More Democratic Party stars calling on Menendez to resign - including citing national security concerns.

Former Senator @DougJones


@RepSlotkin (also former senior Department of Defense)


@RepAdamSchiff

https://twitter.com/DougJones/status/1706011555937005618

https://twitter.com/RepSlotkin/status/1706011656721944878

https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1705671195104792652

2/ @AOC calls on Menendez to resign.

https://twitter.com/FaceTheNation/status/1705956588257730967

NJ Governor Murphy calls on Menendez to resign.

“Serious charges that implicate national security … they compromise the ability of Sen. Menendez to effectively represent the people of our state. Therefore, I am calling for his immediate resignation.”

newjerseyglobe.com/governor/murph… 2. NJ Rep. Andy Kim (D) calls on Menendez to resign

“Allegations are serious and alarming…I don’t have confidence that the Senator has the ability to properly focus on our state … while addressing such a significant legal matter.  He should step down.”

newjerseyglobe.com/congress/andy-…

Devastating evidence in Menendez indictment.

"Over $480,000 in cash—much of it stuffed into envelopes and hidden in clothing, closets, and a safe—was discovered in the home ... Some of the envelopes contained the fingerprints and/or DNA of" co-defendant making alleged bribes.

2. Link to indictment:

s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2398…

Wow. This strengthens MAL case measurably.

Trump long-time aide Molly Michael told the feds:

Around time NARA found classified docs in 15 boxes, Trump "asked Michael to help spread a message that no more boxes existed."

Obstruction; Espionage Act.

1/
abcnews.go.com/US/trump-wrote… 2/ Michael also told feds:

"When the FBI first contacted her for an interview as part of their investigation last year, she notified Trump about the request. In response, he told her, 'You don't know anything about the boxes.'"

via @KFaulders @MLevineReports @alex_mallin

1/ To be sure, Special Counsel Smith's proposed narrow gag order in January 6th case is premised on threat to jury pool.

But

It is surely one step closer to raising the concern that Trump's intimidation of witnesses violates his conditions of release.

Note these passages.👇

2/ Reminder of the strong warnings Judge Chutkan gave Trump to avoid intimidating witnesses as part of conditions of release.👇

via @HBRabinowitz @Tierney_Megan
cnn.com/2023/08/11/pol…

First Chesebro attorney opening argument seemed good (with one caveat). Second attorney, not so much.

Caveat: his argument that the shared purpose was to get Trump elected is laughably over-broad in his description. It was scheme to unlawfully overturn outcome of the election.

https://twitter.com/just_security/status/1699464948596752687

2. Second Chesebro attorney makes this, ahem, most unusual argument. 👇

🤦🏻

https://twitter.com/harrylitman/status/1699473715518661039

1/ NEW and big revelations in Meadows’ hearing transcript.

Meadows testified he got involved in false electors scheme - why did he do it?

"Because I know I would get yelled at by" Trump if I didn't.

This will bolster prosecutors' cases

I discussed @OutFrontCNN w/@brikeilarcnn 2/ Several legal implications to these admissions by Meadows.

First, it directly implicates Trump with evidence of Trump's - intense - involvement in the false electors scheme.

Second, it is solid evidence that Trump got his White House chief of staff involved in the scheme...

What a high risk gamble.

Mark Meadows takes the stand to support his motion to move Fulton County case to federal court.

Even this statement alone gets him into deeper trouble for involvement in the alleged conspiracy.👇

https://twitter.com/jeremyherb/status/1696171934554202407

2. Mark Meadows testifies: "In my role as Chief of Staff, I recommended that the president reach out to Ms. Watson" (via @CNN report).

In his own words, that is an incriminating admission that he recommended Trump make the call to Watson that is part of the alleged conspiracy.👇

On Mark Meadows' fatal concession.

Great analysis by Walter Shaub, @NormEisen and @JoshuaGKolb

They explain why 2 pages of Meadows' court brief should prove fatal to his attempt to get Georgia trial into federal court or dismissed.

justsecurity.org/87859/the-hatc… 2.

a) Meadows has to prove the charged conduct was done under the “color of his office” (done with official authority).

b) The Hatch Act explicitly prohibited the use of his official authority to engage in the charged conduct.

Namely, to affect the result of an election.👇

With eyes now pointed at Ken Chesebro's likely trial start date in Georgia.

Chesebro demanded: by Nov 3
DA Willis now replied: Oct 23!

He is making a risky gamble.

Example: Judge David Carter said of one of Chesebro's memos: It "likely furthered the crimes" in federal case.👇 2. Many other problems facing Chesebro's defense.

Another example.

Ken Chesebro's own words in email to Georgia false electors:

Says Chesebro is tasked to "coordinate" false electors and "help with logistics."

"I drafted these documents" to mimic 2016 certificates.👇

Watch this space.

Key conditions for Trump in this signed Bond Order for pretrial release in Georgia.👇

Explicitly includes re-posting social media posts by others.

