January 6th legal proceedings and investigations megathread

[GeorgiaModerate]

Monday could definitly be the Day where Georgia (Fulton County) Charges drop!

I doubt it. I think Fani Willis will wait until the fed J6 indictments, because several of the potential charges are predicate acts under Georgia’s racketeering law. It would add to her case.

[GeorgiaModerate]

This is interesting.  As has been previously reported, there are two grand jury panels in the current Fulton County Superior Court term.  Apparently Fani Willis is presenting testimony to both of them; the story below implies that the same witness has been subpoenaed to both panels.  It also strongly suggests that Willis is going after the fake elector scheme.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/breaking-journalist-who-observed-gop-electors-subpoenaed-in-fulton-trump-case/5YEH4S4X6BCEPM4PBQYDSWTLGE/

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1686007077649502209

[GeorgiaModerate]

Don't forget that even if an indictment is returned today, it might be filed under seal and won't be announced until later.

[GeorgiaModerate]

U.S. President felony indictment count:

1-44,46: 0

45: 34 71 74 78

[GeorgiaModerate]

If he gets convicted on these counts I think he’s barred from running correct?

Doubtful.  I think it would require a conviction for insurrection, which is not one of the charges.  At least so far.

[GeorgiaModerate]

The DOJ official co-conspirator has to be Jeff Clark.

[GeorgiaModerate]

If he gets convicted on these counts I think he’s barred from running correct?

Doubtful.  I think it would require a conviction for insurrection, which is not one of the charges.  At least so far.

I think you're correct here so Trump can still run for President!

Looks like the GOP needs to rally around whoever is the leading anti Trump candidate after IA/NH and do everything possible to help them get them nomination . DeSantis Scott Haley Pence Christe all should make a deal with each other behind the scenes to ensure this happens

This is objectively the correct strategy, but the problem is that all the participants think they should be the surviving candidate.  This creates a Prisoner's Dilemma situation in which their failure to cooperate means they will all lose.

[GeorgiaModerate]

DOJ explanation of what the "conspiracy to deprive rights" charges mean: https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/civil-rights/federal-civil-rights-statutes#:~:text=Title%2018%2C%20U.S.C.%2C%20Section%20241%20%2D%20Conspiracy%20Against%20Rights

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 - Conspiracy Against Rights
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).

It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.

This kind of sounds like he's being charged with conspiring to intimidate the Congress via the riot, but I'm not quite sure if I'm reading that right.

I think it means depriving the citizens (in the states whose results he tried to overturn) of their right to have their vote counted.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1686514682444513280

[GeorgiaModerate]

(Quoting from the unreliable and untrustworthy deadbirdsite since it seems an appropriate venue for Haberman.)

https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1686516701297336320
Alarmed Trump whisperers must hurry to the well and start drawing water for their gravy train.

Haberman is shilling for Trump here. She is not doing journalism, she is simply amplifying a message Trump wants spread. The message that "Trump thought he'd won, so none of this is a crime!"
And she knows what she's doing. She's providing a legitimacy to a nonsense defense (Smith's indictment alone make it clear that Trump knew he'd lost). This is truly despicable behavior, and actions like this are a large part of why Trump is a still a political power in the United States.
 

I do not see this as shilling for Trump.  Haberman is reporting on what a Trump lawyer is floating as a defense.  This is legitimate news.  It's just not a legitimate defense.

[GeorgiaModerate]

I think it is reasonable to assume that the possibility was there that Edwards did not know that paying hush money was a campaign finance violation (e.g., it is not intuitively obvious to me that such a payment is a campaign finance violation). It is not reasonable to believe that Trump really believed he won the election because the vote count was inaccurate. Only an insane person would believe that, and while Trump has mental issues, he is not legally insane. So that line of defense is not going to fly with the jury or the higher courts on appeal. His lawyers are going to have to do better than that.

Trump knew he lost. He just didn't think it was illegal to lie and say he won

Simply lying and saying he won wasn't illegal.  But attempting to change the result outside of lawful avenues (election challenges, courts) was illegal.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Really good thread here.  Read it to understand why the First Amendment defense won't fly.

https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1686784453580910592

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/girlsreallyrule/status/1686794926875447296

Jack Smith is incredibly smart to pursue separate indictments and not have any co-defendants in Trump's indictment.  It will limit the amount of delaying maneuvers.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Let me warn all Republicans here:
Make no mistake if Trump gets convinted Swing States with Democratic Governors, Democratic Attorney Generals and Democratic Secretary of States will use the Convictions to find a loophole to boot Trump of the Ballot.

How certain is that? Is this really a thing that can happen?

