So, what did I miss? :-)
Open thread.
This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments
So, what did I miss? :-)
Open thread.
This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments
Predictions are hard. (Silently adding especially about the future.)
But I’m gonna make one anyway. Think of it as a gift to all of you when you can point and laugh if it turns out to be totally wrong!
I think Jack Smith is going to split the baby, in the best possible way. I don’t think there will be one huge case about the MAL documents + Jan 6 + the grifting off the big lie. I think the various cases will be brought separately, and I think some will be in DC and some will be in FL. There may even be parts of one of those that are in FL and other parts that are in DC.
As for the documents, I believe that these 3 pieces are considered separate crimes: taking the documents, retaining the documents, and showing the documents. I am most certainly not a lawyer, but it seems like they could charge the retaining of documents in FL, for instance, and the taking if documents in DC.
Jack Smith is not stupid, and I don’t think for a minute that he will be putting all his eggs in one basket. And if he did, that basket would certainly not be in FL where the crazy judges and plenty of MAGAs live. Like me, Jack Smith is a belts and suspenders person.
Somewhat related, regarding the discrepancies in reporting about Meadows, I think we may be seeing some very careful parsing of words. Could the initial reporting of Meadows pleading guilty to some smaller offenses and getting PARTIAL immunity be true, and have it be true at the same time that “he didn’t take a deal”?
It seems to me that the key players are playing it very close to the vest, and they should be. Jack Smith and company, for sure. Ditto for Meadows and his attorney, the one attorney who appears to have been involved this high-profile case without losing his credibility and standing in the legal community.
Oh, and totally unrelated, this cartoon from Anne Laurie’s thread is exceptionally good, so I will repost it here.
I wonder if the Squeaker is as happy in the position as he thought he would be. I hope that he is totally miserable every single day, and that he is a living example of be careful what you wish for.
Open thread.
This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments
Holy forking shirt balls! It’s all speculation of course – but informed speculation! Legal twitter thinks it’s really looking like we will see Jack Smith indict Trump this week. I’m not entirely sure about that because Jack Smith is still bringing people in to testify in front of the grand juries.
We seem to be building to a major crescendo this week, including with the Meadows thunderbolt. Thanks very much as always @NicolleDWallace for having me at the table. https://t.co/55ExibbIzL
— Harry Litman (@harrylitman) June 6, 2023
This seems like a big deal to me. The DOJ’s head of counterintelligence is questioning the person in charge of Trump’s super PAC. I hope all of Trump’s minions are squirming like the little worms they are.
Significant. DOJ’s head of Counterintelligence is handling questioning of Trump super PAC chief. Unlikely this is just about obstruction: Multiple witnesses subpoenaed in Florida in Trump Mar-a-Lago case | Donald Trump | The Guardian https://t.co/BHZHAfh764
— Frank Figliuzzi (@FrankFigliuzzi1) June 7, 2023
As I understand it, they don’t have “targets” testify before a grand jury, so Meadows doesn’t appear to be a target of the investigation. His comment that essentially said “I tell the truth when I am required to by law” leaves me thinking that he was not taking the 5th, and that he was actually testifying.
What say you all? Has Meadows been cooperating all along?
Update: This is NOT good news for Donald Trump!
1. Mark Meadows to plead guilty to lesser federal crimes in exchange for testimony under limited immunity.
2. Federal grand jury to vote on a Trump indictment on charges of Obstruction of Justice and Espionage Act violations.
Buckle up.
— Jack E. Smith ⚖️ (@7Veritas4) June 7, 2023
— Jack E. Smith ⚖️ (@7Veritas4) June 7, 2023
BREAKING: Jack Smith is prepared to ask a grand jury to CHARGE TRUMP with ESPIONAGE and OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE as early as TOMORROW, and MARK MEADOWS HAS FLIPPED and will plead guilty to several lesser charges in exchange for limited immunity. https://t.co/RNC7flxm6K
— Mueller, She Wrote (@MuellerSheWrote) June 7, 2023
Open thread.
This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments
Another hot day here today, but the most of the next 10 days look to have weather that actually supports life. Very excited about that! The heat has sapped most of my motivation, and I am considering an afternoon siesta. It’s good to have goals.
Some of the folks I follow on legal twitter seem pretty confident that we may well see a Trump indictment this week. It’s all speculation, so who knows, but I like to think it’s true. Hoping that it’s not until tomorrow when the heat will break and I will have some energy again.
In the meantime, on the lighter side.
Dear Amazon,
We ordered tiny handcuffs a week ago and were expecting them any day now.
It is imperative they are delivered immediately, otherwise we will be forced to reconsider our Prime membership.
