tit for tat" — it's about adhering to the law and applying it equally. //

Dieter Schultz
14 hours ago

"I'm not talking about violence," she made clear. "I'm talking about tit for tat," she said.

I'd just be happy if the GOP just decides to fight like they're in an existential war for this country's soul and act accordingly.

That might mean something that resembles "tit for tat" but, more important than that is just playing to win rather than playing to let the Dems win.

Betterdeadthanred Dieter Schultz
9 hours ago
Indeed. Sticking to our principles has gotten us here. Its certainly not going to get us out or guarantee a place at the back of the line at the camps.

Dieter Schultz Betterdeadthanred
9 hours ago edited

Indeed. Sticking to our principles has gotten us here.

I'm pretty sure it's not principles we're sticking to that's gotten us here.I keep saying that there are two kinds, and definitions, of conservative, the ideological and the personality type.

We can't seem to grok that the personality type conservative sounds a lot like the ideological conservative but with the basic impetus of "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change" and, because of that, they are NOT the same and, in fact, behave like RINOs.

It's not principles that are 'getting us here', it is being confused about which 'conservative' we're working with and wondering why people that 'tend to oppose change', you know, refuse to change the status quo that the left is clever enough to create for them so that they will 'refuse to act' to correct the ideological errors of the left's positions.

Tuesday, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., who chairs the House Republican Conference, filed a complaint with the New York State Unified Court System alleging Judge Juan Merchan was secretly selected in contradiction to a legal mandate for the random assigning of judges. Judge Merchan, Stefanik noted, was somehow randomly selected to preside over a previous trial against the Trump Organization, an upcoming trial against former Trump White House adviser Steve Bannon, and Bragg’s criminal trial against Trump himself.

“If justices were indeed being randomly assigned in the Criminal Term, the probability of two specific criminal cases being assigned to the same justice is quite low, and the probability of three specific criminal cases being assigned to the same justice is infinitesimally small,” Stefanik wrote in a letter to state officials. “And yet, we see Acting Justice Merchan on all three cases.”

Pelican State officials have approved a proposal that says sex is “immutable,” that a “female” is someone who produces eggs absent a biological anomaly, and that a “male” is someone who produces sperm.

The proposal also says that K-12 educators must call a minor-age student by the name or pronoun listed on the child’s birth certificate.

Those provisions are similar to The Heritage Foundation’s model bills—and are bulwarks against dangerous gender ideology threatening women and girls. (Heritage founded The Daily Signal in 2014.)

Gov. Jeff Landry’s signature would make Louisiana the eighth state to adopt a version of a “Given Name Act,” which requires parental permission before a teacher can socially affirm a child’s confusion about his or her sex by using a name or pronoun that does not correspond to the student’s official records.

Lawmakers should insert parents back into important health-related conversations educators may have with the parents’ students. Children confused about their sex need compassion and wise counsel—and for their primary caregivers to be a part of those conversations.

It’s a dry heat
9 hours ago edited
Just to be clear, including a provision in the direction for conducting the search warrant specifically authorizing heavily armed men to use deadly force is not deemed by Smith as creating "a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger" to a former President and his family is perfectly okay; but for Trump to recite verbatim this authorization to use deadly force against him and his family somehow creates an intolerable risk to Smith and his goons? That's the argument? Oh please, someone play some tiny violin music while Smith cowers against the possibility that the FBI threat to kill Trump might make some people mad.

Smith should include in his request that Trump not make mention of the fact the FBI staged that infamous photo of the so-called classified material that it recovered. When I read that it made me really mad.

Parents cannot effectively remove technology from their children day to day, so we must target the source of the danger itself. //

In the digital age, shielding our children from the pervasive threat of explicit online content has become an urgent concern demanding innovative and effective solutions. //

The singular dependency on individual filters stems from Supreme Court rulings in the late ’90s and early 2000s that ultimately determined that the internet was not so pervasive as TV and radio and therefore not subject to the same regulations. Adults’ rights to pornography outweighed the need to implement protections because the burden of government involvement was too restrictive and a disproportionate response to the problem at hand. The idea was that parents should simply protect their kids on their own dime rather than potentially threaten First Amendment rights.

