The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 11:58 am

I mean sure, Teixeira and Trump are about as different as can be with respect to their roles and their station in life.

That said, I didn't realize there was a provision in the law that had gradations for pre-trial treatment - especially for matters related to national security.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 12:04 pm

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 11:58 am I mean sure, Teixeira and Trump are about as different as can be with respect to their roles and their station in life.

That said, I didn't realize there was a provision in the law that had gradations for pre-trial treatment - especially for matters related to national security.

In the federal system, getting bail is the default state and being remanded requires an argument to be made.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 12:05 pm

I did not know that! See, I'm learning. Still, it probably won't come as a surprise that I think both of them should be incarcerated prior to their trial.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 12:21 pm

Right the real problem is the risk here. In almost every national security investigation the default state was that the risk was high they would further compromise national security. But for Trump where he is very likely actively compromising national security they aren't trying. If anyone is paying attention it is clear he is being treated VERY DIFFERENTLY and IT STINKS.

Just to compare, when David Patraeus was suspected of leaking documents to his mistress they searched both their properties upside down to find any documents. Trump has been found holding nuclear secrets, war plans, and they have footage of them moving boxes around to Bedminster, including a tape of him showing that war plan to fake Melania, but they didn't search it or any of his other properties?! Not great at all and it directly maps to the pre-trial stuff. The risk isn't Trump fleeing. That'd be hard for him to accomplish but is he possibly still holding onto and mismanaging classified records? Highly likely.

I'm not even saying they need to detain him but an argument should have been a request to a search of his other properties in lieu of detention to reduce the risk of further breaches. I don't know if the law allows for it but it feels like no one is even considering it which is just...unwise to me.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 2:17 pm

The conspiracy mindset is that they’re waiting for Trump to repeat the offense so they can bust him in the act. Because that may be necessary to convict.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 3:42 pm

FWIW with the target letter now being reported related to 1/6 charges I think we finally have enough to push back against the Garland/Wray defenders. We've been told that Federal investigations take long times. However, the many articles printed since Smith was named Special Prosecutor indicate that he authorized several unexplored avenues and may be marching to another indictment in under a year. Garland has has nearly 3. It is hard to escape the conclusion that Wray and Garland both may not have seriously investigated Trump's crimes. I don't know why but we deserve answers about their pursuit of justice.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 4:02 pm

If this had happened quicker Trump wouldn't have had time to regain so much momentum. So we have that going for us.

I expect he will go up ever further in the polls.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 5:20 pm

malchior wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 3:42 pm FWIW with the target letter now being reported related to 1/6 charges I think we finally have enough to push back against the Garland/Wray defenders. We've been told that Federal investigations take long times. However, the many articles printed since Smith was named Special Prosecutor indicate that he authorized several unexplored avenues and may be marching to another indictment in under a year. Garland has has nearly 3. It is hard to escape the conclusion that Wray and Garland both may not have seriously investigated Trump's crimes. I don't know why but we deserve answers about their pursuit of justice.

Garland gets credit for appointing Smith though, right?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 6:34 pm

El Guapo wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 5:20 pm Garland gets credit for appointing Smith though, right?

Someday I'd like to know wtf took so long, but for now I'm happy with some forward motion. To wit:

MORE from courthouse in Ft Pierce, Florida.. where there was a hearing today in Trump federal case

Per my teammate Jack Renaud, DOJ said they have more than 1,000,000 pages of discovery, including 1545 pages of classified documents & hours of closed-circuit video from Mar A Lago

That seems like...a lot of evidence.

He also reported:

Per my temmate Jack Renaud in Ft. Pierce, Florida... no decision from Judge AIleen Cannon on scheduling or trial calendar in Trump federal criminal case in Florida.... after lengthy hearing

Cannon said she'd promptly issue order on scheduling

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 8:03 pm

Does that amount of evidence work in Trump's favor re postponement?

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 8:05 pm

I wouldn't think so, but all of this is uncharted territory anyway, right?

Rolling Stone article with more details on the pending election related charges:

Special counsel Jack Smith sent the letter to Trump on Sunday, informing him he was a target of the Justice Department. Trump on Tuesday announced he’d been sent the letter via a post on the social media platform Truth Social.

