6."On several occasions, Mark Meadows claimed to have no knowledge of the Trump campaign’s efforts to contest the election results" (via @AmyEGardner)
a) Shows prosecutors what cards he'll play
b) If prosecutors can show he's lying, he's in deeper trouble washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/…
@AmyEGardner 7. Here's the more full report by @AmyEGardner on Mark Meadows' - in testimony - denying knowledge of various Trump Campaign efforts to contest election results in Georgia and Pennsylvania.👇
9. Meadows who has testified he was the gatekeeper now says he can't recall details of arranging for Cleta Mitchell and two other Trump Campaign lawyers to be on the Raffensperger call.👇
10. Note the DA subpoenaed both Trump Campaign lawyers who were on that Trump-Raffensperger call for today's hearing, Kurt Hilbert and Alex Kaufman.
11. This claim by Meadows does him some good (but won't work on Raffensperger call in which he actively participated).
"He said he attended numerous meetings and listened in on many phone calls that were political in nature simply to end the conversations at the right time."
12.
On left:
Among most damaging evidence showing Meadows' conduct was political is Act 96 in indictment. Meadows texted GA official if they can speed up their work "if the trump campaign assist financially."
On right:
Meadows' testimony on this, riddled with problems.
13. DA saved strongest question for last: Meadows' involvement with false electors.
That has no nexus to presidential duties.
Meadows' response is perhaps telling:
"As chief of staff, no I did not coordinate those efforts."
Hegseth's Defense Department's flat denial from March 31 (now appears to be provably false)⤵️
3/ BBC also fact checked the DoD's denial:
Six experts "all commented independently ... citing the missile's visual features, the way it exploded, its trajectory and the number of strikes in the area."
After outrageous letter by Blanche and Bondi, Judge Novak (Trump appointee) wrote:
“The Court finds it inconceivable that the Department of Justice, which holds a duty to faithfully execute the laws of the United States — even those with which it may have disagreement — would repeatedly ignore court orders, while simultaneously prosecuting citizens for breaking the law."
3/ After Blanche's chief of staff violated a court order in Mangioni case, federal judge wrote:
“The Government is also directed to advise the Deputy Attorney General, for dissemination within the Department as appropriate, that future violations may result in sanctions, which could include personal financial penalties, contempt of court findings, or relief specific to the prosecution.”
DOJ admits repeatedly made "material mistaken" representations to judge. ICE never had authority (under 2025 Guidance) to conduct arrests at immigration courthouses!
"This error, however, is not caused by a lack of diligence and care by the undersigned attorneys. The undersigned were specifically informed by ICE that the 2025 ICE Guidance applied to immigration courthouse arrests."
"... agency attorney error ..."
3/ You can be assured that we'll add this to 5th edition of Presumption of Regularity study.
Currently tracks 90+ cases in which either court determined the Trump administration submitted false information or the administration admitted it.
If Hegseth et al got this wrong, think what else is happening with the drug boat strikes and much more.
The U.S. Said It Helped Bomb a Drug Camp. It Was a Dairy Farm.
Gets worse as you read it.
1/
2/ "Workers on the farm told The Times that Ecuadorean soldiers .. doused several shelters and sheds with gasoline and ignited them after interrogating workers and beating four of them with the butts of their guns ... later choked and subjected them to electrical shocks."
3/ "The Ecuadorean government said in the news release that it had relied on U.S. 'intelligence and support' to target the farm, which it said was a camp used to train 'about 50 drug traffickers.'”
"Plaintiffs have made a clear showing that Defendants have adopted a POLICY authorizing federal immigration officers to conduct investigatory stops based on ethnicity or race without reasonable suspicion." 1/
2/ With a team, I had provided a graphic representation of some of the key declarants in the plaintiffs' case here:
"These witnesses’ accounts and related evidence show these witnesses were detained by DHS officers and questioned about their immigration status based solely on their race or ethnicity."