January 6th legal proceedings and investigations megathread

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1552067190404382721

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1551969775848390664?t=RrMh47FKitVgJismcsj...

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

And... here we go,
https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1552067446542159873#m

[emailking]

According to Carol Leonnig (WAPO) the questions the witnesses are being asked in the federal grand jury are overwhelmingly about Trump (what did he do, what did he say, etc.).

[Inmate Trump]

Conspiracy to Defraud the US - fake electors

Obstruction of an Official Proceeding - could carry up to 20 years. Trump's witness tampering would potentially also be part of this charge.

Seditious Conspiracy


Man, I hope they take him down. He is a criminal and the writing is on the wall in bold in the largest font possible.

[EJ24]

For the first time ever, and I do mean EVER, I'm starting to feel somewhat optimistic about Trump being held accountable for something.

And I feel like I've seen it all at this point. Never had faith in Mueller or anything related to Russia, but this is plain as day. The guy is on video tape refusing to do his job and tell those terrorists to stop committing a terrorist attack on our country.

[Progressive Pessimist]

For the first time ever, and I do mean EVER, I'm starting to feel somewhat optimistic about Trump being held accountable for something.

And I feel like I've seen it all at this point. Never had faith in Mueller or anything related to Russia, but this is plain as day. The guy is on video tape refusing to do his job and tell those terrorists to stop committing a terrorist attack on our country.

If it happens, let's just hope it's sooner than later, especially with his impending 2024 campaign.

[emailking]

Updates today.

DOJ got a warrant to to search Eastman's phone. They seized it weeks ago, but the judge wanted to see more evidence before they could go through it.

Also Cassidy Hutchinson is now talking with the DOJ investigators.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/Santucci/status/1552652730954649600

[Koharu]

And in response to movement against him, Trump is having his lawyers argue that he has "absolute immunity."

https://twitter.com/joshgerstein/status/1552506547263213568

The document's argument starts out claiming that whether one agrees or disagrees with Trump, it is a generally accepted thing that he engaged in "patriotic" discourse. It then goes on to acknowledge that his discourse was "highly controversial" with his rivals.

I definitely object to Trump's discourse being "patriotic," at any rate.

Anyway, I don't see this actually accomplishing anything like what Trump wants it to accomplish, but it will be interesting to see the court's response to it.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Jesse Binnall is a good lawyer.

[Torie]

I would be amazed if the content of Trump's speech and his urging the crowd to go to the Capitol to protest can be the gravamen of a criminal act. Unless and until evidence appears that Trump was aware of and endorsed the breaking and entering into the Capitol, aside from jury tampering potentially, I just don't see a criminal case against Trump going very far.

What I do hear, is a lot of sloppy thinking by pundits on this matter. The punishment for Trump's failure to take action to end the riot and secure the Capitol was impeachment and conviction and removal from office for gross dereliction of duty. Frustrating to them all no doubt, and to me for that matter.

[GeorgiaModerate]

I would be amazed if the content of Trump's speech and his urging the crowd to go to the Capitol to protest can be the gravamen of a criminal act. Unless and until evidence appears that Trump was aware of and endorsed the breaking and entering into the Capitol, aside from jury tampering potentially, I just don't see a criminal case against Trump going very far.

What I do hear, is a lot of sloppy thinking by pundits on this matter. The punishment for Trump's failure to take action to end the riot and secure the Capitol was impeachment and conviction and removal from office for gross dereliction of duty. Frustrating to them all no doubt, and to me for that matter.

IANAL, but I think the most likely basis for a federal indictment is his involvement in the fake elector plot.

[LBJer]

I would be amazed if the content of Trump's speech and his urging the crowd to go to the Capitol to protest can be the gravamen of a criminal act. Unless and until evidence appears that Trump was aware of and endorsed the breaking and entering into the Capitol, aside from jury tampering potentially, I just don't see a criminal case against Trump going very far.

What I do hear, is a lot of sloppy thinking by pundits on this matter. The punishment for Trump's failure to take action to end the riot and secure the Capitol was impeachment and conviction and removal from office for gross dereliction of duty. Frustrating to them all no doubt, and to me for that matter.

There is already abundant evidence that he foresaw the attack on the capitol, facilitated it (specifically demanding armed people be allowed to go there because "they're not here to hurt me"), and completely approved of it (his comments on Pence, his tweeting that the rioters shouldn't harm the Capitol Police because "They are on our side," and his doing absolutely nothing to stop the attack).

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

No wonder Trump is cocky and arrogant ever since the insurrection, the RNC is paying his legal bills whatever McConnell, McCarthy and Graham said didn't mean nothing following insurrection

[Torie]

I would be amazed if the content of Trump's speech and his urging the crowd to go to the Capitol to protest can be the gravamen of a criminal act. Unless and until evidence appears that Trump was aware of and endorsed the breaking and entering into the Capitol, aside from jury tampering potentially, I just don't see a criminal case against Trump going very far.

What I do hear, is a lot of sloppy thinking by pundits on this matter. The punishment for Trump's failure to take action to end the riot and secure the Capitol was impeachment and conviction and removal from office for gross dereliction of duty. Frustrating to them all no doubt, and to me for that matter.

There is already abundant evidence that he foresaw the attack on the capitol, facilitated it (specifically demanding armed people be allowed to go there because "they're not here to hurt me"), and completely approved of it (his comments on Pence, his tweeting that the rioters shouldn't harm the Capitol Police because "They are on our side," and his doing absolutely nothing to stop the attack).

