January 6, 2021: Insurrection or “normal tourist” visitation?

[ggait]

Base case seems to be that the MAL case will be charged/tried first and that Trump will be convicted. It looks open/shut from the outside.

While the 1/6 case is much more serious/important, I wonder what impact a prior conviction of Trump will have on the pursuit/outcome of the 1/6 case. Once Trump becomes the first/only convicted president (possibly of a felony), getting a second round of convictions (much more difficult to prove) seems a lot less important.

[Kismet]

It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

The jury will be comprised of 12 DC residents who likely will all have voted for Biden. If Trump is really lucky, he’ll get one Trump voter on the jury. And that one voter could well be disgusted with him by now.

His odds of winning an acquittal before a DC jury are not good, which I suspect he knows.

How many members of the Trump mafia have been acquitted by DC juries? Zero.

Unless DoJ has something nobody knows about (or a cooperating witness of two) don't see how they can go for an insurrection charge as part of any January 6 prosecution. Conspiracy and obstruction are certainly very much on the table. A few of his lawyers and associates are also in big trouble and are going to need legal help. Many flippable folks in the mix which must keep Orange Cheato up at night.

That said, they likely have him dead to rights on the classified documents case (which also will be conducted in DC before any other case). Anyone other than Cheato would have copped a plea by now on just the evidence that is public.

Keep on eye of the Georgia prosecutors. They may have the best case on the election.

[njbill]

Base case seems to be that the MAL case will be charged/tried first and that Trump will be convicted. It looks open/shut from the outside.

While the 1/6 case is much more serious/important, I wonder what impact a prior conviction of Trump will have on the pursuit/outcome of the 1/6 case. Once Trump becomes the first/only convicted president (possibly of a felony), getting a second round of convictions (much more difficult to prove) seems a lot less important.

Some left leaning talking heads have said that DOJ will only go after him for the documents case. Not that there may not be merit to the January 6 case, but that the documents case is a slam dunk, and some may be thinking that will be enough in terms of Trump federal prosecutions.

I don’t think the time frames will work for them to indict, try, and convict Trump on the documents case and then wait to decide about the January 6 case.

I suspect there will be some delays attendant to the documents case, and that a conviction, if there is one, won’t come until 2024. Of course he hasn’t even been indicted as yet.

If he is to be indicted for anything related to January 6, I don’t think the prosecutors will be able to wait until 2024, and particularly, until the documents case has gone to verdict. So if they do decide to indict him for something related to January 6, they will have to pull the trigger before a jury decides the documents case.

I think the Georgia state prosecutor is hell-bent on indicting Trump (rightly so in my view). My biggest concern about that prosecution is the jury pool. I don’t what the make up of a Fulton county jury would be, but I suspect it would be more favorable to Trump than a DC jury would be.

[njbill]

It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

The jury will be comprised of 12 DC residents who likely will all have voted for Biden. If Trump is really lucky, he’ll get one Trump voter on the jury. And that one voter could well be disgusted with him by now.

His odds of winning an acquittal before a DC jury are not good, which I suspect he knows.

How many members of the Trump mafia have been acquitted by DC juries? Zero.

Unless DoJ has something nobody knows about (or a cooperating witness of two) don't see how they can go for an insurrection charge as part of any January 6 prosecution. Conspiracy and obstruction are certainly very much on the table. A few of his lawyers and associates are also in big trouble and are going to need legal help. Many flippable folks in the mix which must keep Orange Cheato up at night.

That said, they likely have him dead to rights on the classified documents case (which also will be conducted in DC before any other case). Anyone other than Cheato would have copped a plea by now on just the evidence that is public.

Keep on eye of the Georgia prosecutors. They may have the best case on the election.

I agree, at least based on what has been made public, that there probably isn’t enough to indict Trump on an insurrection charge for January 6. As you note, however, there could be critical evidence the public isn’t aware of. Perhaps some people who are close to Trump could provide sufficient testimony to justify indicting him for inciting an insurrection. Still, I bet that’s a longshot.

