Trump Wanted So Stay In Office. Long Live Trump.

[Sixties Fan]

TIMELINE: From a presidential speech to insurrection, here's how the Capitol riots evolved

It took about an hour from the time rioters arrived at the Capitol to breach all police barricades and overtake the legislative building.

www.wusa9.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Trump summoned supporters to "wild" protest, and told them to fight. They did

The chaos in the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday unfolded after President Donald Trump spent weeks whipping up his supporters with false allegations of fraud in the Nov. 3 election, culminating in a call to march to the building that represents U.S. democracy.

www.reuters.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

[ If that happens, that goes his 2024 candidacy, or any other ]

Neal Katyal, a former Justice Department official, thinks former President Donald Trump's written response to the House panel's intention to subpoena him looks like an insanity defense.

Katyal — a law professor and an Obama-era acting solicitor general — made an appearance on NBC on Sunday, three days after the House panel investigating the Capitol riot unanimously voted to subpoena Trump. The subpoena will compel the former president to cooperate with the committee or be held in contempt of Congress and referred to the DOJ for prosecution — much like Trump allies Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro.

In response to the decision, Trump sent a document to the panel that started off with the sentence, "THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 2020 WAS RIGGED AND STOLEN!" and contained multiple baseless claims of election fraud. It also included four photos of the crowd near the Washington Monument on January 6, 2021.

"Yeah, so, this is a 14-page screed, Jonathan, that's very hard to follow. But it does seem to dig the hole in deeper for Donald Trump," Katyal told MSNBC host Jonathan Capehart.

"I can't see it in any legal way helping him unless he is trying to go for the insanity defense, of which this paper seems, you know, to be some evidence of," Katyal added.

Katyal added that he thought it was a "pretty fanciful" idea that Trump would just give in and testify to the panel because of the congressional subpoena.

"I mean, this is a man who took the Fifth Amendment more than 400 times the last time he was questioned under oath. And I doubt he's suddenly become eager to testify," Katyal said.

Katyal was referencing Trump's deposition in New York in August during New York Attorney General Leticia James' probe of the Trump Organization's business practices, during which he pleaded the Fifth more than 440 times and only answered a question about what his name was.

Katyal also added that he thinks Attorney General Merrick Garland will indict Trump, seeing as there is overwhelming evidence to do so and "no contrition whatsoever" on Trump's part.

A representative at Trump's post-presidential press office did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

Former DOJ official says Trump's reaction to the January 6 panel is starting to look like the makings of an insanity defense

Neal Katyal, an ex-DOJ official, shared his view on former President Donald Trump's written response to the House panel's intention to subpoena him over the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

www.aol.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

 

[Sixties Fan]

• Former President Donald Trump lashed out at a judge who found that Trump knowingly pushed false claims of voter fraud while fighting his loss to President Joe Biden.
• U.S. District Judge David Carter ordered pro-Trump attorney John Eastman to turn over dozens of documents to the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
• They include emails that “demonstrate an effort by President Trump and his attorneys to press false claims in federal court for the purpose of delaying the January 6 vote,” Carter wrote.

(full article online)

Trump lashes out at judge who said former president knowingly pushed false voter fraud case

U.S. District Judge David Carter ordered pro-Trump attorney John Eastman to turn over dozens of documents to the House probe of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

Today, federal judge David Carter ruled that John Eastman’s emails, which he has been fighting to protect from the January 6 committee’s subpoena since January of this year, must be turned over. Eastman argued that he was Trump’s attorney, and the communications were protected by the attorney-client privilege. Judge Carter disagreed and found that the privilege didn’t apply because of the crime-fraud exception. You can read his full order here.


This is not a criminal judgment against the former president. This is a civil case and the issue before Judge Carter is whether to enforce the subpoena the J6C sent to Eastman. We should not overread it. It doesn’t mean an indictment of Trump will automatically follow. But it is still highly significant. Judge Carter’s 18-page opinion is careful and deliberate. He’s not taking any leaps of faith to stretch to his conclusions that some of these emails were about committing crimes, namely obstruction of Congress and a conspiracy to defraud the government. It’s the measured approach Judge Carter takes that’s so compelling here. He could have gone further, but he didn’t. And the emails that Congress will now have access to are deeply damaging to the former president.

