DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024 #2

New Posts

Tuesday, February 20th:
*Ruling Hearing (U.S. Supreme Court) (@ 9:30am ET) - DC – Donald John Trump (77) has been indicted & charged (8/1/23) & arraigned (8/3/23) with four counts re 2020 election: conspiracy to defraud the United States "by using dishonesty, fraud & deceit to obstruct the nation’s process of collecting, counting & certifying the results of the presidential election"; 2 counts of tampering with witness, victim or an informant, conspiracy to obstruct an Official proceeding & conspiracy against rights of citizens. Plead not guilty. Personal recognizance bond. Conditions of release: agreed to by both sides. No violations of federal law. Must appear in court as required. Must sign appearance bond. Shall not communicate about the facts of the case to any individual known to the defendant to be a witness except through attorneys. Case #23-cr-00257-TSC-1, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington, DC).
The co-conspirators were excluded from the lawsuit. Five of the six alleged co-conspirators, based on details provided in transcripts of testimony to the Jan. 6 Committee & other records, appear to be: longtime Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani; lawyer John Eastman, who helped architect the "fake electors scheme"; attorney Sidney Powell, who helped lead Trump's post-campaign legal efforts; former Justice Dept. official Jeffrey Clark, whom Trump considered making his attorney general and Kenneth Chesebro, another attorney pushing the "fake electors scheme." It is not clear who co-conspirator 6 is, but it could be Boris Epshteyn??).
Trump's alleged role in the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, when a mob of his supporters stormed the building in an effort to stop the confirmation of President Joe Biden's election victory, is under scrutiny from several federal government bodies. The most visible has been a congressional committee that spent 18 months looking into Trump's actions. They held a series of televised hearings laying out their case that his election fraud claims led directly to the riot. Following these hearings, the committee accused Trump of inciting insurrection & other crimes.
Defense attorneys: John F. Lauro, lead attorney, Emil Bove, Fitzah I. Pavalon, Pro Hac Vice, Todd Blanche, Pro Hac Vice & Attorney Will Scharf.
Prosecution: Thomas Windom, Molly Gulland Gaston, J.P. Cooney & James Pearce all lead attorneys.
Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya / U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan presiding.
Trial was set to begin on 3/4/24 with jury selection has been Vacated (2/2/24) while on appeal. Appeal-denied! (2/6/24).
Case info from 3/25/23 thru 2/5/24 reference post #467 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...-1-aug-2023-trial-4-mar-2024-2.690382/page-24
2/6/24 Update: Appeal (23-3228) - U.S. Court of Appeals (DC Circuit), Henderson, Childs & Pan, Circuit Judges. We have balanced former President Trump’s asserted interests in executive immunity against the vital public interests that favor allowing this prosecution to proceed. We conclude that “[c]oncerns of public policy, especially as illuminated by our history and the structure of our government” compel the rejection of his claim of immunity in this case. We also have considered his contention that he is entitled to categorical immunity from criminal liability for any assertedly “official” action that he took as President — a contention that is unsupported by precedent, history or the text and structure of the Constitution. Finally, we are unpersuaded by his argument that this prosecution is barred by “double jeopardy principles.” Accordingly, the order of the district court is AFFIRMED. “We cannot accept former President Trump’s claim that a President has unbounded authority to commit crimes…Nor can we sanction his apparent contention that the Executive has carte blanche to violate the rights of individual citizens to vote and to have their votes count.” “For the purpose of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump, with all of the defenses of any other criminal defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution,” the court wrote. Oral arguments were heard on 2/6/24.
2/6/24 Docket Update: (196) Judgement of USCA as to Trump re [179] Notice of Appeal-Interlocutory. Affirming the Order of the District Court Appealed from in this Cause. USCA Case #23-3228. Argued on 1/9/24 & decided on 2/6/24-Denied.
2/8/24 Update: The US supreme court meets today to hear oral arguments on whether the 14th amendment of the constitution bars the former president Donald Trump from appearing on the ballot in Colorado & other states because of his role in the January 6 Capitol riot. The case is unprecedented: the clause has rarely been used since it became part of the constitution after the civil war in 1868, and it has never before been applied to a former president. The oral arguments are expected to be something of a free-for-all, with nine justices asking about a bevy of unresolved constitutional issues. And the justices’ questions on Thursday could hint at exactly how they might rule.
2/8/24 Additional Update: U.S. Supreme Court: Over the course of two hours of oral arguments, the justices questioned the notion that states have the power to determine whether a presidential candidate is disqualified from holding office under Section 3 & thus exclude them from the ballot. At one point, Chief Justice John Roberts said that argument was "at war with the whole thrust of the 14th Amendment & very ahistorical." "I would expect that a goodly number of states will say, whoever the Democratic candidate is, you're off the ballot. And others, for the Republican candidate, you're off the ballot, and it'll come down to just a handful of states that are going to decide the presidential election," the chief justice said. "That's a pretty daunting consequence."
2/12/24 Update: Application for a Stay of the D.C. Circuit's mandate pending the filing of a Petition for Writ of certiorari filed by Trump's attorney D. John Sauer. Link: DocumentCloud
2/14/24 Update: The U.S. Supreme Court sets 2/20/24 deadline for Special Counsel to response to Trump’s immunity case. Smith has already filed his response on 2/14/24. 2/15/24 Update: Trump has filed his reply to Smith's filing to the Supreme Court. The Court will have all the briefings when it meets in conference tomorrow. Could have a decision tomorrow [2/16/24] or Monday [2/19/24]. 2/19/24 Update: Trump filed reply brief in Supreme Court, meaning court will have all the briefing when it meets in conference tomorrow, 2/20/24.
 