More likely, I think, are charges relating to disrupting a congressional proceeding. I’m certainly not an expert in criminal law or in that type of charge in particular, but from what we have seen, he certainly seemed to intend to do that. I think that would be an easier case to make.

[cradleandshoot]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.
For MG, failure is not an option .

[kramerica.inc]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

[SCLaxAttack]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

Don’t just read his words, watch it. A video of it can be seen embedded in this article. https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/96639684 ... ment-trial

I watched him live that morning. As I watched it I texted my best friend: “Holy s…, are you watching C-Span? This f…er is calling for attacking the Capitol building!”

[cradleandshoot]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

Don’t just read his words, watch it. A video of it can be seen embedded in this article. https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/96639684 ... ment-trial

I watched him live that morning. As I watched it I texted my best friend: “Holy s…, are you watching C-Span? This f…er is calling for attacking the Capitol building!”

Maybe I'm confused, exactly what vernacular did trump use telling, suggesting or ordering this mob to do anything illegal? There was a lot of rhetoric spouted out by trump that was totally asinine in nature. If I'm following the logic trail the rabid, foaming at the mouth trump followers believed the trump speech was directed at them to be their marching orders. That very well might be what trump wanted them to do. That is not what trump ordered them to do. The closest analogy was trump telling them to be mad as hell and to take their government back. If this mob had marched to the capital steps and had their protest they would have been within their rights. That is when the rabble rousers took the protest to the next level. The burden of proving otherwise is now on the shoulders of MG.

[cradleandshoot]

It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

The jury will be comprised of 12 DC residents who likely will all have voted for Biden. If Trump is really lucky, he’ll get one Trump voter on the jury. And that one voter could well be disgusted with him by now.

His odds of winning an acquittal before a DC jury are not good, which I suspect he knows.

How many members of the Trump mafia have been acquitted by DC juries? Zero.

I have to believe trumps legal team will petition for a change of venue. Their argument will be it is impossible to seat an unbiased jury in the DC area. The argument could be made finding an unbiased jury anywhere could be very challenging.

[MDlaxfan76]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.
Putting aside that it's quite clear from any clear-eyed watch/listen that Trump intended the armed crowd to march on the Capitol to pressure the VP and Congress to reverse the election, they have evidence that he wanted to lead the crowd to do so, that he knew many were armed, and that he was furious about being restrained from doing so...and all sorts of other evidence of his attempt to pressure Pence, DOJ, DOD etc.

And of course, Trump's silence, then his 'order' to go home, while indeed providing 'comfort' and support to the rioters.

But leave aside that, the fake elector strategy was not "speech".

The coup attempt was not simply the riot.

[njbill]

It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

The jury will be comprised of 12 DC residents who likely will all have voted for Biden. If Trump is really lucky, he’ll get one Trump voter on the jury. And that one voter could well be disgusted with him by now.

His odds of winning an acquittal before a DC jury are not good, which I suspect he knows.

How many members of the Trump mafia have been acquitted by DC juries? Zero.

I have to believe trumps legal team will petition for a change of venue. Their argument will be it is impossible to seat an unbiased jury in the DC area. The argument could be made finding an unbiased jury anywhere could be very challenging.

I’m sure Trump’s lawyers will try something like that, but I don’t think it will be successful. He’s not going to find a Judge Cannon in DC. I’m not a criminal lawyer and I am not familiar with change of venue procedures in criminal cases, but my understanding is that venue is proper in the District which, I think, would negate any motion to transfer venue.

There probably would be an extensive jury selection process to find unbiased jurors, but that type of thing happens from time to time in high profile cases. That’s what voir dire and jury questionnaires are for.

[Kismet]

It won't be a bi-partisan group of politicians passing judgement on the dumpster, it will be 12 jurors.

The jury will be comprised of 12 DC residents who likely will all have voted for Biden. If Trump is really lucky, he’ll get one Trump voter on the jury. And that one voter could well be disgusted with him by now.

His odds of winning an acquittal before a DC jury are not good, which I suspect he knows.

How many members of the Trump mafia have been acquitted by DC juries? Zero.