Who is John Eastman? This is how he’s described in the court’s order: Plaintiff Dr. John Eastman (“Dr. Eastman”), a former law school dean at Chapman University (“Chapman”), is a “political conservative who supported former President [Donald] Trump” and a self-described “activist law professor.” While he was a professor at Chapman, Dr. Eastman worked with President Trump and his campaign on legal and political strategy regarding the November 3, 2020 election.

More than 500 disputed emails, each of which the Judge reviewed, are involved in this order. After his review, he reached this conclusion: the crime-fraud exception applies to a number of emails related to President Trump and Dr. Eastman’s (1) court efforts to delay or disrupt the January 6 vote; and (2) their knowing misrepresentation of voter fraud numbers in Georgia when seeking to overturn the election results in federal court.

The attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between attorney and clients, so long as they are made for the purpose of facilitating the provision of professional legal advice. To be confidential, communications must be limited to attorney and client, or in some cases their representatives. They must be for the purpose of seeking legal advice. If communications are used to commit or are in furtherance of crimes, they lose the protection the privilege normally provides.

That’s what happened here. The procedure is a little bit complicated. First, the Judge decided that 536 of the communications he reviewed were protected by either the attorney-client privilege or because they were attorney work product (to which the crime-fraud exception also applies). Second, he had to consider whether any of those documents should be disclosed to the committee, nonetheless, because they went afoul of the crime-fraud exception.

There’s a two-part legal test used to decide when the crime-fraud exception applies. The client must have consulted an attorney “for advice that will serve [them] in the commission of a fraud or crime,” and the communications must be both “sufficiently related to” and made “in furtherance of” the crime. It doesn’t matter whether the defendant successfully pulled off the crime or not, it’s the abuse of the confidential relationship between lawyer and client that shuts off the protection these communications would normally receive.

Judge Carter found in earlier proceedings that Trump had, more likely than not been involved in:

· A plan to obstruct Congress’s official proceedings to confirm the electoral college vote on January 6, 2021, and

· A conspiracy to defraud the United States

when he consulted Eastman. So, his consideration here involved whether the communications were sufficiently related to and in furtherance of those two crimes. He concluded there were eight documents where the crime-fraud exception applied.

That may be sound like a small percentage of the total number of communications, but it’s an astonishing conclusion to reach regarding a then-sitting president of the United States. Eight communications indicates an ongoing course of conduct instead of an inquiry that was quickly abandoned. And there were still more documents that the Judge considered to be “close calls” —for instance, some were related to disrupting the January 6 vote, but that the Court couldn’t “conclusively determine” furthered the obstruction—and didn’t order disclosed. But there was no question in Judge Carter’s mind about the eight.

There are four communications in which Eastman and other attorneys suggest that the primary goal of filing lawsuits “is to delay or otherwise disrupt the January 6 vote.” In one of the emails, Trump’s attorneys advise that “merely” having a case pending in the Supreme Court may delay consideration of Georgia’s election results. Judge Carter concludes Trump filed suits, not to get legal relief he was entitled to, but to disrupt the certification of the election. He finds that the communications Eastman tried to withhold from the committee were in furtherance of the obstruction. In other words, they were all involved in committing that crime together.

Judge Carter ruled that four additional emails involved the effort by Trump and his attorneys to make false claims in federal court to delay the January 6 vote. He says there is evidence of this in at least one Georgia lawsuit. In my experience with Alabama elections, Republicans spend a lot of time on claims Democrats engage in voter fraud. A lot of their complaints center on unfounded allegations of dead people, people with prior felony convictions, and unregistered people voting. That’s what Trump argued in Georgia. He attached specific numbers to each of the claims: 10,315 deceased people, 2,560 felons, and 2.423 unregistered people. He did it first in a lawsuit filed in state court in Georgia in early December and then again, in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Georgia to challenge the election.

Before the federal case was filed, Eastman relayed what the Court calls “concerns” about the specific numbers and Trump’s “resistance” to signing when the specific numbers were included. Eastman explained in one of the communications he tried to withhold from the committee that after signing the Georgia state complaint, Trump had “since been made aware that some of the allegations (and evidence proffered by the experts) has been inaccurate.”

