Trump likely committed felony obstruction, federal judge rules

[Marius25]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/28/trump-judge-felony-obstruction-insurrection-00020918


Will Garland finally do something about this?

[Ocelot II]

1. How do you know he isn't?

Criminal investigations that are the equivalent of mob crimes are not normally made public.

[Marius25]

2. Because he would have been arrested by now.

Garland has had tons of time and evidence to charge Trump and his supporters.

Gaetz is still free. MTG is still free. Cawthorn is still free. Boebert is still free. Brooks, Gosar, Biggs. All still free. Roger Stone is still free.

[Ocelot II]

3. Have you ever worked on a complex federal case?

I've worked on relatively simple ones that took longer than this. It took more than two years to investigate, try and convict all the Watergate defendants.

[Marius25]

5. Well in case Garland hasn't noticed, he has a ticking clock here

since Dems are likely to lose control of Congress, and the 1/6 committee will be disbanded next year.

[Emile]

7. +1 my thoughts too!

[Hortensis]

9. I think many don't realize that TIME/TIMING is a huge factor that Garland

has always HAD to consider right up front. Not that there's only one huge time-related factor. There must be a number of big ones. Most will be dynamic and subject to huge shifts, many of which he and others on this battlefield create.

For most on the outside and kept carefully clueless about what's happening inside, there seems to be only one time, "fear/frustration time": As in, "I want! Now!" We should know by now that he's not investigating our wishes, and we should at least suspect that we know nothing about the "time" they have to evaluate daily.

[bottomofthehill]

8. This may suck to hear but...

Gaetz, MTG, Boebert, Cawthorn, Brooks, Gosar, Biggs and the others who voted the way they did will be difficult if not impossible to convict. If they were part of the planning on the attack, that is another thing, but it is very difficult to convict a Member of Congress based on how they vote.

[Marius25]

10. They were part of the attack.

Boebert was live tweeting Pelosi's location during the attack, and compared it to 1776 before it happened.

Cawthorn was hanging out with the insurrectionists before the event.

Brooks, Gosar, and Biggs were all part of the planning.

Gaetz sex traffics children.

[bottomofthehill]

14. If it can be proven that they were part of the planning the attack, they may, and thats a may,

be prosecuted for treason. If they were part of the planning and execution of the attack on the Legislative Branch. As to how they voted on 1/6, that is clearly protected by Article 1 Section 6


Article I, Section 6, Clause 1:

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

[lagomorph777]

4. The story is much bigger than the headline implies:

A federal judge ruled Monday that President Donald Trump “more likely than not” attempted to illegally obstruct Congress as part of a criminal conspiracy when he tried to subvert the 2020 election on Jan. 6, 2021.

“Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021,” U.S. District Court Judge David Carter wrote.

Carter’s sweeping and historic ruling came as he ordered the release to the House’s Jan. 6 committee of 101 emails from Trump ally John Eastman, rejecting Eastman’s effort to shield them via attorney-client privilege.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

6. I had fun skimming this opinion and the judge did a great job on the crime fraud exception

I just skimmed the opinion. I am law geek and I had to read this opinion. here is a link to the opinion
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.260.0.pdf

The judge bent over backward to find that Eastman had an attorney client privilege with TFG and that Eastman did not waive such privilege when Eastman improperly used Chapman University's email system. These were close issues and the judge gave the benefit of the doubt to Eastman and TFG.

The discussion of the crime fraud exception really made me smile

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

I love the last page of the opinion

Link to tweet

[SoonerPride]

11. Patience

Link to tweet

?s=20&t=UuNEQQH5uy9UDpnXXhVwyw

[Poiuyt]

12. Exactly

[lagomorph777]

13. Ted is correct.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

15. John Eastman says he will **NOT APPEAL** the court order

Link to tweet