Thread by @TimInHonolulu

1. I've been pondering the #venue angst that I see being amplified by Trump's attorney, who claims to not represent him, #TimParlatore, who was selling it on @Lawrence. Weird coincidence that within 23 days from now #SCOTUS should hand down a case on whether criminal venue error

2. prevents retrial after defective venue ruling vacates a conviction. SCOTUS hasn't done a criminal venue case in a long time and they're doing one right now, passing drafts around & thinking about it while Parlatore does his MSNBC schtick. But I've concluded it's a red herring.

3. The US Code has flaws for the lazy. You might look at the name of a specific statute and think it actually describes the entire statute. The obstruction chapter has a few sleepers. I went back to refresh my memory regarding some of the key facts.

4. One fact was to recall which obstruction statute was cited and what else besides obstruction and espionage evidenced probable cause for the warrant. The obstruction statute cited was one that I have dealt with professionally. I know it well. But it seemed odd to me

5. because I know it as a bankruptcy fraud statute. For a variety of reason I think the Govt can charge under another substantially similar obstruction statute and I think it actually puts the Govt to a higher standard of proof with the added element of corrupt intent but

6. the name they gave it looks like a witness intimidation statute because that's what it is but the
but it's also very similar to the statute named the warrant but you have to look beyond the name they gave the section.

7. Here's the part of 18 USC 1512 (above) that is similar to the bankruptcy fraud statute. Both carry 20 years for concealing records but this one adds corrupt intent and it must to obstruct its use in an "official proceeding" even if one never happens.

8. I also looked at the grand jury subpoena and best I can tell they empaneled a grand jury in late April 2022 and issued the Subpoena in mid May. One fact that may be important for venue will be what was the investigation that made them use the bankruptcy fraud statute rather

9. that the 1512(c). The one they used doesn't only apply to obstructing a grand jury or court proceeding. I mentioned I've had experience with 1519 because it involves investigations I did under court supervision

10. as a private citizen. This investigation started in NARA. They were looking for missing records. That would fall within the "jurisdiction of any department or agency" element of 1519. The warrant appears based on probable cause he was obstructing NARA not the Grand Jury.

11. But when Trump obstructed the subpoena that was corrupt obstruction of an official proceeding triggering 18 USC 1512(c). That is likely going to be charged because they have proof now that he withheld documents

12. from the grand jury. And that matters for the purpose of venue because 18 USC 1512(i) says that venue is related to the "official proceeding" or where the "offense occurred." There are very few special criminal venue rules and that happens to be one of them. Lucky Donald.

13. As I mentioned, I also looked at the other section that was named in the warrant besides obstruction and espionage. From the warrant probable cause affidavit:

14. So I looked at 18 USC 2071 and I discovered that I, and I think many others, missed something big. Really big.