Nonetheless, Trump attached a signed verification to the federal lawsuit when it was filed, attesting that the information in it was correct, or at least believed to be to the best of the his knowledge, as he had previously done with the state lawsuit. And that’s a serious problem because before the federal case was filed, Eastman communicated that the numbers were made up junk. Those numbers were still incorporated into the federal complaint and attested to by Trump, without any effort to correct or delete them. Judge Carter concludes, “The emails show that President Trump knew that the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong but continued to tout those numbers, both in court and to the public. The Court finds that these emails are sufficiently related to and in furtherance of a conspiracy to defraud the United States” and orders Eastman to disclose these four, along with the earlier four communications to the committee.

Eastman managed to delay the committee’s work for nine months at a critical juncture in the nation’s history. That delay is likely not over—he could still appeal. But this ruling should be all that both the Justice Department and Fani Willis, the Fulton County DA, need to get to work on these materials if they weren’t already on it. The devil is always in the details, but it sounds as though these documents go a long way towards establishing Trump’s intent to obstruct the January 6 election certification and specifically, the count of the Georgia votes. It’s more proof, and from the mouth of his own attorney, that he knew the Big Lie was a Big Lie. The wheels of justice may move slowly, but they do move. They moved a lot today.

The Attorney-Client Privilege Doesn't Apply To Committing Crimes

Today, federal judge David Carter ruled that John Eastman’s emails, which he has been fighting to protect from the January 6 committee’s subpoena since January of this year, must be turned over.

joycevance.substack.com

 

[surada]

All kinds of evidence was never investigated. The election was stolen. Public opinion is on Trump's side, not yours.

Trump should have provided evidence. He couldn't. Accusations aren't enough.

 

[Sixties Fan]

#TheFinal5: Michael Fanone on 1/6, “Hold the Line”​

He’s been front and center as one of the strongest advocates for his fellow law enforcement officers after the Capitol riots, and now former Metropolitan Police Department Officer Michael Fanone is sharing his story in the new book “Hold the Line.” He joins Jim on "The Final 5" to talk about January 6th, what his life has been like after being attacked by pro-Trump rioters, and what he’d like to see happen to prevent another attempted insurrection.

#TheFinal5: Michael Fanone on 1/6, “Hold the Line”

He’s been front and center as one of the strongest advocates for his fellow law enforcement officers after the Capitol riots, and now former Metropolitan Police Department Officer Michael Fanone is sharing his story in the new book “Hold the Line.” He joins Jim on "The Final 5" to talk about...

www.fox5dc.com

 

[Sixties Fan]

A log of text messages sent and received by former Sen. Kelly Loeffler during the weeks leading up to the Jan. 6 Capitol attack is raising questions about potentially unauthorized access to investigative material relevant to probes of the 2020 election.

The messages, reviewed by POLITICO, shed light on Loeffler’s shifting political calculus as she weighed whether to lodge a challenge to the 2020 results at the urging of then-President Donald Trump. She announced she would challenge the results but ultimately decided against it as a violent mob ransacked the Capitol one day after she lost her reelection bid to Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.).

The 59-page log of 405 texts was obtained by media organizations via an anonymous sender who declined to reveal more details about the source of the messages, which begin on Nov. 8, 2020 and end Feb. 3, 2021. The document, which POLITICO is not publishing in full because it contains unauthenticated as well as authenticated conversations, focuses only on Loeffler’s election-related correspondence. It’s unclear if all of her messages sent on the subject are included, or just a selection.

Notably, the log of texts was sent as a report from Cellebrite, a service typically used by investigators to extract digital data from cell phones. The nature of the document suggests Loeffler’s phone may have been subpoenaed, otherwise provided to prosecutors or accessed as part of defense-related activity in one of several ongoing probes of Trump’s attempts to influence 2020 election results.

(full article online)

Loeffler's texts post-2020 election go public, raising new investigative questions

The nature of the document that's circulating suggests the former Georgia GOP senator's phone may have been deemed relevant to probes of the 2020 election.

www.politico.com