Here’s the thing: First Amendment rights have never applied to obscenity. And while we might forgive the court for not predicting the future of broadband internet, the fact is it is now much more pervasive than TV and radio. The safety of our children demands action. //

The SCREEN Act, with its requirement for robust age-verification technologies, reflects a pragmatic and narrowly tailored solution to a complex problem. //

The only thing this bill does is ensure that pornography platforms perform the same age-verification checks that are already done by alcohol, tobacco, and gambling websites. This should be a slam dunk.

UpLateAgain Lightning47
5 hours ago
The raid should NEVER have been authorized. It was total BS. But should the language restricting the use of deadly force have been removed from the op order? Absolutely NOT. The Deadly Force Policy RESTRICTS the use of deadly force. It's not a green light to use it. It specifies the only conditions under which it can be used. Police at every level (including the FBI) are commonly reminded of the department's shooting policy before an action. To remove it would be LEGALLY seen as inviting gun play. //

GBenton Lex Naturae
4 hours ago
As in War Games, the only way to win this is not to play.

There should have been no raid. The language, per se, is not the real issue. Every raid has the language for a reason. But it IS a very big freaking reason why they never, ever should have done this. //

GBenton mikwcas
5 hours ago
yeah, we're witnessing fascism, Communism, and tyranny. And we're parsing whether the use of force order was extraordinary.

We need to make them live by their own rules. They hype up nonsense into crimes. Well, turn around is fair play. They create a scenario for an illegitimate raid that included potential for use of deadly force, they gotta own it.

Tone it down? No. Wrong answer. Shout it from the rooftops. Biden tried to kill Trump if the circumstances allowed. And Jack Smith tried to frame him and set up the hit.

Oh, it's not unique to Trump. SO WHAT?

The entire raid shouldn't have been used in the first place. And this only makes that a zillion times more true. //

GBenton bk
5 hours ago
Good people project their good nature on others. It's hard for some to see that evil is being done intentionally on our soil by our government. Conservatives want to have faith in law enforcement and the legal system. But it's all been perverted.

The bottom line is they are manufacturing fake crimes to persecute Trump and those around him, not to mention Christians, parents, etc.

We should not ever again give these filth the benefit of the doubt. When our side gets back in power, and it will happen some day, odds are, the game needs to change: They need to be prosecuted for their actual crimes and abuse of power.

The Bush/McCain/Romney doctrine of let bygones be bygones is suicide. Only one said plays by the rules so the game is rigged against us.

Or, we could keep taking the high road, not pushing every advantage, and let them basically win by default over time. //

GBenton Susie Moore
4 hours ago
Agree 100% Characterizing it as a "hit" is over stepping.

But that the order made it possible use of force could have resulted in death underscores how wildly irresponsible this raid was in the full context.

There should never have been a raid if that inherently involved a risk of loss of life over documents, etc.

Jonathan Turley
·
9h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Blanche just got Cohen to say that he handed over $20,000 in a paper bag to close end a financial dispute. There is something quintessentially Cohen about the scene...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Weisselberg later paid Cohen for $60,000 rather than $20,000. Cohen admits that he stole from the Trump organization. He also told federal prosecutors about stealing the money but was never charged with larceny...
2:12 PM · May 20, 2024

Jonathan Turley
·
9h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Replying to @JonathanTurley
...These are hits below the waterline for Cohen but also the prosecutors. They had a man admitting to a major larceny but never charged Cohen. That made Cohen not only their man, but allowed him to keep stolen money...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Blanche is now going in for the kill. He was that he lied to Weisselberg and "to this day you have never fixed that" and disclosed this to the District Attorney...
2:14 PM · May 20, 2024 //

I can say with some certainty that in any normal situation, having the prosecution's star witness admit to being a dishonest thief would be a death blow to the case's credibility. Remember, everything revolves around Cohen, who is now claiming to be a patsy who was just doing the bidding of Trump in cutting the check to Stormy Daniels. //

FloridaTransplant
8 hours ago
Hey wait up. If the DA knew about the theft, didn't fix it, didn't inform the trump organization, and didn't prosecute, doesn't that make everyone involved in the DAs office and accessory to grand larceny? Arguably even conspiracy to the crime? //

FloridaTransplant DKnight
8 hours ago
Yes. Prosecutorial discretion is a thing. If for example the Trump organization discovered the fraud and reported it. Here however it seems that the DA discovered the fraud in the trial prep and DID NOT REPORT IT to the Trump organization. That is what should make them an accessory.

