THREAD: What should we make of the breaking news that former Vice President Mike Pence received a grand jury subpoena for his testimony from Special Counsel Jack Smith?
1/ Tonight ABC News (and later NBC and the New York Times) reported that Special Counsel Jack Smith subpoenaed Mike Pence for his testimony before a grand jury.

This subpoena is very likely seeking testimony relating to Pence’s role on January 6th. nytimes.com/2023/02/09/us/…
2/ Pence is a key witness because Trump reportedly pressured him to refuse to certify the electoral votes on January 6th or to delay and send the matter back to the states.

His staff testified regarding this pressure campaign, but Pence had some private conversations with Trump.
3/ Because most of the other facts can be established by other witnesses, such as the Pence staffers who testified before the January 6th Committee, I expect Pence is one of the *last* witnesses Smith would call if he was building a case around the electoral vote certification.
4/ For that reason, this suggests that Smith’s January 6th investigation is far along. It also suggests that he is pursuing that aspect of his investigation aggressively—he isn’t focusing largely on the Mar-a-Lago documents matter and putting January 6th on the back burner.
5/ So does this mean Pence will try to fight the subpoena?

Don’t be so sure. Often witnesses who want to testify *ask* for grand jury subpoenas so they can say they were compelled to testify even when they are willing (or even eager) to come in and talk.
6/ If Pence doesn’t fight the subpoena, that would be a sign that he isn’t really resisting this testimony. (His own team could have leaked this news.)

Trump could sue to block the subpoena, citing executive privilege, but it is very unlikely that he would prevail.
7/ I expect Pence to testify, one way or another.

Typically a witness who is subpoenaed will instead negotiate a voluntary interview with prosecutors.

Prosecutors would have FBI agents present, which would mean any lie could be prosecuted just as if it was under oath.
8/ Most people negotiate a voluntary interview because that permits them to have their attorney present and to answer questions in a more relaxed setting.

If Pence insists on formal testimony, that suggests he wants to appear like he is not being cooperative.
9/ So does this mean Smith is building charges against Trump?

We know that John Eastman is already under investigation, so it’s possible that Pence is being interviewed to build evidence against Eastman, but Pence is hardly a necessary witness against Eastman.
10/ It’s more likely Smith is building a case against Trump. That doesn’t mean Trump will be charged, but today’s news should greatly concern Trump’s team.

We now know Smith is pushing hard to investigate January 6th, and it looks like he’s developing a case against Trump. /end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Renato Mariotti

Renato Mariotti Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @renato_mariotti

Dec 30, 2022
THREAD: Why hasn’t ______ been charged with lying to Congress (or lying under oath)?
1/ As the January 6th Committee transcripts have been released, my Twitter feed has been filled with comments and questions from people who can’t understand why a particular witness hasn’t been charged with lying to Congress, or lying under oath.
1/ Prosecuting someone with lying under oath (or lying to Congress) is more difficult than many tweets make it seem.

As a starting point, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a particular statement is false.
Read 10 tweets
Dec 13, 2022
THREAD: Why is the investigation of Donald Trump taking much longer than it took the DOJ to investigate and charge Sam Bankman-Fried?
1/ Earlier today, the Washington Post reported that Special Counsel Jack Smith sent a grand jury subpoena to the Georgia Secretary of State, along with other state officials in states that were hotly contested in the 2020 election. washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/…
2/ That news broke shortly after the DOJ announced that Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder and CEO of FTX and previously believed to be one of the world's richest people, was arrested pursuant to a sealed indictment.

FTX collapsed early last month.
Read 16 tweets
Dec 9, 2022
The purpose of the DOJ’s contempt motion was not to gain the upper hand in a criminal case.

DOJ wanted to give the judge leverage to force Trump’s team to find and return any remaining classified documents.

That leverage still exists, which is why her decision is unsurprising.
My last tweet has generated some confusion, so let me be more clear:

Despite speculation on Twitter to the contrary, the purpose of the contempt motion was never to obtain an order that would assist DOJ in a criminal prosecution or to uncover evidence.
In fact, documents that were unaccounted for could potentially be used by the defense to argue that Trump was so sloppy and unorganized that he didn’t know what documents he had.

The government’s best evidence is and will be the Mar-a-Lago documents, many in Trump’s office.
Read 5 tweets
Dec 1, 2022
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit just issued an opinion that overturns the bizarre ruling issued by Judge Aileen Cannon.

The Court of Appeals found there was no jurisdiction for Cannon to issue the ruling. That was its most obvious, but not the only, flaw.
The court concluded:

“In considering these arguments, we are faced with a choice: apply our usual test; drastically expand the availability of equitable jurisdiction for every subject of a search warrant; or carve out an unprecedented exception in our law for former presidents.”
There was nothing remarkable about Trump’s case other than the fact that he was a former president.

The DOJ obtained a search warrant and lawfully seized records. If you have records seized in this manner, you typically can’t challenge the search until you’re charged.
Read 4 tweets
Nov 30, 2022
Today's verdicts in the Oath Keeper trial were a big win for the Justice Department.

The jury carefully considered the evidence and did not return guilty verdicts across the board. But they will end up being sentenced for *all* their conduct despite some acquittals.
Each defendant was convicted of a felony, and the judge is required to consider *all* their conduct at sentencing, even if they were acquitted of certain counts.

As a practical matter, that means that the sentences will be substantial, particularly the sentence of Stu Rhodes.
Any defense lawyer trying to spin this as a "win" or a "mixed bag" for the government is not being honest.

If I represented any of these defendants, I'd tell them that they were convicted of a felony and will likely face a significant sentence. That's the truth.
Read 4 tweets
Nov 18, 2022
THREAD: What should we make of the appointment of Jack Smith as Special Counsel overseeing the criminal investigations of Donald Trump?
1/ Today's news that Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed career prosecutor Jack Smith to oversee the investigations of Donald Trump has generated significant skepticism and disagreement.

In my view, this is a prudent (and savvy) move by Garland but it's a little late.
2/ Why appoint a Special Counsel? The answer is obvious:

Trump is the immediate past president and he just announced that he is running again. Biden defeated Trump in 2020 and will likely run against him again in 2024.
Read 17 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(