Wednesday, February 21st:
*Status Conference (via phone) (@ 5pm ET) - Washington D.C. - Second Capitol Police Suit over the Jan. 6 Riots. Smith et al vs. Trump, Donald John (D.D.C. filed Aug. 26, 2021). Plaintiff: 8 Capitol Police officers & pro-Trump PAC person.
Case Summary & court info from 8/26/21 thru 1/26/23 reference post #443 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...ial-4-mar-2024-2.690382/page-23#post-18692443
Update-5: Status conference on 1/11/24 @ 5pm, telephone/VTC hearing. Judge Amit P. Mehta presiding. 1/11/24 Update: Next status conference on 2/21/24 @ 5pm, telephone/VTC hearing.
 
Here's some "miscellaneous" cases coming up - I won't follow these anymore - I will just post them.

no decision from the Supreme Court on the docket. Unless there is an article out there that I am not receiving over here.

Calendar: 02/22/2024-04/30/2024
Case Number and Title Judge Time Courtroom Purpose
21-cv-0400: THOMPSON v. TRUMP et al Judge Amit P. Mehta 02/23/2024 01:30PM Courtroom 10- In Person (Audio Line Available) Status Conference

21-cv-0586: SWALWELL v. TRUMP et al Judge Amit P. Mehta 02/23/2024 01:30PM Courtroom 10- In Person (Audio Line Available) Status Conference
\
21-cv-0858: BLASSINGAME et al v. TRUMP Judge Amit P. Mehta 02/23/2024 01:30PM Courtroom 10- In Person (Audio Line Available) Status Conference

21-cv-2265: SMITH et al v. TRUMP et al Judge Amit P. Mehta 02/23/2024 01:30PM Courtroom 10- In Person (Audio Line Available) Status Conference

link: Court Calendar Response
 
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) revealed Tuesday on CNN that he was interviewed by special counsel Jack Smith’s office as part of the federal investigation into former President Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

“I don’t know exactly when that was. I mean, it’s been months ago, but really didn’t last that long. And I basically told them the same thing I told the special grand juries — that I followed the law and the Constitution, and answered all their questions truthfully,” he said ...

“Well, listen, I don’t think anybody’s above the law, you know, Democrat, Republican, independent, myself or anybody else. So that’s my personal opinion,” ...

au.news.yahoo.com

Kemp says he was interviewed in federal 2020 election interference case

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R) revealed Tuesday on CNN that he was interviewed by special counsel Jack Smith’s office as part of the federal investigation into former President Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election. CNN host Kaitlan Collins pressed Kemp on previous reports that his office...
au.news.yahoo.com au.news.yahoo.com
 
MamaSleuth5 said:
‘My ultimate and absolute revenge’: Trump gives chilling CPAC speech on presidential agenda

Hopefully this thread is a good fit for this article.. IMO

Edited by me to fix weird looking link..
Click to expand...
It’s very frightening. Seeing more people acting out in public, talking and behaving violently. More talk of guns and some actual use of them, even in very nice suburban areas. I avoid making eye contact when I can. I was accosted in the local Walgreens the other day for wearing a mask. Fortunately, the store manager stepped in. Our new mayor boasts of owning 3 AR 15s.

ETA: Yes, this is an upper middle class suburb with a growing population of millionaires. Ironically, its beginning to get a reputation as a violent place, like several other wealthy outer ring suburbs.
 
Last edited:
Well, that's it folks. <modsnip - off topic>The Supremes won't render a decision before June, far too late for the trial to start before the election.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stunned said:
Nope! I just have to refuse to believe that! For the sake of my remaining sanity! NOPE! IMO but seriously!
Click to expand...

It must be as blatantly obvious to the judges, as it is to us, that trump is stalling in the hopes that he will achieve a position that will allow him to pardon himself.

"I am running for presidential candidate, I don't have time for all of these criminal and other charges!"
"I am immune from prosecution!"
"I am allowed to keep classified documents!"
"I am allowed to try to subvert election results ... I should have been elected! The election must have been stolen because everyone knows that I wanted to be president again!"

imo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 165 more.
Total: 4,359 (members: 166, guests: 4,193)

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
4,193
Total visitors
4,359
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
593,075
Messages
17,980,888
Members
229,016
Latest member
Roller Derby
Back
Top