Trump Indicted for Conspiring to Overturn the 2020 Election

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Trump's legal team filed not one, not two, not three, but four motions seeking to dismiss all or some of the indictment.

1. Motion to dismiss based on constitutional grounds (specifically, the First Amendment);
2. Motion to dismiss based on statutory grounds (e.g., that he didn't actually violate the statutes that they say he violated);
3. Motion to strike "inflammatory allegations" from the indictment (e.g., because it includes repeated references to the actions of independent actors at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, but Trump is not charged with inciting those actions, and therefore someone that makes them "inflammatory" and "irrelevant"; and
4. Motion to dismissed based on "selective" and "vindictive" prosecution.

The first two, while largely nonsense, at least have some modicum of legal basis. The second two veer off into crazyland.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Meanwhile, Trump is getting toastier.

[N.E. Brigand]

Marcy Wheeler is probably right to see today's news as Mark Meadows signaling to Trump and others about what he might testify about if they don't help him out.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As Marcy notes (and as we discussed in the other thread), a key factor is when Meadows' grand jury testimony was.

I think this statement is likely to be prescient.

If the two versions of Meadows story have started to obviously conflict, he may be doing some soul searching about whether he wants to go the way of Sidney Powell and Ken Chesebro and Jenna Ellis, who sent 350 texts with Meadows. [edited for grammar]

[N.E. Brigand]

Mark Meadows's lawyer tells a conservative CBS reporter that ABC's reporting is inaccurate.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Mark Meadows's lawyer tells a conservative CBS reporter that ABC's reporting is inaccurate.

Here's your friend Marcy's reaction to that (which I largely share):

[N.E. Brigand]

It repeats the pattern from June, when Meadows was reported to have flipped and within a couple hours, his lawyer (the same one as now) denied it.

My guess is that in both cases, Meadows leaked one story to one outlet and then has his lawyer deny it to another.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

And the predictable Trump reaction (which would violate the gag order if it was in effect, and probably technically violates the conditions of his release).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Trump has a surprising ally in the gag order battle.

[N.E. Brigand]

Trump has a surprising ally in the gag order battle.

I'll have to read up on how often the ACLU files motions opposing gag orders. I hope that they're not making a special exception for Donald Trump.

Edit: It appears from that article that they are indeed making a special exception for Trump, because he's running for office. I guess every criminal should run for office!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[N.E. Brigand]

Trump has a surprising ally in the gag order battle.

I'll have to read up on how often the ACLU files motions opposing gag orders. I hope that they're not making a special exception for Donald Trump.

Edit: It appears from that article that they are indeed making a special exception for Trump, because he's running for office. I guess every criminal should run for office!

Upon further reflection, I think the ACLU's argument defeats itself. Because Donald Trump has more power to influence violence than other defendants -- and it is his public prominence which is at the heart of the ACLU's position -- he actually deserves less leeway to speak his mind than other defendants do, not more. But the government has only asked for Trump to be treated the same as everyone else. He's getting off easy.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[RoseMorninStar]

You don't say.

NO, really DON'T SAY!! LOL.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The Trump team continues its relentless effort to delay the cases at all costs. Last night they filed a motion requesting that this case be stayed entirely until the judge rules on their motion to dismiss the case on the novel grounds that Trump is entitled to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution. And this morning the filed another motion for an extension of time to file motions to compel discovery, since that deadline is a week away. The judge hasn't responded to the former motion but she did order that the SCO file any opposition to the latter motion by Saturday, and that Trump reply to that by Monday (three days before they current deadline to file any motion to compel.

The SCO hasn't responded in this docket. Instead, the part of the team litigating the Florida case made a scathing filing there, pointing out that the Trump team had argued in the hearing in that case yesterday that the timing of the D.C. case made it impossible to proceed to trial in the Florida case, but failed to mention that they were about to make a filing in the D.C. case to stay it entirely. They wrote: "Defendant Trump’s actions in the hours following the hearing in this case illustrate the point and confirm his overriding interest in delaying both trials at any cost."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The COA granted a temporary administrative stay of the gag order and set a very expedited briefing schedule culminating in oral argument on November 20. The panel is two Obama appointees and one Biden appointee. So Trump can go wild for the next couple of weeks until the brakes are put on him again. Then he'll going running to SCOTUS.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Incredible pettiness on the part of Trump's lawyers. After they filed two separate motions to dismiss, one on constitutional grounds and the other on statutory grounds, the SCO is seeking to respond to both of them in one opposition rather than repeating much of the same information in two different documents. But doing so would require more than the 45 page limit, though far less than the 90 pages that they would have to do two separate oppositions. Trump's lawyers refused to stipulate that they could do that, requiring them to file a motion for permission to file an oversized brief. Judge Chutkan has ordered that Trump's team file any opposition to that motion by 7:00 p.m. today. It will be interesting to see what possible grounds they could come up with.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Judge Chutkan granted (in substance) the SCO's motion to be given notice if Trump plans to rely on an advice of counsel defense and if so to provide copies of relevant communications (it may be recalled that they have also made a similar motion in the Florida case).