The letter mentions three federal statutes: Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States; deprivation of rights under color of law; and tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant. It does not offer further details, nor does it detail how the special counsel believes Trump may have violated the statutes, the source tells Rolling Stone.

The letter does not mention statutes on sedition or insurrection, according to the source. Trump is the only person named in the letter, the source says.

The source said the statutes listed likely refer to the prosecutor’s interest in charging Trump with obstructing the election certification process, including Trump efforts to pressure Mike Pence to stop the certification of President Biden’s 2020 victory.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:09 pm

In related news, Michigan’s attorney general filed charges against 16 “alternate electors” who tried to steal the state for trump.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:24 pm

Kraken wrote: Tue Jul 18, 2023 10:09 pm In related news, Michigan’s attorney general filed charges against 16 “alternate electors” who tried to steal the state for trump.

Yeah, f these folks:

Each false elector will be charged with 8 FELONY COUNTS.

Each defendant will be charged with the following counts::

- 1 count of Uttering and Publishing, a 14-year felony,
- 1 count of Conspiracy to Commit Election Law Forgery, a 5-year felony, and,
- 2 counts of Election Law Forgery, a 5-year felony.
- 1 count of Conspiracy to Commit Forgery, a 14-year felony,
- 2 counts of Forgery, a 14-year felony,
- 1 count of Conspiracy to Commit Uttering and Publishing, a 14-year felony,

Nessel said stated: “The duly elected and qualified electors for president and vice president of the United States of America for the state of Michigan. “That was a lie. They weren’t the duly elected and qualified electors, and each of the defendants knew it.”

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 11:21 pm

Uttering and publishing is actually a crime related to the forgery or counterfeiting of important documents and then attempting to pass them off as if they are legitimate.

Jaymann · Post by **Jaymann** » Tue Jul 18, 2023 11:30 pm

That is great news. Now maybe the nihilist rednecks will think twice before criming on behalf of a crime boss who never had any intention of having their backs.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 12:00 am

Similar efforts are underway in other states as well, including AZ and GA, I do believe.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 8:46 am

More data required but moving in the direction that Cannon is going to help Trump delay this trial. She probably won't directly accept Trump's request to delay trial until after election but she can issues orders like this and chip away at the timeline.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 9:37 am

This is par for the course in most cases. Judges hate discovery motion practice. They have rules that require the parties to meet and confer before taking an issue to the court. They take those rules very seriously. If the government reached out on Friday and filed on Monday without satisfying the meet and confer rule, that’s going to get dinged nine times out of ten.

Parties often play games with this stuff, and it can be maddening. Like, you really don’t have any 5 minute window to get in the phone and confirm we’re at an impasse when we all know we’re never going to reach agreement?

But that’s how it goes.

Scraper · Post by **Scraper** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 10:09 am

Kurth wrote: Wed Jul 19, 2023 9:37 am This is par for the course in most cases. Judges hate discovery motion practice. They have rules that require the parties to meet and confer before taking an issue to the court. They take those rules very seriously. If the government reached out on Friday and filed on Monday without satisfying the meet and confer rule, that’s going to get dinged nine times out of ten.

Parties often play games with this stuff, and it can be maddening. Like, you really don’t have any 5 minute window to get in the phone and confirm we’re at an impasse when we all know we’re never going to reach agreement?

But that’s how it goes.

I agree with Kurth on this point. Discovery procedure has to play out and each side needs to have a chance to review and address issues and motions. The thing the Judge can't allow is for one side to abuse the process whether that be for purposes of delay or for trying to speed things through without full consideration.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 11:01 am

Kurth wrote: Wed Jul 19, 2023 9:37 am This is par for the course in most cases. Judges hate discovery motion practice. They have rules that require the parties to meet and confer before taking an issue to the court. They take those rules very seriously. If the government reached out on Friday and filed on Monday without satisfying the meet and confer rule, that’s going to get dinged nine times out of ten.

