1/23/2024 0 Comments Julia ioffe![]() ![]() ![]() To enter his room, she would need to present a marriage certificate, they said, and secure verbal consent from Navalny, who was still unconscious and on life support. They were reinforced-or kept in line-by a small battalion of plainclothes federal security officers, all intent on keeping her from seeing her husband. At the hospital in Omsk, Navalnaya would encounter a wall of doctors who seemed more scared of their civilian superiors than they were of losing their patient. Her husband, she learned, hadn’t died, but the hardest was yet to come. “The most important thing is not to relax,” she felt, “to not show weakness.” It would stay with her for weeks. She had been preparing for this moment for a decade, and now it was finally here, pouring in with the sun on this warm summer morning. If the plane carrying her husband had to make an emergency landing 1,700 miles from its intended destination, Alexey’s life must have been in imminent danger. “Alexey has been poisoned, the plane landed in Omsk.” Navalnaya said “okay” and hung up. It was Kira Yarmysh, her husband’s press secretary, who was supposed to be midflight with Alexey. She wasn’t normally up that early, but she was preparing to go to the airport to meet her husband, Alexey Navalny, the sole remaining leader of the Russian opposition, whose flight from the Siberian city of Tomsk was scheduled to arrive in Moscow at eight that morning. "McAfee seemed unconvinced, saying the questions seemed to cross a “hard line in the sand” against asking prospective jurors whether they think someone is guilty or not.It was 6:40 on the morning of Augwhen Yulia Navalnaya’s phone rang. Chesebro attorney Scott Grubman said he could see why such questions might be barred in a normal case, but he argued that this case is unprecedented and “has no parallels in American or Georgia jurisprudence.” "Bernick argued those questions were basically meant to test defense theory and see what jurors are receptive to before putting on their case. READ MORE: Trump vows to appeal Judge Chutkan's gag order: 'Witch hunt!' "Defense attorneys also wanted to include a string of questions about whether potential jurors believe Trump and his associates tried to steal the election and what they think about people who spread misinformation or tried to help overturn the election<" the AP wrote. "Whether that should include questions about their opinions about potential witnesses, the other defendants and issues that go to the heart of the case dominated that discussion."Īmong the questions that the judge and lawyers debated were if jurors could be asked if they believe Trump and his associates are guilty – questions that would not be asked at a normal trial. POLL: Should Trump be allowed to hold office again? "Lawyers for Powell and Chesebro met with prosecutors and the judge overseeing the case to hash out what will be asked on a lengthy questionnaire when the first group of 450 prospective jurors arrives at the courthouse on Friday," the AP's report stated. The former president has also vowed to appeal the order to a higher court, proclaiming himself to be the victim of a "witch hunt." ![]() However, it prohibits Trump from attacking special counsel and lead prosecutor Jack Smith, members of his family, court staff, or any witnesses who might be called in the case.įollowing the ruling, a spokesperson for Trump released a statement saying, "Today's decision is an absolute abomination and another partisan knife stuck in the heart of our Democracy by Crooked Joe Biden, who was granted the right to muzzle his political opponent." The gag order, imposed just hours before this speech, doesn't categorically ban him from discussing or criticizing any elements of the case outside the courtroom. ![]() POLL: Should Trump be allowed to run for office? And he continued to insist the election had in fact been "rigged" against him, at one point plugging the discredited "2,000 Mules" documentary which purported to show illegal ballot harvesting in the 2020 election. He added that they are "weaponizing" the Justice Department against him, complaining that even Al Capone, who would have had federal agents shot for daring to indict him, was not indicted as many times as he has been. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |