God Damn These Electric Sex Pants
God damn these electric sex pants! From the 3rd episode of the 3rd season of The IT Crowd.
www.youtube.com
www.youtube.com
I…don't think I fully knew these details. Holy fucking shit.
Fun reminder that current Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson was aware of this entire conspiracy and had his own role.
View: https://youtu.be/hfkZWaLTqTk
Jack Smith officially the GOAT if he implicates that jackass in all this as well.
He's not behind bars yet. Though I sincerely hope to see the day.
No, he isn't. But the systemic protections of the rich and powerful have already failed him, simply by virtue of these indictments. Or rather, his crimes are so blatant and unprecedented that they have overwhelmed those protections. And this indictment proves that even a president can't act illegally with complete impunity - something which his other indictments do not prove, since one was for actions before he was president, and the other for actions afterwards.
Whatever the outcome of this trial, its existence shows that the law can apply to anyone, if not that it always does, or does so equally. That indeed, no one is (entirely) above the law.
... and a partridge in a pear tree ...
OP
OP
The indictment lists the following things:
7 states with slates of fake electors (page 5 para 10(b))
Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
6 co-conspirators (page 3 para 8)
They are not named in the indictment, but it's pretty clear that they are
1) Rudy Giuliani
2) John Eastman
3) Sidney Powell
4) Jeffrey Clark
5) Ken Chesebro
6)Steve Bannon Boris Epshteyn Mike Ronan
It is quite common to use the phrase "unindicted co-conspirator" in indictments, to signify people who have been immunized against prosecution. That's not the case here, they are just "co-conspirators". I expect all of these will probably also be indicted.
5 means and methods (page 5 para 10)
The indictment uses the phrase "manner and means", but "means and methods" scans better for when we write the song about it.
a) the Big Lie - false claims of election fraud
b) the fake electors scheme
c) attempting to corrupt the DoJ into sending to the states false claims that investigations had discovered fraud
d) attempting to enrol the VP to corruptly reject electoral votes or refer them back to the states
e) sending the angry mob to the Capitol, and attempting to get Congress to delay proceedings
4 felony counts (page 1, and all the rest of the pages!)
1) 18 USC 371 conspiracy to defraud the United States, covers the whole scheme
2) 18 USC 1512(k) conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding (the certification of results in Congress)
3) 18 USC 1512(c)(2) obstructing, and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding (ditto)
4) 18 USC 241 conspiracy against rights, specifically the right to vote and have ones vote counted
There are no charges here for obstructing officials or proceedings at state level, I would expect these to be charged by the individual states.
3 criminal conspiracies (page 2 para 4)
1) to defraud the United States by dishonesty fraud and deceit
2) to corruptly obstruct and impede the certification
3) against the right to vote and have ones vote counted
2 US Senators (para 119(a) page 41)
That is, two Senators that Trump himself attempted to contact to delay the certification. Other co-conspirators attempted to contact further Senators and one Representative. We don't know who they are, but can probably guess. They may be immune from prosecution because separation of powers, or speech-and-debate or something - unless they stepped out of their congressional role (as Lynsey Graham did in Georgia).
1 Indictee (guess who!)
I imagine it has been done this way so as to give the best chance of a fairly speedy trial. It would get long and complicated if the rest were brought in at this stage. Trump's lawyers have said that they will use this case as a vehicle to relitigate all the claims of electoral fraud, but I'm guessing that this will be precluded by all those adverse court decisions they already got.
I have updated the OP as best I can. My plan for now is to include any further Smith indictments in this same thread if they are at all related to this one, as it is most unlikely that the trials will overlap or that there will be unmanageable amounts of activity between now and trial for any of them.
Wow. What a great day.
7 states with slates of fake electors (page 5 para 10(b))
Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
6 co-conspirators (page 3 para 8)
They are not named in the indictment, but it's pretty clear that they are
1) Rudy Giuliani
2) John Eastman
3) Sidney Powell
4) Jeffrey Clark
5) Ken Chesebro
6)
It is quite common to use the phrase "unindicted co-conspirator" in indictments, to signify people who have been immunized against prosecution. That's not the case here, they are just "co-conspirators". I expect all of these will probably also be indicted.
5 means and methods (page 5 para 10)
The indictment uses the phrase "manner and means", but "means and methods" scans better for when we write the song about it.
a) the Big Lie - false claims of election fraud
b) the fake electors scheme
c) attempting to corrupt the DoJ into sending to the states false claims that investigations had discovered fraud
d) attempting to enrol the VP to corruptly reject electoral votes or refer them back to the states
e) sending the angry mob to the Capitol, and attempting to get Congress to delay proceedings
4 felony counts (page 1, and all the rest of the pages!)
1) 18 USC 371 conspiracy to defraud the United States, covers the whole scheme
2) 18 USC 1512(k) conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding (the certification of results in Congress)
3) 18 USC 1512(c)(2) obstructing, and attempting to obstruct an official proceeding (ditto)
4) 18 USC 241 conspiracy against rights, specifically the right to vote and have ones vote counted
There are no charges here for obstructing officials or proceedings at state level, I would expect these to be charged by the individual states.
3 criminal conspiracies (page 2 para 4)
1) to defraud the United States by dishonesty fraud and deceit
2) to corruptly obstruct and impede the certification
3) against the right to vote and have ones vote counted
2 US Senators (para 119(a) page 41)
That is, two Senators that Trump himself attempted to contact to delay the certification. Other co-conspirators attempted to contact further Senators and one Representative. We don't know who they are, but can probably guess. They may be immune from prosecution because separation of powers, or speech-and-debate or something - unless they stepped out of their congressional role (as Lynsey Graham did in Georgia).
1 Indictee (guess who!)
I imagine it has been done this way so as to give the best chance of a fairly speedy trial. It would get long and complicated if the rest were brought in at this stage. Trump's lawyers have said that they will use this case as a vehicle to relitigate all the claims of electoral fraud, but I'm guessing that this will be precluded by all those adverse court decisions they already got.
I have updated the OP as best I can. My plan for now is to include any further Smith indictments in this same thread if they are at all related to this one, as it is most unlikely that the trials will overlap or that there will be unmanageable amounts of activity between now and trial for any of them.
Wow. What a great day.
Last edited:
I have a feeling that Jack Smith turned down Rudy's offer of cooperation.
View: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1686556016333168640?s=20
View: https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1686556016333168640?s=20
"Free speech" is this defense? Where is the free speech in "I am going to fire you for not complying with my desire to overturn an election" regarding replacing his fucking AG?
He's one of the co-conspirators in the indictment document.
Meadows is not listed as one, so the presumption is that he flipped.
I don't have a ton to contribute to the topic besides rejoicing but thanks so much for putting this together. Super useful and insightful.
There has been no public comments AT ALL from Meadows since it was last gleaned he might be cooperating a few months ago.
Says all you need to know.
Their argument is that they are allowed to say there was election fraud - which the indictment concedes is in fact true. That is protected speech.
But that ignores the fact that they then went on to try to get others to take very specific actions based on those lies, actions that would defraud others. Then they tried to prevent people from gathering evidence of that fraud. And the fraud happened to be infringing on the rights of citizens at the same time.
I've also seen a lot of back and forth about the mens rea component - that those involved didn't think they were doing anything illegal. The reason that argument fails is that most of the Co-Conspirators are lawyers, and Trump is the head of the branch whose oath includes faithfully executing the laws of the United States. They are naturally expected to have a better grasp of the law than the average citizen.
Rudy sounds like he's about 100 years old in these clips.
All the lawyers kept telling him that what he was trying to do was illegal. He went looking for those that told him that it was okay so that he could say "my lawyers told me I could do it". I think Jack Smith pointed this out in the indictment.
He's gonna try and use this as a defense but it's not going to work.
Where does attorney-client privilege fit in here? Did Smith get statements from these lawyers? Can he have them testify?
I think a lot of those statements were made to the January 6th committee by the lawyers in question. So privilege goes out the window.
Man, the more I think about it, the more that it seems like Trump at least trying to commit his coup via some twisting of the system is what has particularly backfired on him.