According to what I have read that isn't what happened. Trump's lawyers failed to respond to repeated requests to confer and several counsel have blown deadlines set by Cannon to complete paperwork to get their classified access process started. Apparently the pattern extends beyond just the comment above about Friday/Monday. I also keep in mind these are amongst several well-known national security law experts saying this order is irregular.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 11:39 am

malchior wrote: Wed Jul 19, 2023 11:01 am
Kurth wrote: Wed Jul 19, 2023 9:37 am This is par for the course in most cases. Judges hate discovery motion practice. They have rules that require the parties to meet and confer before taking an issue to the court. They take those rules very seriously. If the government reached out on Friday and filed on Monday without satisfying the meet and confer rule, that’s going to get dinged nine times out of ten.
According to what I have read that isn't what happened. Trump's lawyers failed to respond to repeated requests to confer and several counsel have blown deadlines set by Cannon to complete paperwork to get their classified access process started. Apparently the pattern extends beyond just the comment above about Friday/Monday. I also keep in mind these are amongst several well-known national security law experts saying this order is irregular.

I completely believe that Trump’s team is generally playing games and being uncooperative. But if that were the case here and necessitated the government moving forward with a motion without meeting and conferring, I would have expected the government would have made an extensive record of that and submitted that with the motion (likely as a declaration from counsel). I didn’t check the docket or read the papers on this one, but I didn’t see anything like that reported.

Also, national security experts may not know shit about litigation. I wouldn’t assume that they do.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Wed Jul 19, 2023 11:57 am

Kurth wrote: Wed Jul 19, 2023 11:39 amI completely believe that Trump’s team is generally playing games and being uncooperative. But if that were the case here and necessitated the government moving forward with a motion without meeting and conferring, I would have expected the government would have made an extensive record of that and submitted that with the motion (likely as a declaration from counsel). I didn’t check the docket or read the papers on this one, but I didn’t see anything like that reported.

What's more likely though? If you just do a casual search on the DOJ handbook you'll see they provide guidance for this process that talks about the availability of detailed instructions and templates for the motion. I find it highly unlikely that the team from DOJ ignored the handbook and is playing fast and loose with federal procedures on one of the most important cases in DOJ history. On the other side you have an inexperienced trial judge who has demonstrated bias and a penchant for procedural errors and a defendant known for endless delay tactics. Though at least for now I get the measure of skepticism at the moment.

Also, national security experts may not know shit about litigation. I wouldn’t assume that they do.

Just to be clear here the Tweets above are from someone who was in the Special Counsel's office for the Russia investigation and was the lead on the Manafort prosecution (Weissmann) and another who was on the same team for Mueller and also ran the FARA office at DOJ (Van Grack). I think what they think is irregular is...probably irregular. The charitable explanation I've seen is that she is just inexperienced. We'll see still. That's why I said "More data required".

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am

Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am

malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

That assumes the trial doesn't get pushed out further as the date approaches.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:07 am

stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

That assumes the trial doesn't get pushed out further as the date approaches.

Right. And I have little faith it will happen before the election tbh.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:15 am

malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:07 am
stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

That assumes the trial doesn't get pushed out further as the date approaches.
Right. And I have little faith it will happen before the election tbh.

In fairness, that schedule looks reasonable given the complexity of the case.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:18 am

If it weren't for the election nobody would think that date is odd. So what happens if the trial is still going and he wins the election? They just stop? I can't believe we dropped so far that this is even a thing.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:29 am

Octavious wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:18 am If it weren't for the election nobody would think that date is odd. So what happens if the trial is still going and he wins the election? They just stop? I can't believe we dropped so far that this is even a thing.

No - he's not president until sworn in. If he's convicted and sworn in, I guess we'll see if a president can pardon himself.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:39 am

Isn’t the pardon restricted to crimes committed while in office? Was trump was out of office when he stole the documents?

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:56 am

Kraken wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:39 am Isn’t the pardon restricted to crimes committed while in office? Was trump was out of office when he stole the documents?