Thank you, Your Honor. I appreciate it. Family, friends, and allies and foundationalists and honored adversaries, today we enter the next phase in the fight to protect our God-given rights from a government that wishes to take them from us and grant us mere privileges in return. To quote another patriot from another place and time, "This is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. This is perhaps, the end of the beginning."

And so, as we enter this new phase, there should be no question in the mind of any patriotic American as to why we fight. After all, only slaves lack the right to arm self-defense and we are no slaves, but free citizens of a great republic and we contain multitudes each of us from builder, a healer, a teacher, a statesman, a soldier, a judge, an attorney at law, a sergeant at arms, and an image of God. So, we know why we fight.

The question before us is how we must fight. What kind of discipline we must bring with us into battle and what spirit we must show to our friends and adversaries alike and by way of answering, we refer to our core doctrines.

The foundationalist's manifesto calls us to listen closely and to speak clearly. To deny the self at the same time to defend the individual. To respect tradition and also to cultivate the future. In short, as foundationalists, we are called to embrace disciplines that seem to contradict each other but nonetheless, to embrace them with all of our strength.

So, it is in our current fight because this system as dysfunctional as it often is, as unjust as it often is, it is nonetheless, our system. It is a feature not a bug of our American civilization. Like any other structure built from man's crooked timber, it is not perfect. Judges and attorneys and trial courts and juries in the light of day are not perfect. Judges and attorneys and trial courts and juries in the light of day are merely what we have instead of the blood feud and the vendetta and the dagger in the dead of night.

Knowing this, we give challenge even as we give thanks. Knowing this, we prepare ourselves for battle in a spirit of profound dissatisfaction and profound gratitude in equal measure.
...
When I was a boy my grandfather told me that fire is a great servant, but a terrible master and so it is with Government. And to the extent that our own Government attempts to be our master, we must oppose it. We must fight to the utmost limits of our strength, but in that fight, our spirit must be one of restoration, not destruction. We must confront the enemy as the firefighter confronts his enemy and for the same reasons that the structure itself may yet, be saved.

God bless and keep you all and may God bless the United States of America. Thank you, Your Honor.

Dexter Taylor, a Brooklyn-based software engineer, has been sentenced to a decade in prison for building firearms in his home using parts purchased legally. He was arrested after a SWAT raid in 2022, and a jury convicted him of 13 counts last month. Now, he is set to spend up to ten years behind bars for what many perceive as an egregious violation of his Second Amendment rights.

The sentence was handed down on Monday by Judge Abena Darkeh, who presided over Taylor’s trial. The judge’s handling of the case has been criticized, especially her decision to prohibit mention of the Second Amendment in the courtroom during the trial. //

“She told us, ‘Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York.’” //

Taylor recalled that it “seemed like we had three prosecutors in the courtroom, the two [assistant district attorneys] and the judge working in concert.”

Indeed, in a previous interview, Varghese characterized Judge Darkeh as “the most aggressive prosecutor in the room.” //

Interestingly enough, Taylor said some of the officers who escorted him into the holding cell behind the courtroom after the verdict was read began discussing politics. “Literally, they were all talking about how this is nonsense. ‘Of course, you have a God-given right to keep and bear arms,’” he recalled the officers saying. He discussed his case with another sergeant who “thought it was a travesty.” //

When asked about the possibility that Taylor could get bail pending appeal so he could fight his case from outside of prison, the lawyer said, “It’s something that Dexter and I will have to discuss further. The chances are slim to none.”

Democrats pushing the so-called “Equal Rights Amendment” failed to follow the required procedure for advancing a constitutional amendment. Equal Protection Project had opposed the attempt to embed CRT and DEI in the state constitution.