No.  He's engaging in wishful fantasizing.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Look, it’s not my fault that my political opponent in the Democrat Party, Crooked Joe Biden, has told his Attorney General to charge the leading (by far!) Republican Nominee & former President of the United States, me, with as many crimes as can be concocted so that he is forced to spend large amounts of time & money to defend himself. The Dems don’t want to run against me or they would not be doing this unprecedented weaponization of “Justice.” BUT SOON, IN 2024, IT WILL BE OUR TURN. MAGA!

I NEED ONE MORE INDICTMENT TO ENSURE MY ELECTION!

I AM NOW GOING TO WASHINGTON, D.C., TO BE ARRESTED FOR HAVING CHALLENGED A CORRUPT, RIGGED, & STOLEN ELECTION. IT IS A GREAT HONOR, BECAUSE I AM BEING ARRESTED FOR YOU. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!

Biden and his family steal Millions and Millions of Dollars, including BRIBES from foreign countries, and I’m headed to D.C. to be ARRESTED for protesting a CROOKED ELECTION. UNFAIR VENUE, UNFAIR JUDGE. We are a Nation in Decline. MAGA!!!

^ Trump today

It's like someone told an AI to do Fascist Leader Madlibs.

But with the writing style of a third grader.

https://twitter.com/AntiToxicPeople/status/1687146198204071936

[GeorgiaModerate]

Chuck Todd pointed out earlier that while republicans are complaining about this , we wouldn’t need this case if Republicans just impeached him

I do wonder whether Mitch McConnell regrets not letting the Senate convict Trump and bar him from office.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Chuck Todd pointed out earlier that while republicans are complaining about this , we wouldn’t need this case if Republicans just impeached him

I do wonder whether Mitch McConnell regrets not letting the Senate convict Trump and bar him from office.

Of course he would have except the premise is wrong I think; there were not 67 votes to convict no matter what Mitch wanted or said or how much he twisted arms. The only thing Mitch liked about Trump were his judicial appointments. If the votes were available, Mitch would have dropped the hammer. I am confident of that.

Andrew McCarthy (a smart ex prosecutor) at National Review said that it would have been better to defer the Senate trial until well after Trump left office to dig up all the dirt on him, which we know now, but not in Jan of 2021.

I take it there was no mug shot.

There was no mug shot.  They said they would use an existing photo of Trump.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/AnnaBower/status/1687468230225301504

[GeorgiaModerate]

In case you missed it.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-calls-supreme-court-intercede-125857502.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall

SCOTUS intervened without lower court foreplay in Bush v Gore, so I guess anything is possible. I am not sure what Trump would want however. Stay it all until after the election when he can arrange for his pardon, because all this legal action is diverting his money from his campaign to his lawyers? Wishing, wishing upon a star.

Some might find this article helpful in understanding the field of legal play.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/trump-legal-strategy-analysis-1.6927404

I found this sentence arresting: “This brings us to one of the most fascinating parcels of real estate in American politics: inside the mind of Donald Trump.”

And here is an interesting survey of said mental real estate:

“Trump's lawyer, John Lauro, speaking on Fox News, alluded to this challenge for the prosecution: Good luck proving to the jury — beyond a reasonable doubt — that Trump truly believes he really lost the election.

‘ "It's a high bar," Barr acknowledged on CNN.

‘Barr made one cryptic remark that the prosecution has much more evidence, but would not answer when asked whether he had personally provided any.”

And then there is this riposte:

“Gershman's take: None of this matters. Whether Trump believed the justness of his cause is, in his view, a red herring.

‘ "That's all nonsense," he said, suggesting anybody who commits political crimes is convinced they're acting for a just cause.”

The problem is that if you really think you are telling the truth, is it possible for you to commit fraud? I suspect that in that instance, the First Amendment defense does have traction. The DC jury is going to find Trump was a liar however. And that is why Trump is unusually grumpy, and wants a SCOTUS life raft thrown his way.

In the meantime, just what does Barr know that he is not telling, if anything?

If someone truly, honestly believed that a bank screwed them out of $1000, robbing the bank would still be a crime.

[GeorgiaModerate]

A theory I've seen floated on legal Twitter is that the reason the right-wing talking heads are spouting off about the First Amendment is that they were expecting Trump to be charged with seditious conspiracy and had their talking points ready to go.  But Smith didn't charge Trump with that, and the 1A defense doesn't really fit the actual charges very well.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Trump seems determined to push the judge's warning about not intimidating jurors or witnesses:

https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1687561085128208386

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/rgoodlaw/status/1687574728360235008

[GeorgiaModerate]

Trump seems determined to push the judge's warning about not intimidating jurors or witnesses:

https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1687561085128208386

Helpfully shared by his faithful frontwoman at the NYT, I see.

It's been shared by a bunch of other people in my feed.  It's news.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1687642534804127744