A president can pardon anyone (although not sure about himself) of federal crimes. Doesn't matter when they happened.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 11:04 am

Well all the historical data we have on election year strategies is about to vaporize as his trial sucks all the air out of every other possible issue headed into Election Day. Well, except for Hunter Biden. I'm guessing there's still going to be plenty of room to keep that in the forefront.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 11:16 am

I'm pretty sure they will be pushing an impeachment on the Hunter stuff to counter Trump's many issues.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 3:59 pm

/edit - nevermind. Superbammed.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:06 pm

stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:15 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:07 am
stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

That assumes the trial doesn't get pushed out further as the date approaches.
Right. And I have little faith it will happen before the election tbh.
In fairness, that schedule looks reasonable given the complexity of the case.

Do any of the knowledgeable / informed people on this sort of thing have any issue with the schedule?

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:13 pm

El Guapo wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:06 pm
stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:15 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:07 am
stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

That assumes the trial doesn't get pushed out further as the date approaches.
Right. And I have little faith it will happen before the election tbh.
In fairness, that schedule looks reasonable given the complexity of the case.
Do any of the knowledgeable / informed people on this sort of thing have any issue with the schedule?

I'm waiting for the Mr Fed podcast, but I haven't seen any gnashing of teeth in other areas yet.

Octavious · Post by **Octavious** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:22 pm

To me the biggest issue is the January 6th nonsense. By the time they bring charges and schedule court we'll be well past the election. Like what the heck is Georgia doing? Maybe this is all normal, but they took so long that people had time to just excuse it away and normalize it through the news. I legit saw an article today that said let the voters decide. Awesome it's not a crime anymore if you get elected. Murder someone? Just run for president and let the voters decide.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:23 pm

Octavious wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:22 pm Like what the heck is Georgia doing?

Apparently getting ready to drop the bomb:

The Fulton county district attorney investigating Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results in the state of Georgia has developed evidence to charge a sprawling racketeering indictment next month, according to two people briefed on the matter.

The racketeering statute in Georgia requires prosecutors to show the existence of an “enterprise” – and a pattern of racketeering activity that is predicated on at least two “qualifying” crimes.

In the Trump investigation, the Fulton county district attorney, Fani Willis, has evidence to pursue a racketeering indictment predicated on statutes related to influencing witnesses and computer trespass, the people said.

...

The racketeering statute in Georgia is more expansive than its federal counterpart, notably because any attempts to solicit or coerce the qualifying crimes can be included as predicate acts of racketeering activity, even when those crimes cannot be indicted separately.

...

Charges stemming from the Trump investigation are expected to come between the final week of July and the first two weeks of August, the Guardian has previously reported, after Willis told her team to shift to remote work during that period because of security concerns.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 5:19 pm

El Guapo wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 4:06 pm
stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:15 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:07 am
stessier wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 10:02 am
malchior wrote: Fri Jul 21, 2023 9:48 am Trial date set - May 20th, 2024 in Fort Pierce. At the tail end of primary season.

Edit: This raises the possibility that the Republicans may go to convention having to decide if they will nominate a convicted felon for the highest office in the land.

That assumes the trial doesn't get pushed out further as the date approaches.
Right. And I have little faith it will happen before the election tbh.
In fairness, that schedule looks reasonable given the complexity of the case.
Do any of the knowledgeable / informed people on this sort of thing have any issue with the schedule?

Not per se. There seems to be no real disagreement with the date in *abstract*. The major disagreements I see are will it happen before vs. after election. Van Grack noted that the protective order motion that Cannon denied earlier this week is something that is usually settled in a few days of discussion between prosecutors/defense counsel...and sometimes goes a week. We're in week 5 on this preliminary step. We'll see over the coming weeks if they keep blowing dates. I'm going to assume they will because my working theory is Cannon is at the very least sympathetic (if not outright biased) in favor of Trump and she is aware that time helps Trump.

Edit: Here is this point in Tweet form.

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 5:35 pm

By setting that generous of a timeline, hopefully further delays will be hard to justify.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Jul 21, 2023 5:43 pm

I love when I post news on a page, only to find out that it's been being discussed for hours. It's partially thanks to the stories always being updated, and thus having recent times listed, and partially due to my once again accidentally hitting 'mark all forums read' on my phone before I caught up.