Actually what Trump wanted was for them to enter the area in front of his podium to fill the space up for the cameras. That was the context of that remark. The key missing element so far as we know is the lack of any evidence that he knew of the plot to breach the Capitol, much less plot and scheme before hand to facilitate it.* I predict that absent that element he will not be indicted. The fake elector thing doesn't make any sense either, inasmuch as everyone knew they were fake. Yes, I know, I sound like Trump's lawyer now. Pray for me.

*I do get the feeling from Bannon's radio show comments that he knew about the plot to attack. If he did (hopefully Garland's office squeezes him hard), and if he told Trump that, and "better" still, although mere knowledge with all the rest might be enough, they coordinated the scenario to get the thugs to the Capitol and maximize the crowd there as cover, then it is an entirely different story, and Trump goes to jail. But first you have to turn Bannon. Has his cell phone been seized by the way?

[emailking]

But none of that is a defense against aiding and abetting the intimidation of federal officials and obstruction of congressional proceedings.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Why would knowing the fake electors were fake and trying to have them counted anyway be better for Trump? That seems like conspiracy to defraud the United States to me.

[LBJer]

I would be amazed if the content of Trump's speech and his urging the crowd to go to the Capitol to protest can be the gravamen of a criminal act. Unless and until evidence appears that Trump was aware of and endorsed the breaking and entering into the Capitol, aside from jury tampering potentially, I just don't see a criminal case against Trump going very far.

What I do hear, is a lot of sloppy thinking by pundits on this matter. The punishment for Trump's failure to take action to end the riot and secure the Capitol was impeachment and conviction and removal from office for gross dereliction of duty. Frustrating to them all no doubt, and to me for that matter.

There is already abundant evidence that he foresaw the attack on the capitol, facilitated it (specifically demanding armed people be allowed to go there because "they're not here to hurt me"), and completely approved of it (his comments on Pence, his tweeting that the rioters shouldn't harm the Capitol Police because "They are on our side," and his doing absolutely nothing to stop the attack).

Actually what Trump wanted was for them to enter the area in front of his podium to fill the space up for the cameras. That was the context of that remark. The key missing element so far as we know is the lack of any evidence that he knew of the plot to breach the Capitol, much less plot and scheme before hand to facilitate it.* I predict that absent that element he will not be indicted. The fake elector thing doesn't make any sense either, inasmuch as everyone knew they were fake. Yes, I know, I sound like Trump's lawyer now. Pray for me.

*I do get the feeling from Bannon's radio show comments that he knew about the plot to attack. If he did (hopefully Garland's office squeezes him hard), and if he told Trump that, and "better" still, although mere knowledge with all the rest might be enough, they coordinated the scenario to get the thugs to the Capitol and maximize the crowd there as cover, then it is an entirely different story, and Trump goes to jail. But first you have to turn Bannon. Has his cell phone been seized by the way?

But he knew there was going to be a march on the Capitol and knew that people who were armed would, per his instructions, be in the mob. What did he think they had weapons for--to give Congress good wishes? And if he didn't want it to happen, he wouldn't have done absolutely nothing to stop the violence for hours.  I honestly think one has to suspend all powers of reason to arrive at your conclusion that there's not sufficient evidence here. It's like saying that no one should be convicted of a crime unless you have them on tape beforehand saying: "I am going to commit this crime"  or footage or them actually doing so.  

Not to mention the fact that saying "they're not here to hurt me" implies that they ARE there to hurt others.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

I think it’s debatable to unlikely that Trump acted with the goal of the attack happening. But he certainly didn’t care whether it did or not, had good reason to suspect that it would (the crowd was armed and wanted to march on the Capitol), and supported it while it was happening.

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://twitter.com/kpolantz/status/1552768922067288095

[Torie]

Why would knowing the fake electors were fake and trying to have them counted anyway be better for Trump? That seems like conspiracy to defraud the United States to me.

For criminal purposes, what a court would do is rule that it is obvious this slate would only have force and effect pursuant to a court ruling, without further appeal. There is factual fraud, and way out there legal fraud, and they are not the same thing.

Below is a good write up on executive privilege. I am no expert on that issue, but it seems to me that the privilege does not apply to criminal conduct, just as the attorney client privilege does not apply to aiding and abetting criminal conduct.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/doj-court-trump-january-6-executive-privilege/index.html

[Badger]

Jesse Binnall is a good lawyer.

Doesn't sound like it if that's the type of extremely tenuous overreaching argument he's relying on. Still, given the facts in his client that he has to work with, I guess that's what you do

[GeorgiaModerate]

https://mobile.twitter.com/RollingStone/status/1553896625021624321

[GeorgiaModerate]

Capitol rioter Guy Reffitt sentenced to 7+ years, longest so far

A Donald Trump fan from Texas who attempted to storm the U.S. Capitol while armed with a gun was sentenced to more than 7 years in prison on Monday after a judge denied the Justice Department's request for a "terrorism enhancement" that would have resulted in a lengthier prison sentence.

Guy Reffitt was the first Jan. 6 defendant to go to trial. Reffitt's own son actually tipped off the FBI a couple of weeks before Jan. 6 but didn't hear back until after the attack. The government had an enormous amount of evidence against Reffitt, including his friend's testimony that Reffitt was carrying zip ties and that the duo had made a decision to carry guns because they'd rather be "tried by a jury of twelve than carried by six."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/capitol-rioter-guy-reffitt-gets-longest-jan-6-sentence-no-terrorism-en-rcna40664