Sincerely,
The Department of Justice
— Jack E. Smith ⚖️ (@7Veritas4) June 6, 2023
Rumors that I told the Trump team to “fvck off” when they asked to drop the charges, are simply not accurate.
I distinctly remember a “please” in there somewhere.
There is no reason not to be civil.
— Jack E. Smith ⚖️ (@7Veritas4) June 6, 2023
Thank dog for the other Jack Smith. He brightens my days.
This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments
BREAKING: Trump’s lawyers just spotted by @CBSNews entering the Justice Department, per @RobLegare who is on site… comes as sources tell me the special counsel is moving toward a charging decision in the classified documents case
— Robert Costa (@costareports) June 5, 2023
I have lost track of the Trump attorneys. James Trusty seems like a joke, and I assume that Lindsey Halligan is the attorney is the female attorney that legal twitter said was apparently hired because she’s attractive and Trump likes to have her around.
Who is John Rowley? Can someone catch me up?
(CBS)
Attorneys representing former President Donald Trump — John Rowley, James Trusty and Lindsey Halligan — were at the Justice Department at around 10 a.m. Monday, weeks after Trump’s lawyers had requested a meeting with top federal law enforcement officials.
CBS News saw Trump’s legal team walking into the Justice Department. They did not speak as they entered the building in Washington, and they stayed for just under two hours. A person familiar with the meeting between Trump’s lawyers and the department said that Attorney General Merrick Garland did not attend.
Two people familiar with the probe said that Trump’s legal team is frustrated with how Justice Department officials have handled attorney-client matters in recent months and would likely raise their concerns on this front during Monday’s meeting, in particular, prosecutors’ discussions of related issues in front of the grand jury.
(NYT)
Lawyers for former President Donald J. Trump met on Monday at the Justice Department with officials, including the special counsel Jack Smith, two weeks after requesting a meeting to discuss their concerns about Mr. Smith’s investigations into Mr. Trump, according to two people familiar with the matter.
The meeting did not include Attorney General Merrick B. Garland or Lisa O. Monaco, the deputy attorney general, and it is unclear what precise subjects were discussed. But the visit came amid indications that prosecutors in the special counsel’s office were approaching the end of their inquiry into the former president’s handling of classified documents. It also came at a time when Mr. Trump’s advisers have concluded that there might not be much more time to stave off charges, the people said.
The lawyers — James Trusty, John Rowley and Lindsey Halligan — left the Justice Department after nearly two hours. They declined to speak to reporters.
Shortly after their visit, Mr. Trump posted a message on his social media platform, Truth Social, suggesting that his legal team had at least discussed with him the possibility that he could be indicted.
“How can DOJ possibly charge me, who did nothing wrong,” Mr. Trump wrote in all capital letters.
Oh, and if anyone wants to hear the folks at Lawfare (LIVE) at 3pm Eastern today:
Open thread.
by WaterGirl| 52 Comments
This post is in: Open Threads, Trump Indictments
*Friday afternoon is always a good time for speculation, and some smart, respected people got together and created a model prosecution memo related to the Trump classified documents.
(*Friday was when I wrote this, then pulled it.)
I believe they had released this quite some time ago, but apparently it has been updated.
2. A stronger statement in this 2d edition:
"The authors have decades of experience as federal prosecutors and defense lawyers, as well as other legal expertise. Based upon this experience and the analysis that follows, we conclude that Trump should–and likely will–be charged."
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) June 2, 2023
4. "The DOJ precedent indicates that to decline to bring a case against Trump would be treating Trump far more favorably than other defendants, which would be antithetical to the rule of law and the principles of the Justice Manual."
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) June 2, 2023
I’ll be interested in what some of our attorneys think about this. And what everyone else has to say, of course!
Model Prosecution Memo for Trump Classified Documents
June 2, 2023
by Andrew Weissmann, Ryan Goodman, Joyce Vance, Norman L. Eisen, Fred Wertheimer, Siven Watt, E. Danya Perry, Joshua Stantonand Joshua Kolb
I know a lot of these names, but not all of them.
Open thread.
Update: I just saw that the esteemed Tom Levenson is composing a post in the back room, so I pulled this and will put it up later!
This post is in: Open Threads, Politics, Trump Indictments
It’s Friday, and it’s very quiet. Hmm.
The Montreal Cognitive Assessment:
“Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV.”
DOJ version:
“Tapes. Espionage. Indictments. Convictions. Prison.”
— Jack E. Smith ⚖️ (@7Veritas4) May 31, 2023
Open thread.
Update: the consensus seems to be that this is Thursday, dammit.