CNN: 'Conservative Judge Delivers Major Setback To Key Donald Trump Ally'

Source:CNN- former White House Chief of Staff & current Fulton County, Georgia defendant Mark Meadows, getting is mug shot taken back in August.

"A federal appeals court rejected Mark Meadows’ effort to move his Georgia election interference case to federal court. CNN's Elie Honig discusses the impact of the ruling." 

From CNN

“We cannot rubberstamp Meadows’ legal opinion that the president’s chief of staff has unfettered authority,” Pryor wrote.

The panel found that Meadows’ efforts to contact Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger about possibly altering the outcome of the 2020 election fell squarely outside his official duties. His decision to join a call with Trump and Raffensperger on Jan. 2, 2021 — a now-infamous call that is at the heart of the state prosecution — “reflected a clear attempt to further Trump’s ‘private litigation interests,’” rather than any government function.

The panel characterized Meadows’ December 2020 visit to Georgia as an attempt to “infiltrate” an ongoing recount — an act, Pryor said, that was far outside his official duties.

“Meadows cannot point to any authority for influencing state officials with allegations of election fraud,” Pryor wrote. “At bottom, whatever the chief of staff’s role with respect to state election administration, that role does not include altering valid election results in favor of a particular candidate.”

Pryor, an appointee of President George W. Bush, dismissed much of Meadows’ legal position. The judge said Meadows was trying to simultaneously argue that his official duties encompassed some partisan political matters while also acknowledging he was not permitted while acting in his official job to get involved in election-related advocacy for any candidate.

“Meadows cannot have it both ways,” Pryor wrote. “He cannot shelter behind testimony about the breadth of his official responsibilities, while disclaiming his admissions that he understood electioneering activity to be out of bounds. That he repeatedly denied having any role in, or speaking on behalf of, the Trump campaign, reflects his recognition that such activities were forbidden to him as chief of staff.”

Though the ruling was unanimous, the two other judges — Obama appointee Robin Rosenbaum and Biden appointee Nancy Abudu — issued a stark warning that the court’s interpretation could produce a “nightmare scenario” and “cripple the federal government” by allowing state prosecutors to intimidate and interfere with federal officials by subjecting them to the threat of criminal action in state court.

The Democrat-appointed judges explicitly urged Congress to change the law, known as a “removal” statute, to make clear that former officials prosecuted over their official duties can move their cases to federal court even after those officials have left their posts.

“These types of actions can cripple government operations, discourage federal officers from faithfully performing their duties and dissuade talented people from entering public service,” Rosenbaum wrote, in a concurring opinion Abudu joined.

An attorney for Meadows, George Terwilliger III, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the decision and to indicate whether Meadows plans to appeal to the full bench of the 11th Circuit or to the Supreme Court." 

From POLITICO 

As I wrote on The New Democrat back in August: 

"Of course I'm not a lawyer (if you are just reading my blogging for the very first time) but here's my argument for why Mark Meadows case shouldn't be in the Federal court system and why it should say in Fulton County, Georgia. 

The Meadows legal team is going to have to answer the question where is it in the interest of the United States and under Mark Meadows job description, for the White House Chief of Staff, to try to convince the Secretary of State of Georgia, to throw out enough legal votes, for then President Donald Trump to win that election in 2020. Which is what Meadows was trying to do on behalf of then candidate Trump in 2020, so the President could overturn the 2020 election and be declared the winner and be able to stay in office. 

The Meadows legal team is not going to be able to do that because Meadows was clearly acting as a Trump campaign official, not as Federal Government official. And so was President in November or December of 2020, when he was trying to do the exact same thing, when he was talking to the Georgia Secretary of State as well. 

George Conway already explained in this video (that's linked on this post) about the Hatch Act. If Meadows is making a free speech argument by saying that he was advocating for the President of the United States in Georgia, when he was trying to convince the Secretary of State to overturn the election there and declare President Trump the winner, he would be in violation of the Hatch Act, which is a Federal felony. 

Under Federal law, Federal officials, who are not elected officials, meaning they don't serve in Congress or are not President or Vice President, are barred from weighing in on and contributing to political campaigns and elections. Legally, they're supposed to be above politics. So which felony does Mr. Meadows want to plead guilty to: the Federal Hatch Act, or the Georgia RICO ACT?" 

As I wrote on The New Democrat back in September: 

“The Meadows legal team is going to have to answer the question where is it in the interest of the United States and under Mark Meadows job description, for the White House Chief of Staff, to try to convince the Secretary of State of Georgia, to throw out enough legal votes, for then President Donald Trump to win that election in 2020. Which is what Meadows was trying to do on behalf of then candidate Trump in 2020, so the President could overturn the 2020 election and be declared the winner and be able to stay in office.

The Meadows legal team is not going to be able to do that because Meadows was clearly acting as a Trump campaign official, not as Federal Government official. And so was the President in November or December of 2020, when he was trying to do the exact same thing, when he was talking to the Georgia Secretary of State as well.

George Conway already explained in this video (that’s linked on this post) about the Hatch Act. If Meadows is making a free speech argument by saying that he was advocating for the President of the United States in Georgia, when he was trying to convince the Secretary of State to overturn the election there and declare President Trump the winner, he would be in violation of the Hatch Act, which is a Federal felony.

Under Federal law, Federal officials, who are not elected officials, meaning they don’t serve in Congress or are not President or Vice President, are barred from weighing in on and contributing to political campaigns and elections. Legally, they’re supposed to be above politics. So which felony does Mr. Meadows want to plead guilty to: the Federal Hatch Act, or the Georgia RICO ACT?”

I don’t want to sound like I’m kissing my own ass: (which would be impossible for me to day anyway, at least physically) but for anyone who predicted that Mark Meadows was actually going to win this, perhaps also believes in Santas Clause as well.

It’s clear that what Mark Meadows was doing post-2020 election day, after President Donald Trump had already lost to Joe Biden, (and that’s according to the 50 United States, including Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan) he was working on behalf of his de-facto client Donald J. Trump, to overturn that presidential election and just automatically declare President Trump the winner of that state. Even though it was clear that the President lost that election by 12,000 votes. Mr. Meadows wasn’t acting as White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, on behalf of the U.S. Federal Government, which is why he lost today."

The term slam dunk, especially since the days of the Iraq War back in the early 2000s, gets thrown around a lot. Sort of like the football in the modern NFL, (to use a modern sports reference) but slam sunk is appropriate in the Mark Meadows case and I'll explain why. 

I guess it's legal to be both a campaign official and a U.S. Government official at the same time. (But you might want to consult a lawyer on that) You just can't do both jobs at the same time. 

There's no statue or law in the U.S. Government that allows for one of their government official to interfere in democratic elections, especially to try to benefit one particular candidate or another. Which is what then White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows was trying to do back in late 2020 in Georgia, to get that presidential election thrown out and just automatically declare Donald Trump the winner of the Georgia election. 

Mark Meadows wasn't acting as White House Chief of Staff when he was trying to get Georgia state officials to reverse the election there and just automatically declare President Trump the winner there. He was acting on behalf of his de-facto client Donald Trump, as a campaign employee for the Donald Trump presidential campaign. Which is why he lost back in October and lost yesterday and will keep losing, as long as keeps fighting the charges against him.

You can also see this post on WordPress.