Because in trying to get so many officials - including his own Vice President - to bend to his whims, he and his co-conspirators made records. Catalogued, easily verifiable accounts of what he said when he said it, and to who. The mobster shit he's used to involves having plausible deniability to avoid meeting specific claims and charges. But there's a citation for fucking everything here
Because in trying to get so many officials - including his own Vice President - to bend to his whims, he and his co-conspirators made records. Catalogued, easily verifiable accounts of what he said when he said it, and to who. The mobster shit he's used to involves having plausible deniability to avoid meeting specific claims and charges. But there's a citation for fucking everything here
OP
OP
Obscure lawyer who led the fake electors scheme. Eastman cooked up the 'legal' justification for it, Chesebro executed it.
Some of the lawyers were from his very own DOJ. No need for privilege there.
You can do anything with free speech, even murder a man on 5th avenue.
Listening to some lawyers talk about how the indictment is structured, and it's a masterclass in how to get a speedy trial.
The evidence is laid out in plain terms. There's no co-defendants, there's nothing classified. There's very little to muck up the works
Any argument of "1st amendment" gets slapped down immediately in the indictment, as well as a massive volume of evidence already provided by the Jan 6th Committee. This WILL be pushed to the courts as quickly as possible due to the nature of the charges
The evidence is laid out in plain terms. There's no co-defendants, there's nothing classified. There's very little to muck up the works
Any argument of "1st amendment" gets slapped down immediately in the indictment, as well as a massive volume of evidence already provided by the Jan 6th Committee. This WILL be pushed to the courts as quickly as possible due to the nature of the charges
OP
OP
Probably not. There's no TV in Federal courts. And being as we are trying to treat Trump like any other defendant there's no reason to change that now. Besides, I shudder to think what courtroom shenanigans team Trump would come up with if he decides to treat it as an opportunity for campaigning. We're better off without IMO.
A
The fact he's such a fucking idiot and did this in the sloppiest way possible is what makes taking so long to charge him especially frustrating.
The fact he's such a fucking idiot and did this in the sloppiest way possible is what makes taking so long to charge him especially frustrating.
Friendly reminder that whenever Rudy has to answer questions under oath, he gives the game away and admits its all bullshit.
I expect that Trump is going to *demand* cameras in the court room and try and use that demand as a way of trying to delay. We know he's going to execute every potential delay he can. 'WHY WON'T THEY LET CAMERAS IN? WHAT DON'T THEY WANT YOU TO SEE?' etc etc. Even if he knows it won't happen and doesn't really want it, I expect he's going to ask all the same.
OP
OP
I thought it appropriate since January 6th, the feast of the Epiphany, actually is the twelfth day of Christmas!
Oh shit.
Thanks again for the clarification. And apologies to entremet from earlier, it turns out you were (bizarre as it is to say this) probably right to trust Rudy Giuliani, LOL.
Last edited:
The whole point of going after Trump FIRST, is to get it in front of a judge in the quickest way possible.
The pressure will be put on the "co-conspirators" BIG TIME to flip to save their own ass. They are all in the crosshairs to be charged with the same conspiracy charges.
There WILL be superseding indictments in this. It's going to web out. Refuse to cooperate, then you get indicted and you WILL go to federal prison.
OP
OP
Just for clarity, I think there will be additional indictments (of different people), but not that there will be superseding indictments (which just add things to an indictment that is already there), because that would risk slowing things down. I don't think, for example, that Trump will be charged with Seditious Conspiracy, appropriate though it might sound, because of the difficulty of showing him to be conspiring against a government that at the time he was a part of.
I can definitely agree with you there. The DOJ wants this to go through as quickly as possible.
I'm just curious who else is going to be indicted as part of this web. Which sitting members of Congress will be indicted.
We bring the speculation
you bring the clarification
It's a deal!
(again, thank you)
OP
OP
Probably none of them for their part in delaying the certification, as that'll be protected by the speech-and-debate clause. Maybe MTG, who wasn't in Congress for most of the conspiracy (sworn in 3rd Jan IIRC), maybe Lynsey Graham when he stepped out of bounds in Georgia. Maybe the two who gave guided tours of the Capitol to MAGA insurrectionists in the run-up, though I can't remember who they were.
Would be awesome to see Graham in jail. But I think they will take immunity deals.