Elizabeth de la Vega 🇺🇸🦅 Profile picture
21yr Fed Pros (Org Crime, Chief SJ Branch), Past Stanford Law Pro Bono Dir/Lecturer & US Dist Ct. Clerk. Pub. Famous quote: "Keep talking, moron."
9 subscribers
Sep 26, 2023 4 tweets 1 min read
Correct, @AndrewFeinberg. The judge has ordered cancellation of all [NYS] business certs of "any entity controlled or beneficially owned by Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Jr, Eric Trump, Alan Weisselberg, & Jeffrey McConney. An independent receiver will manage the dissolutions. Many questions along the lines of what if he does this or that? It's smart to have those questions, but there's no way to answer them yet. This will be a step-by-step process, but the courts and NYSAG attys did not just fall off the turnip truck. They know how to deal with trump.
Jul 27, 2022 4 tweets 1 min read
Again: Before Short & Jacob appeared in the GJ, they were interviewed multiple times by agents & prosecutors, who would've organized all available records & witness reports to prepare. In the GJ, both they & prosecutors would have known what the questions & answers would be. Also, prosecutors would've made sure Short's and Jacob's proposed testimony was double-checked and corroborated in all ways possible before they were asked questions in the GJ. Not every assertion can be corroborated, but each is analyzed for accuracy, truth and credibility.
Jun 16, 2022 5 tweets 2 min read
I am glad to see both @JRubinBlogger and @tribelaw adopting in this piece on June 14, precisely the point I made on June 13, which was noted and retweeted by @JRubinBlogger that day, but it would have been decent and fair to credit me with that point. Further, the point is not "sidestepping" the issue of intent. The intent that must be proved wrt a conspiracy to defraud the U.S. by impeding the execution of a lawful government function is precisely that: The intent to impair the execution of a lawful government function.
Jun 6, 2022 4 tweets 1 min read
There were NOT two conspiracies. At Trump's level, the various means to overthrow the election were fully intertwined and they all led up to the 1/6 insurrection. It's not at all inconceivable that a POTUS who orchestrated such events should be charged with seditious conspiracy. It is inconceivable that a POTUS who orchestrated these events would NOT be charged. The Tarrio et al indictment charges the defendants with conspiring with others "known and unknown." It is not limited to the Proud Boys.
Jan 17, 2022 4 tweets 1 min read
You don't contact possible defs til the end. You get all docs you can & talk to other witnesses 1st so you don't waste an interview and possibly reveal info that can enable coordination of testimony and endanger witnesses. WaPo's story proves nothing about DOJ's investigation.👇🏾 Often, you don't contact possible defs at all except, thru their atty assuming they have one, to say you're about to present an indictment, would they like to make a statement or testify to the GJ? Similarly, you don't do search warrants at places or under circumstances that
Mar 1, 2018 9 tweets 2 min read
Thread/ Conspiracy Law - Eight Things You Need to Know.
One: Co-conspirators don’t have to explicitly agree to conspire & there doesn't need to be a written agreement; in fact, they almost never explicitly agree to conspire & it would be nuts to have a written agreement! 1/ (Conspiracy Law) Two: Conspiracies can have more than one object- i.e. conspiracy to defraud U.S. and to obstruct justice. The object is the goal. Members could have completely different reasons (motives) for wanting to achieve that goal. 2/