Chutkan: Trump Insurrection Trial Going Forward

 

Fortunately, we have a jurist in U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan who's not overwhelmed by the moment or intimidated by the convicted felon Malignant Loser's team of crime family lawyers.  The January 6 insurrection trial inches forward:

Judge Tanya Chutkan, overseeing a case against former President Donald Trump for his role on Jan. 6, said that Judge Aileen Cannon’s ruling calling special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment illegitimate was not “particularly persuasive,” and signaled the case may move forward despite the election schedule.

Chutkan on Thursday re-arraigned Trump on a new superseding indictment from Smith’s office, made to exclude potentially official acts he made as president involving the attacks following the Supreme Court’s wide presidential immunity decision.

Responding to Trump attorney John Lauro’s suggestion that allowing prosecutors to file a brief containing evidence would put harmful details into the public record "at this very sensitive time,” Chutkan said the law was not concerned with political sensitivities.

“The electoral process and the timing of the election and what needs to happen before  . . . is not relevant here. This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule,” Chutkan said, per Politico reporter Kyle Cheney.

Chutkan went on to ask Trump’s attorneys why they were filing a motion to challenge the legitimacy of Smith’s appointment, citing Clarence Thomas’ dissent in Trump v. United States and Judge Cannon’s ruling, tossing out a case involving Trump’s illegal handling of classified documents. The judge noted that they missed an October deadline to file and that D.C. Circuit precedent held Smith’s appointment was valid.

“You have an opinion by a district judge in another circuit which frankly this court doesn't find persuasive,” Chutkan reportedly said, per Lawfare’s Roger Parloff.

Chutkan, who also disagreed with Lauro’s characterization that the Supreme Court’s ruling already settled whether conversations between Trump and Pence were official acts, according to MSNBC correspondent Katie Phang, didn’t dismiss the conversation outright, noting that if Trump’s team could persuade the court that the D.C. Circuit precedent didn’t hold, she’d reconsider.

At one point in the hearing, Lauro cracked a joke that “life was almost meaningless” while the case was on hold for months. To which Chutkan fired back, "Enjoy it while it lasts." (our emphasis)

Clearly, she intends to proceed with all due haste with the re-focused superseding indictment.  We look forward to the Special Counsel's evidentiary brief.  

You can bet the ketchup is flying fast and furious at Mar-a-Lardo.

(Composite image:  Agence France- Presse/Getty Images)

Supreme Court Delays Immunity Decision

 

After the Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously ruled that the Malignant Loser did not have immunity for criminal acts while President, specifically those committed on January 6, it was hoped that the Republican-stacked Supreme Court might decline to review the case and send the case back to the District Court immediately for trial. Unfortunately, the Court agreed to hear the Malignant Loser's appeal, but not until April 22, when oral arguments are scheduled. SCOTUSblog has a timeline for the case, starting from when the Malignant Loser was indicted last August.

While legal experts described that drawn-out schedule as "expedited", it likely moves the District Court trial date (assuming the Court doesn't side with the Malignant Loser) well into the summer of 2024, with considerable doubt that it would conclude before the election.  There may be some economies in the schedule later regarding the District Court, but this ruling by the Supreme Court is a gift to the would-be dictator as it moves him closer to an election that he hopes will rescue him from justice. Stay tuned.

BONUS:  More discussion here, here, and here.

QOTD -- The Two-Faced Flipper

 

The New York Times' Robert Draper provides some context to reports confirming that former Malignant Loser Chief of Staff Mark Meadows received an immunity order last year to testify to Special Counsel Jack Smith's Grand Jury in the election subversion case, and why the Malignant Loser should be worried:

... The question of what Meadows may have said, and might say on a witness stand, has significant implications for Trump’s fate in the federal trial, which was scheduled to start March 4 but was recently removed from the court calendar. A firsthand verification from Trump’s former top aide that the president knew that he lost the election but proceeded with efforts to overturn the results anyway might by itself sway the jury to find Trump guilty and send him to prison. In turn, some polls have suggested that a guilty verdict might cost Trump enough votes from independent voters to deny him an election victory — and thus the ability to pardon himself. All of which is to say that Trump’s entire fate could depend on what it means to Mark Meadows, then and now, to be “the chief’s chief.”...

Draper, having studied the untrustworthy Meadows, has a cautionary note to add:

... But if that outcome has indeed arrived and Meadows chooses to do as he has typically done — which is to look after Mark Meadows — then the man who was once dubbed Two-Face, after the DC Comics supervillain, by House Republican leadership staffers is not just Trump’s problem but the problem of Trump’s prosecutors as well. The recurrent feature of Meadows’s career ascent is that he persuaded people to trust him, leaving them to later regret having done so...

