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."
He incriminates false electors by saying they went further than Chesebro intended.
He hides that Chesebro himself helped submit their false certificates, pushed the Pence plan through to the end on back of their certificates, and more.
3. See for yourself.
Here’s just a smidgen of the huge body of evidence.
Email correspondence from Chesebro on submitting the false certificates. Dec 15 and Jan 4.⤵️
Source: documents obtained in Penebaker v. Hitt settlement brought by @GeorgetownICAP @lawfwd @Stafford_Law.
3/ Link to the court filing (remarkably a joint filing by Donald Trump and Michael Cohen): admitting to the facts of Trump's reimbursement of Cohen for hush money to Stormy Daniels:
I discussed why two documents shown by prosecutors on Monday in the Trump trial are "close to being smoking guns."
On @OutFrontCNN.
The Trump CFO Allen Weisselberg document is truly mind blowing.
2/ Get this 🤯:
Trump CFO's contemporaneous handwritten notes recording the underlying scheme - the true reason for payments to Michael Cohen - are written on a copy of the bank account showing the $130,000 hush money wired on Oct. 27 to Stormy Daniels' lawyer!
3/ What else do you notice about the bank statement?
It indicates the bank account was set up for this sole purpose.
- Shows total funds of $130,000 for the hush money plus $1K to cover wire transfer fee etc.
- Appears to have opened account a day before the wire transfer.
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.