It looks like the ‘strongest’ legal case against Trump is based on yet another set of lies from corrupt federal agencies. //

Recent court disclosures give two indications that federal employees could have planted the classified documents used to mire Trump and several aides into a sprawling investigation and an election-interfering court case. The first is the explosive evidence revealed Friday: For 11 months, the special counsel’s office hid that it misplaced some — we don’t know how many or which — of the same allegedly classified documents it claims Trump criminally possessed at Mar-a-Lago. //

Second, there’s the also newly uncovered fact that a federal agency sent “two pallets” of documents to Mar-a-Lago while the National Archives and Records Administration was setting up this documents case. It’s unknown who all had access to these document boxes during their packing, temporary storage in Virginia, and transit to Trump’s home. Were those boxes a setup too? Imagine if some boxes the feds sent amid NARA’s dispute with Trump were also boxes the DOJ can’t verify as being in their original state. //

We also learned just last week that the White House and Department of Justice lawyers colluded with NARA to develop what became the special counsel’s classified documents indictment, starting an entire year before the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, according to documents reviewed by reporter Julie Kelly. Just the News reports the collusion between NARA and the White House could have begun as early as a few weeks into the Biden presidency, according to White House visitor logs.

So of course the classified documents case didn’t arise from concern over legal improprieties, as the complete lack of prosecution for the same conduct from Joe Biden, Mike Pence, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and DOJ leakers also proves. It was a political hit from the beginning, using federal agencies and resources to strangle Democrats’ top political opponent and override the votes of half the country. Talk about an insurrection.

Tucker Carlson recently sat down with Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote. As you might expect, after 2020, True the Vote is paying very close attention to this year's presidential election. But what Engelbrecht says she found hidden in an obscure section of the U.S. code, could hold the key to a lot of what is going on, and the timing for it.

Engelbrecht told Carlson that she just happened upon it herself. Title 18, under the heading "Crimes and Criminal Procedure," states, "if the (illegal) alien reasonably believed at the time of voting in violation of such subsection that he or she was a citizen of the United States," that in Engelbrecht's words, "they are subject to no prosecution."

Wait, what?! So if someone comes into the country illegally, votes in the election, is caught, but then says they believed themselves to be U.S. citizens just because they came across the border and maybe checked in with the Border Patrol, they can now vote in the election? Engelbrecht went on to say that when she found this, she showed it to legislators, immigration attorneys, and even attorneys for True the Vote. The response was deer in the headlight stares. Engelbrecht added, "We've seen many many people coming across the border who are talking about their excitement about voting for Joe Biden, and claiming that they are citizens." //

In another part of the interview, Carlson asks if she believes that the majority of illegal immigrants would, or will, vote Democrat. Engelbrecht's answer is a sobering one. She stated, "I certainly see that the NGOs and the outfits that are bringing them across the country are grooming them for that purpose." //

Carlson then asks Engelbrecht incredulously, if the Biden administration is registering illegal immigrants to vote. In an even more sobering response, Engelbrecht states "They certainly are setting up all of the place settings to do it...It's not at all beyond the realm of possibilities, that is in fact, exactly what is happening." //

Funny, we thought Democrats were itching for another pandemic, but just maybe, illegal immigration is indeed the 2024 pandemic. //

COUltraMAGA
5 hours ago
In case anyone wanted to look at the "obscure" USC, since Redstate doesn't provide it, here it is:

18 U.S. Code § 611 (c)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/611

Byron York explains:

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has charged Trump with falsifying bookkeeping records of a nondisclosure payment in order to commit or conceal another crime, Bragg still hasn’t revealed what that other crime is. It’s really the key to the whole case. Without the other crime, there would be no charges against Trump in this matter. The fact that we — and that includes the defendant — still don’t know what the other crime is is one of the great injustices of a felony prosecution that never should have happened...[Bragg's] theory is that if Michael Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 in the fall of 2016 to keep her from going public with her story that she and Trump had a sexual encounter and then Trump repaid Cohen in 2017, then that was a campaign contribution and should have been reported to the FEC. The payments were made “for the purpose of influencing any election,” the theory continues, and the Trump campaign should have filed a document with the FEC listing among its campaign contributions and expenditures that it received and spent $130,000 for “hush money.”