We can only hope Special Counsel Smith got value for Meadows' immunity deal, and that it (and the weaselly Meadows) holds up in court.

Lordy, There Are Tapes!

From the Detroit News:

Then-President Donald Trump personally pressured two Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers not to sign the certification of the 2020 presidential election, according to recordings reviewed by The Detroit News and revealed publicly for the first time.

On a Nov. 17, 2020, phone call, which also involved Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel, Trump told Monica Palmer and William Hartmann, the two GOP Wayne County canvassers, they'd look "terrible" if they signed the documents after they first voted in opposition and then later in the same meeting voted to approve certification of the county’s election results, according to the recordings.

"We've got to fight for our country," said Trump on the recordings, made by a person who was present for the call with Palmer and Hartmann. "We can't let these people take our country away from us." 

McDaniel, a Michigan native and the leader of the Republican Party nationally, said at another point in the call, "If you can go home tonight, do not sign it. ... We will get you attorneys."

To which Trump added: "We'll take care of that."

Palmer and Hartmann left the canvassers meeting without signing the official statement of votes for Wayne County, and the following day, they unsuccessfully attempted to rescind their votes in favor of certification, filing legal affidavits claiming they were pressured. 

The moves from Palmer, Hartmann and Trump, had they been successful, threatened to throw the statewide certification of Michigan's 2020 election into doubt.

The revelation of the contents of the call with the former president comes as he faces four counts of criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States and its voters of the rightful outcome of the election. Efforts to prevent certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s 154,000-vote victory in Michigan are an integral part of the indictment.

The call involving Trump, McDaniel, Hartmann and Palmer occurred within 30 minutes of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers meeting ending on Nov. 17, 2020, according to records reviewed by The News.

The recordings further demonstrated the direct involvement of Trump, as an incumbent president, with Republican officials in Michigan in a bid to undermine Biden's win and how some details of his efforts had remained secret as he launched a campaign to win back the White House in 2024...  (our emphasis)

There's much more detail and background at the link.  Sleazy RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel may also have some more legal exposure from the revelations in the recording, not to mention the Malignant Loser (see Tweet below).  She's also been implicated in election tampering in Georgia and Arizona.

There had been earlier reporting on the existence of this and other Malignant Loser calls, including the oft- played one to Georgia Secretary of State Raffensperger;  this is the first time outside of that where there's been a recording revealed of which we're aware.  It's unclear from what source the Detroit News got access to the recording.  We only play lawyers on this blog, so we don't know if this somehow taints the smoking gun evidence or not.  We have to see how this plays out as Special Counsel Smith's prosecution stays in high gear for now.

BONUS:  This guy doesn't play a lawyer, he is one --

 

Trump and Ronna McDaniel - Offering a thing of value to a public official to violate oath of office = a crime. ⬇️ https://t.co/ovJ6y1g9pj

— Andrew Weissmann (weissmann11 on Threads)🌻 (@AWeissmann_) December 22, 2023

(Image:  via GIPHY)

 

BREAKING: Special Counsel Asks For Speech Restrictions On Trump

 

The Special Counsel, doubtless reacting to increasing threats of violence generated by the vile rhetoric of the Malignant Loser, has asked the judge presiding over the January 6 coup/ fake electors case to restrict that rhetoric:

Special counsel Jack Smith and his team have requested a federal judge in Washington, D.C., impose a "narrowly tailored" order restricting former President Donald Trump from making public statements that they argue could "present a serious and substantial danger of prejudicing" his 2020 federal election interference case.

In an extraordinary filing, Smith's office accused Trump of engaging in a sweeping campaign of "disinformation" and harassment intended to intimidate witnesses, prosecutors and others involved in the prosecution he is facing.

"Like his previous public disinformation campaign regarding the 2020 presidential election, the defendant's recent extrajudicial statements are intended to undermine public confidence in an institution -- the judicial system -- and to undermine confidence in and intimidate individuals --the Court, the jury pool, witnesses, and prosecutors," the filing says.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges of undertaking a "criminal scheme" to overturn the results of the 2020 election by enlisting a slate of so-called "fake electors," using the Justice Department to conduct "sham election crime investigations," trying to enlist the vice president to "alter the election results," and promoting false claims of a stolen election as the Jan. 6 riot raged -- all in an effort to subvert democracy and remain in power.

Prosecutors say their proposed order to D.C. District Judge Tanya Chutkan would be "a narrow, well-defined restriction" that would prohibit Trump from making statements "regarding the identity, testimony, or credibility of prospective witnesses" and "statements about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors that are disparaging and inflammatory, or intimidating."

