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⬇️
4/ Justice Merchan's 8-page Decision and Order on the People's Motion for Contempt can be found here:
From Backgrounder on "criminal contempt" and NY law:
"Criminal contempt proceedings under the Judiciary Code 'are neither civil nor criminal. They are sui generis special proceedings to coerce future obedience or punish past disobedience.'" justsecurity.org/94878/why-trum…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"An FBI search warrant affidavit ... shows that a criminal investigation into 2020 election results in Fulton County, Ga., was set off by a leading election denier in the Trump administration and relied heavily on claims ... widely debunked."
Affidavit "noted that if any of the alleged deficiencies in ballots 'were the result of intentional action,' ... would constitute evidence of a crime. Yet the affidavit also cites multiple instances of witnesses insisting that any discrepancies were the result of human error."
Devastating first-hand witness to Alex Pretti's killing
Declaration filed in federal court:
"I don't know why they shot him. He was only helping. I was five feet from him and they just shot him."
2/ "The agents pulled the man on the ground. I didn't see him touch any of them-he wasn't even turned toward them. It didn't look like he was trying to resist, just trying to help the woman up. I didn't see him with a gun."
"I have read the statement from DHS about what happened and it is wrong. The man did not approach the agents with a gun. He approached them with a camera. He was just trying to help a woman get up and they took him to the ground."
Here's what the Justice Department actually told the Supreme Court, and how DOJ defends ICE's use of racially profiling.
Full analysis on my YouTube and Substack
🧵
2/ Shareable link to full analysis⤵️
A close look at what the DOJ left undisputed.
And how DOJ admitted to the courts that stopping racial profiling would “upend immigration enforcement efforts” in the way ICE currently carries it out.
3/ Document
U.S. Solicitor General to the Supreme Court arguing to allow racially profiling as a factor supporting ICE's "reasonable suspicion."
A time for choosing, from main street to wall street.
"This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. It is not about Congress’s oversight role. .... Those are pretexts."
2/ "I have served at the Federal Reserve under four administrations, Republicans and Democrats alike. ... Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats."
3/ "I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do, with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people."