Trump Indicted for Conspiring to Overturn the 2020 Election

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Of course, his lawyers know that the federal rules prohibit doing so (and when asked by the SCO they said that they "took no position" on this issue) but now when Judge Chutkan denies this request they can cite it as another example of unfairness, when in fact she is just following the law.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As usual, Roger Parloff has the best take.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The SCO has requested leave to file a reply brief to that travesty of a filing, pointing out that Trump's lawyers misrepresented their position when they told the SCO that Trump took no position on the issue and then reversed course and filed a response in support of the
applications that "did not engage with the relevant Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure or cite any applicable caselaw, and instead made false and incendiary claims about the administration of his criminal case."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Now Trump is seeking an extension of time to file reply briefs in his multitude of motions to dismiss or delay the case, arguing that he doesn't have enough time to do so by the pending deadlines because he also has to file a brief in his appeal of the gag order. Absurd, but it puts Judge Chutkan in a difficult position. I wonder what she will do.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Meanwhile, I literally laughed out loud when I read this passage.



Particularly since the very day his lawyers filed this praising how reliable the mainstream media outlets like the NY Times and Washington Post are, Trump made this post:

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Trump's lawyers respond with an incendiary, lying letter of their own.

[N.E. Brigand]

Meanwhile, I literally laughed out loud when I read this passage.

I hadn't seen that. And I hadn't seen this commentary on it, either, which points out that the Times article in question actually says that President Biden has "confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted" but also that the president "has never communicated his frustrations directly to Mr. Garland."

The Times story also says that both "the White House and the Justice Department acknowledge that the two men [President Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland] have less contact than some previous presidents and attorneys general, particularly Mr. Trump and his last attorney general, William P. Barr.

[N.E. Brigand]

ABC reported this morning on what former Vice President Mike Pence told Special Counsel Jack Smith's team as part of this investigation. A lot of matches what we've previously heard including information that was in Pence's memoirs, but this is new:

According to sources, one of Pence's notes obtained by Smith's team shows that, days before Pence was set to preside over Congress certifying the election results on Jan. 6, 2021, he momentarily decided that he would skip the proceedings altogether, writing in the note that there were "too many questions" and it would otherwise be "too hurtful to my friend." But he ultimately concluded he had a duty to show up.

Did Pence share his "momentary" decision with anyone before changing his mind? Is that why there was talk of Sen. Chuck Grassley presiding?

(Edited to add: Pence said he changed his mind and decided to oversee the certification after his son, a Marine, said, "Dad, you took the same oath I took.")

And editors will really appreciate this detail:

Sources said that investigators' questioning became so granular at times that they pressed Pence over the placement of a comma in his book: When recounting a phone call with Trump on Christmas Day 2020, Pence wrote in his book that he told Trump, "You know, I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome" of the election on Jan. 6.

But Pence allegedly told Smith's investigators that the comma should have never been placed there. According to sources, Pence told Smith's investigators that he actually meant to write in his book that he admonished Trump, "You know I don't think I have the authority to change the outcome," suggesting Trump was well aware of the limitations of Pence's authority days before Jan. 6 -- a line Smith includes in his indictment.

Tiny variations can make big differences!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I knew without a shadow of a doubt that you were going to report on the comma.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Hide the ketchup!



I noted earlier in the 2020 election thread about the DC Court of Appeal decision rejecting Trump's presidential immunity claim in civil cases against him by members of Congress and the Capital police that "I suspect that Judge Chutkan has been waiting on this decision before ruling on Trump's motion to dismiss that case on the grounds that he has absolute immunity against criminal prosecution (which is nonsense). This decision (unless overturned by the Supreme Court) eliminates even any limited basis for that motion." Maybe it was just a coincidence, but she ruled on that motion later the same day. And she cites the opinion in that case twice in her order, she she clearly has been waiting for it.

[Sunsilver]

Oh, I LOVE IT!!!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

More good stuff from Judge Chutkan's order denying Trump's absolute immunity motion.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

[N.E. Brigand]

Jack Smith's team today filed notice describing the types of evidence they plan to introduce at Donald Trump's trial that is either "intrinsic to the charged crimes" but which happened before or after the dates of the conspiracy as charged, or alternatively if Judge Chutkan rules that the evidence is extrinsic not intrinsic, which the government believes is admissible "to establish [Trump's] motive, intent, preparation, knowledge, absence of mistake, and common plan."

Among other things, this includes Donald Trump's bogus 2012 and 2016 claims of voter fraud, his refusal prior to the 2020 election to commit to a peaceful transfer of power in the event that Joe Biden prevailed at the ballot box, and his "repeated false claims [in November 2022] regarding election activities at the TCF Center [in Detroit], when in truth his agent was seeking to cause a riot to disrupt the count."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

This trial is certainly going to be interesting, if it actually happens.

Among the many other interesting aspects to this motion is the fact that, as Ryan Goodman observes, it appears to refer to a new co-conspirator with regard to an attempt to disrupt the counting of the votes in Michigan by causing a riot.




ETA: For all the interesting stuff that is visible in the motion, I still wonder about the stuff that is redacted. That's probably the most juicy stuff.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As expected, Trump has appealed the denial of his presidential immunity motion to dismiss.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

They have now filed a motion requesting a stay of all proceedings pending appeal.



As Marci Wheeler observes, they are several issues in their motion, primarily that they seem to rely exclusively on civil cases.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Having read the motion more thoroughly, I'm not sure that they are wrong. In particular, since Judge Chutkan correctly did not accept the SCO's invitation that she explicitly state that Trump's double jeopardy argument was frivolous, they seem to have a pretty good argument that the case should be stayed until that issue is resolved. I'll be curious to see what attorneys with more experience in this area have to say.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I'll be curious to see if the current SCO (which doesn't always seemed to be aligned with Weissmann, who was a lead attorney for the Mueller investigation), makes this argument, and if it flies at all. I'm doubtful that it will be a successful argument, if it is even made (even though I think it has some validity).