The order would not prohibit Trump from quoting or referencing public court records or making proclamations of innocence, prosecutors say.

But if implemented by Judge Chutkan, such an order would likely set off a high-stakes legal battle, with Trump -- who is currently the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential primary -- expected to argue that his First Amendment rights are being violated...

Tough shit.  Call his bluff.  There are limits to "free speech" in this country, including incitement to violence and making threats, both calling cards of the Malignant Loser throughout his sickening business and political career.  The order would also apply to the Malignant Loser's team of legal scoundrels.

It's about time.  Do it, Judge Chutkan.

(Image:  Getty Images)

Trump Facing Consequences In Courts? (UPDATED)

 

It looks like some folks are getting tired of letting the Malignant Loser play games with the judicial system.

New York civil suit

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Tuesday requested that the state’s Supreme Court sanction Donald Trump and other defendants in her $250 million civil suit against him, accusing them of “frivolous conduct.”

James sued Trump, two of his children, Eric and Donald Trump Jr., and the Trump Organization last year over deploying deceptive business practices as part of a long-running alleged tax-dodging scheme. She also accused Donald Trump of inflating his net worth by $812 million to $2.2 billion each year from 2011 to 2021. 

The case is set to go to trial Oct. 2.

In Tuesday’s court filing, James is asking that all defendants and their lawyers pay a total of $20,000 for using “previously-rejected arguments” several times.

She said her request for sanctions is “based on frivolous conduct by Defendants and their counsel in asserting legal arguments in connection with the parties’ pending dispositive motions that were previously rejected by this Court and the First Department in this action.”

Specifically, James argued that Trump used three arguments, including that the attorney general has no standing to bring this case against him, in several motions despite the fact that those arguments already had been turned down by the court in November 2022.

The court rejected these arguments for a second time in January after the defendants filed motions to dismiss, noting that they “were borderline frivolous even the first time defendants made them."...

It's too bad the sanctions wouldn't amount to much monetarily (the MAGAt cult would be covering the costs anyway, not the Malignant Loser).  The clear effort to delay the proceedings is classic Malignant Loser, but this time he's not likely to get away with it, either with the prosecutor or the judge.

Federal election interference criminal case

Special counsel Jack Smith said Tuesday that former President Donald Trump’s ongoing attacks against prosecutors and judges threatened to influence potential jurors in his 2020 election interference case.

Smith’s team filed documents in court saying Trump has made “daily extrajudicial statements that threaten to prejudice the jury pool,” referencing the former president’s repeated statements on social media. Trump, who was indicted by a federal grand jury over his attempted coup to remain in office, has repeatedly called Smith “deranged” and attacked the judge assigned to the case, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, as “highly partisan” and “unfair.”

Chutkan warned Trump and his attorneys last month against making any “inflammatory” comments about his prosecution, adding that doing so would only add to the “urgency … that we proceed to a trial quickly.”

“I caution you and your client to take special care in your public statements about this case,” the judge told his lawyer in August. “I will take whatever measures are necessary to safeguard the integrity of these proceedings.”

But Trump has continued his attacks. On Tuesday, the former president posted on his Truth Social platform an attack on the special counsel for an “unchecked and insane aggression” against him.

Chutkan recently set a trial date for March 4, 2024, six months away, saying the public had the right to a swift case. Trump’s legal team had argued any prosecution should be pushed back for years, beyond any bid for office or reelection to the White House.

“I want to note here that setting a trial date does not depend and should not depend on the defendant’s personal or professional obligations,” the judge said last week.

Expect the Malignant Loser and his allies to continue their attacks, of course.  The judge should make good on her warning that she would move the trial date up if the Malignant Loser continued to make inflammatory statements, because that's exactly what he has done and continues to do.

UPDATE:  Then there's this development in the E. Jean Carroll civil lawsuit --

A federal judge has ruled that former President Donald Trump is liable for making defamatory statements against writer E. Jean Carroll in 2019, after she went public with claims that he raped her decades earlier.

U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ruled Wednesday that a jury in the trial for Carroll’s civil lawsuit will next consider how much Trump should pay her in monetary damages.

The ruling comes four months after a jury found that Trump is liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll in a separate civil lawsuit she filed against him. The panel in the case rejected Caroll’s claim that she was raped but determined she was sexually abused and Trump should pay her $5 million in damages.

This second lawsuit focuses on Carroll’s claims that Trump defamed her when he dismissed her rape allegations, suggested that she made up the attack to promote her book, and said she wasn’t his “type.”

Kaplan based his decision to move the case to a jury for damages on the May verdict, with him reasoning that the previous judgment “is binding in this case and precludes Mr. Trump from contesting the falsity of his 2019 statements."...

Good, let's get to the damage phase.