I have to believe trumps legal team will petition for a change of venue. Their argument will be it is impossible to seat an unbiased jury in the DC area. The argument could be made finding an unbiased jury anywhere could be very challenging.

I’m sure Trump’s lawyers will try something like that, but I don’t think it will be successful. He’s not going to find a Judge Cannon in DC. I’m not a criminal lawyer and I am not familiar with change of venue procedures in criminal cases, but my understanding is that venue is proper in the District which, I think, would negate any motion to transfer venue.

There probably would be an extensive jury selection process to find unbiased jurors, but that type of thing happens from time to time in high profile cases. That’s what voir dire and jury questionnaires are for.

So far, all of the January 6 Federal cases (including the Oathkeepers Sedition trial) venue changes have been denied by any number of judges.
I doubt it is going to be successful in this case either.

It appears that the MAL documents case will also be brought in DC as that is where the purloined documents originated.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Anyone think Meadows will flip? If you read the reports today, he is in deep, deep waters on the fake electors business and on the documents matter.

[Dr. Tact]

Anyone think Meadows will flip? If you read the reports today, he is in deep, deep waters on the fake electors business and on the documents matter.

50-50...I would want him to.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Anyone think Meadows will flip? If you read the reports today, he is in deep, deep waters on the fake electors business and on the documents matter.

50-50...I would want him to.

I just wonder, Doc, whether he is just too beholden to Trump World for remuneration, payment of attorney's fees, etc., to consider turning over on Trump (and Eastman and others, I guess).

[njbill]

I don’t know if he will or won’t. But I’d sure like to be a fly on the wall when someone comes to Trump and says “Meadows just flipped.”

[NattyBohChamps04]

I don’t know if he will or won’t. But I’d sure like to be a fly on the wall when someone comes to Trump and says “Meadows just flipped.”

Not sure you'd wanna be on the wall, you may get covered in ketchup and hamberders. Maybe on the ceiling?

[MDlaxfan76]

I don’t know if he will or won’t. But I’d sure like to be a fly on the wall when someone comes to Trump and says “Meadows just flipped.”

Not sure you'd wanna be on the wall, you may get covered in ketchup and hamberders. Maybe on the ceiling?

Insect drone from "Eye in the Sky".

[njbill]

I don’t know if he will or won’t. But I’d sure like to be a fly on the wall when someone comes to Trump and says “Meadows just flipped.”

Not sure you'd wanna be on the wall, you may get covered in ketchup and hamberders. Maybe on the ceiling?

[a fan]

"As far as the dumpster and the Jan 6 criminal referral to the DOJ.. it is going to boil down to a very simple interpretation of the 1st amendment."

I think this is actually a pretty complicated issue. And I think the completely frivolous and unlawful "fake electors" scheme is potentially more potent and easier to navigate.

I agree that it is a very complicated case. My understanding is that most serious and most difficult charges to prove come from the claim that trump issued an order to assault the capital. That is where I believe MG has a lot of landmines to tip toe over to prove that to a jury. It is possible that any trial involving trump will not just be one charge. It could be 4 or 5 charges going to court at once.

no, aid and give comfort are not "issued an order"....

Don't listen to whoever you heard that they need to prove he gave an "order".

But yes, IMO too, pretty reasonable to expect there will be multiple violations of law charged.
Jan 6 Committee recommended 4 such.

I have read the complete transcript of trumps speech to the crowd. I'm not sure how you arrive at giving aid and comfort. That may be how you feel and I understand how you got there. Trying to prove it in court is why MG will have to approach any trump prosecution very carefully. What appears obvious to you has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors. That is not going to be a cakewalk by any means. If trump is acquitted of whatever charges he may face that will be a crushing defeat to MGs DOJ.

The threshold for criminalizing speech is a high hurdle to clear.

That is certainly true, and should be.

Agreed. This is a political matter, and that's the part that stinks.

The body that is SUPPOSED to take this trash out is the Republican party, as they did with Nixon, where they said enough is enough. They failed to do that, so here we are.