If you think that sounds a little odd for an FEC disclosure, you’re right. That’s where one of the critical witnesses to be called by the Trump defense comes in. Bradley Smith is a former chairman of the FEC, and on many occasions, including long before Trump, he has argued that there are all sorts of things a candidate can spend money on that are not legally classifiable as “for the purpose of influencing any election.” ... Smith, having headed the FEC, has many examples from the commission’s enforcement of federal election law that illustrate his point. He knows what he is talking about, and it seems clear that his expert opinion is that paying off Daniels, no matter what one might think of it, is not a campaign expenditure or donation that FECA requires a candidate to disclose. The Trump defense plans to call Smith as a witness. Not because he has any personal knowledge of the Trump transaction but because he understands, and has enforced, the campaign law that Bragg’s prosecutors appear to be planning to use against Trump. But Merchan has forbidden Smith from testifying about most of the issues involved in the case.

On Monday, in the ongoing Manhattan trial of former President Donald Trump, a witness for the prosecution gave some startling testimony. While on the stand being questioned by the defense, former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney testified that former President Trump did not personally order payments made to attorney Michael Cohen, who allegedly paid the "hush money" payment to porn star Stormy Daniels. //

"President Trump did not ask you to do any of the things you just described ... correct?" Bove asked.

"He did not," McConney replied. //

The defense, clearly, cannot argue that the payments were made without the former president's knowledge since he had to sign the checks. But the original order for the payments may have originated with someone in Donald Trump's employ, rather than with the man himself; it seems like it would be difficult for the prosecution, at this point, to prove anything else beyond a reasonable doubt.

It's hard to see how this isn't damaging to the prosecution either way.

So much has gone awry with this trial that one has to begin to wonder if Alvin Bragg's motivation here isn't simply to keep former President Trump off the campaign trail. If so, it isn't working. Trump is campaigning in off-hours and receiving big rounds of applause from New Yorkers. //

cupera1 anon-l9w2
an hour ago
The Trump Soviet Union show trial in NY City is a Rube Goldberg legal construction that cannot work. The original alleged crime is a simple misdemeanor under a New York law against falsifying business records. This law passed the statute of limitations over five years ago. Bragg looked at this case at that time and passed on it. Then Trump announced his candidacy to run for president and everything changed.

To defibrillate the case against Trump they claimed that misdemeanor was connected to an election violation. The two statues that they cite: one state and one federal cannot be used. The state election statue can’t be used because the law can only be applied to NY state elected offices, Trump was running for President, a federal office. Federal law can’t be tried in a state court. The FEC looked at this case and laughed at it.

He that runs away from his master is a fugitive. But the law is every man’s master. He therefore that forsakes the law, is a fugitive. So is he, whosoever he be, that is either sorry, angry, or afraid, or for anything that either hath been, is, or shall be by his appointment, who is the Lord and Governor of the universe.

The key takeaway from this? “…the law is every man’s master.” But today, the law is not every man’s master; too many people (like, say, Hunter Biden) get away with too much, with too many things, that common people never would. “…the law is every man’s master” is another way of saying “equal treatment under the law,” which is, as we have documented many times in these virtual pages, effectively dead in this country today.

While the explanation may seem plausible, altering the order of documents represents a serious form of evidence tampering that could completely undermine the prosecution's case.

Perhaps even more extraordinary, the prosecution then admits that they misled the court by previously indicating that the evidence had been left untouched since its seizure last year.

"The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court," the legal filing notes. //

etba_ss JSobieski
5 hours ago
It's his job to know, not guess. Therefore, he is either incompent and lied when he certified something was true when he didn't know that for a fact or he did know and lied about it. Either way, Smith lied.

It wasn't simply a random throwaway line. He certified to the court that the documents weren't viewed and weren't tampered with. Both happened. So he either lied in original filing by stating something as fact that he didn't know or he is lying now.

Otherwise, a lead prosecutor could have his team do things and not tell him and then he could claim it didn't happen and be under no obligation to the truth. He has to certify to truth, so there is no way around him lying. Either he lied about knowing or knew and lied about it not happening.

According to Kachouroff, if the court of appeals or the Georgia Supreme Court were to rule in Floyd’s favor, it would mean Willis indicted the defendants without proper jurisdiction. Not only would that cause her entire case to crumble like a house of cards, but such a ruling would also remove her immunity. This would leave her and Fulton County vulnerable to a multimillion-dollar lawsuit for violating the civil rights of each of the defendants.