Direct or indirect threats "of any nature" against witnesses, codefendants, victims.👇

2/ Note how those conditions are tailored for former President Trump.

Compare to John Eastman's bond order, with similar conditions but not explicitly spelled out as such.👇

What a discovery!

Where was Kenneth Chesebro on January 6th?

“Videos reviewed by CNN show Chesebro with Jones in two sections of the restricted area around the Capitol cited in a federal indictment against Owen Shroyer.”

That could arm Jack Smith.

cnn.com/2023/08/18/pol… 2. On left:

CNN photographic evidence of Chesebro on location with Alex Jones at Capitol

On right:

FBI photographic evidence of Owen Shroyer on location with Alex Jones at Capitol

Same place. Same time.

P.S.A.

Yes, #GeorgiaIndictment is pardon proof.

BUT, But, but...

Supreme Court may well hold a sitting president is immune from trial/conviction.

Result: 18 co-defendants left holding the bag. Trump, if elected, immune (for 4 years).

Another reason for co-defendants to flip. 2/ The issue here is whether the Supreme Court would ratify the long-standing position of the Department Justice Office of Legal Counsel that, as a matter of law, an incumbent president is immune from criminal trial and conviction.

A few caveats...

On left:

Former President Trump intimidates a witness in Georgia case.

On right:

Georgia law stating that to release a person on bail, the judge will have to find the defendant "poses no significant risk of intimidating witnesses."

Note: That is a presumption against release.

2. As @AWeissmann_ has pointed out, Trump's statement against Duncan may also violate the conditions of release in federal January 6th case before Judge Chutkan.

The effort to overturn the Georgia election results is a core subset of that case and associated witnesses.

Special Counsel Weiss court filing in Hunter Biden case:

“The Government now believes that the case will not resolve short of a trial.”

abcnews.go.com/Politics/prose… ABC News: “Prosecutors also wrote in court filings that they intend to drop the misdemeanor tax charges against Hunter Biden in Delaware and instead bring them in California and Washington, D.C. -- the venues where prosecutors say the alleged misconduct occurred.”

1/ Public Service Announcement

Q: Do prosecutors have to prove former President Trump knew he lost the election for any of crimes charged?

A: Absolutely not

I wrote this w/ @BarbMcQuade @NormEisen in 2022.
We anticipated Indictment's charges.

<thread>
washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/0… 2/ Could put this more strongly: Trump could have WON the election and believed he won ... and several of the charges would still stick.

But let's just deal with the straightforward question: whether DOJ needs to prove the defendant knew he lost. Now that we have the Indictment.

1/ The WSJ Editorial has a fundamental flaw.

I would agree with them that Indictment uses a dangerously "broad theory" of criminal conspiracy if the allegations they describe in the indictment were, indeed, in the indictment.

But they are not.

<thread>
wsj.com/articles/donal… 2.

On left:

WSJ says Indictment is about a president "lobbying his own Justice Department to investigate voter fraud."

On right:

What Indictment, actually, alleges Trump pressured Justice Department to conduct sham investigations and issue false statements on finding fraud.

1/ With due respect to National Review Editors - who've been good and strong on MAL indictment etc - this Editorial on #TrumpIndictment is very flawed.

Their thesis is on legal basis of the indictment.

@NRO gets the law wrong and the wrong law.

<thread>
nationalreview.com/2023/08/this-t… 2/ NRO gets wrong federal fraud statute, and thus wrong Supreme Court precedent.

NRO claims DOJ fraud charge must involve deprivation of money/tangible property👇

Sure, if Smith charged Trump for wire fraud (18 USC §1343)

But Smith charged Trump for defrauding US (18 USC §371)

<thread>

@AWeissmann_ and I just published this new analysis.

Experts, ourselves included, have focused on false electors, DOJ pressure, Pence pressure, and Capitol attack.

But there was a scheme that preceded all these, and DOJ can charge it.

justsecurity.org/87435/an-overl… 2. The scheme was the effort to "stop the count" on election night.

The #January6th Select Committee Final Report concluded that the plan was premeditated.👇

Trump's trying to destroy video evidence would bolster the entire classified documents case.

Shows consciousness of guilt for all the charged crimes under Espionage Act, and as principal in conspiracy.

"OLIVEIRA told Trump Employee 4 that 'the boss' wanted the server deleted"👇 2. Big deal:

The Iran attack plan document Trump shared with others at Bedminster is now included as another charge.

In other words, yes, it was a classified document that exists. And Trump retained and shared it, per the new Indictment.

👇

1/ News: Michigan A.G. @MIAttyGen charges 16 false electors!

This is a strong case.

For starters, the Trump electors' document contained clear false statements like: "we convened and organized in the State Capitol."👇

In truth, they met (secretly) in GOP headquarters basement. 2. Why did the Michigan sixteen falsely claim they convened in the Capitol?

Because MI law requires that location for proper certification.

Trump Campaign's Kenneth Chesebro (criminally referred to DOJ by Jan 6 Select Committee) flagged this as a problem in his secret memo.👇