“The evidence in this indictment is very damning for the former President."
- @JayTownAlabama, former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama (2017-2020)
Interview with @KenDilanianNBC @NBCNightlyNews
3. Plus conservative legal commentator:
“It’s a devastating document. If they can prove half of it, he’s toast.… They can probably prove more than half of it, because a lot of it is recorded conversations, testimony from his lawyers, and that sort of thing.”
- @AndrewCMcCarthy
4. “It is an extremely damning indictment.”
- Fox News legal commentator and GOP impeachment hearing witness @JonathanTurley
5. On Trump Indictment:
"I seriously doubt you're going to hear a serious person say, oh, well, this is fine and ... this is actually why this is okay. If you hear somebody doing that, that's crazy talk."
- @ScottJenningsKY
Also read his powerful words on military families.👇
6. Also note this analysis of the subtleties in @RonDeSantis' initial statement following the indictment.
(reporting by @NickNehamas @jonathanweisman) (others making similar point)
8. "It is impossible to read the indictment against Trump ... and not be appalled at the way he handled classified documents as an ex-president, and responded to the attempt by federal authorities to reclaim them."
9. Ty Cobb, former Trump White House lawyer @OutFrontCNN:
“I think [former President Trump] is in an enormous amount of trouble. I think that this indictment is about as carefully structured and evidentiarily supported as any indictment in history.”
11.
“The most damning piece of evidence to me is the audio tape. I mean you want to talk about consciousness of guilt. You want to talk about knowledge and intent. Those are the darlings of a prosecutor’s nursery. And that came from President Trump’s own mouth.”
- @TGowdySC
15. “It gives me no joy to write about prosecuting… Trump. He and I have been friends for nearly 40 years.… He is his own worst enemy, and the feds — of whom I am often highly critical — had no choice but to indict him.”
17. "The only duty to national security that he retained upon leaving office was ... not to disclose the information. He’s now being held accountable for his alleged failure to do so, as our system demands."
A former president of the United States was held to be in Criminal Contempt for "willful disobedience of a court's lawful mandate" by attacking witnesses and jurors in a criminal proceeding.
Court's finding based on beyond a reasonable doubt.
1/
2/ Justice Merchan's well-reasoned, balanced opinion has two additional important notes.
First, he not only warns the Defendant, Mr. Trump, about jail time for future violations. He explains this may be required because fines ($1k per violation) won't be effective in this case.
3/ As part of his balanced opinion, Justice Merchan appears to call out Michael Cohen (and perhaps Stormy Daniels).
The judge explains their use of the gag order to publicly go after Trump while he cannot respond may result in judge excluding them from the order's protections⬇️
Due to Trump attorney's concessions in Supreme Court oral argument, there's now a very clear path for DOJ's case to go forward.
It'd be a travesty for Justices to delay matters further.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett got Trump attorney to concede core allegations are private acts.⬇️
2/ Justice Barrett rounds this out with her final question:
She gets USG attorney to say there's enough of these private acts to move forward, and Trump's conduct involving pressuring DOJ, Pence etc would be used just for evidentiary value not criminally liable for those acts.⬇️
3/ Here are the three bullets in USG brief that Justice Barrett gets Trump attorney to concede are private acts that enjoy no immunity whatsoever.⤵️
And note text before the bullets, which Justice Barrett goes over with USG attorney solidifying DOJ can prosecute on this basis.
2/ As this Timeline shows, Pecker's testimony should be strong proof of core allegation that the hush money scheme was geared toward influencing the outcome of the presidential election.
To make these statements or have these statements made from within the courthouse would be to amplify the "contempt" of and for the court.
3/ New York law also gives special powers to a judge in enforcing their orders (e.g., gag order) if the violation occurs in the "immediate view and presence of the court."
I don't think these alleged violations do so, but the fact that they might come close is significant.
At start of #TrumpTrial, Trump's violations of recent #GagOrder are likely to come up with key question being what sanctions Justice Merchan may threaten or impose.
Great discussion here ⬇️ between @ErinBurnett, District Attorney @Mimirocah1 and @OMGrisham
DA Rocah: "Trump coming out and calling them liars is about as stark a violation as you can get."
2/
On left:
#GagOrder provision prohibiting former President Trump making public statements about witnesses in Manhattan criminal case.
On right:
Trump public statements about witnesses in violation of the gag order (plus one about judge's daughter)
3/ And .... here we go (as anticipated):
Manhattan District Attorney prosecutors asking judge to move toward holding Trump in contempt of court for violations of #GagOrder.