|
Post by Webster on Sept 15, 2023 22:08:18 GMT -5
(The Guardian) The motion by Donald Trump’s legal team seeking to remove US district judge Tanya Chutkan from his case argued that previous public comments she made about the former president’s culpability in the January 6 Capitol attack were disqualifying. Trump’s lawyers identified two episodes where the judge remarked on her opinion about the former president’s responsibility in instigating the attack. The first instance came in October 2022 when she said, referring to January 6: And the people who mobbed that Capitol were there in fealty, in loyalty, to one man … It’s a blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day.Trump’s lawyers argued that those remarks, which came during sentencing of a rioter who stormed the Capitol, suggested Chutkan believed Trump should have been prosecuted and jailed in a prejudgment of guilt that alone was disqualifying. The second instance was when the judge told another January 6 rioter in December 2021: The people who exhorted you and encouraged you and rallied you to go and take action and to fight have not been charged.She added “I have my opinions,” but that was out of her control. Trump’s lawyers argued that those remarks suggested Chutkan agreed with that rioter’s defense attorney, who had said Trump had falsely convinced his supporters that the 2020 election was fraudulent and that they needed to take steps to stop the peaceful transfer of power.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Sept 15, 2023 22:09:02 GMT -5
(The Guardian) The recusal motion by Donald Trump’s lawyers “cherry-picks” portions of US district judge Tanya Chutkan’s statements and “fails to establish any bias by the court”, prosecutors wrote in a court filing late on Thursday. The justice department said the statements that Trump’s lawyers had cited showed the judge simply doing her job – responding to an argument raised by Capitol attack defendants who tried to minimize their own culpability by point the finger at the form president. Prosecutors wrote: Although the defendant tries to claim otherwise, the Court’s statements about which he complains are core intrajudicial statements — statements that the Court made while performing its official duties, in direct response to the arguments before it, and which were derived from knowledge and experience the Court gained on the bench.They added: As such, to mount a successful recusal claim based on the cited statements, the defendant must show that they display a deep-seated animosity toward him. The defendant cannot meet this heavy burden.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Sept 15, 2023 22:12:08 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Twitter handed over at least 32 direct messages from Trump account to prosecutors - court filingTwitter handed over at least 32 direct messages from Donald Trump’s account to special counsel Jack Smith earlier this year in the justice department’s investigation into the 2020 election subversion case, according to newly unsealed court filings. In the new filings, Smith’s team revealed “the materials Twitter produced to the Government included only 32 direct-message items, constituting a minuscule proportion of the total production”. Prosecutors warned Trump's knowledge of Twitter search warrant could 'precipitate violence' – court filingsFederal prosecutors secretly argued that informing Donald Trump about their efforts to access his Twitter account could “precipitate violence”, according to newly unsealed court filings. Prosecutors working for special counsel Jack Smith worried that Trump would publicly announce the search warrant or his Twitter feed, as he did on his Truth Social platform when his Mar-a-Lago estate was searched by the FBI last year. Informing Trump about the Twitter search warrant “could precipitate violence as occurred following the public disclosure of the search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago,” the prosecutors warned. The news was first reported by Politico. Prosecutors argued for keeping Trump in the dark about the Twitter search warrant was necessary because they said the former president presents a “significant risk of tampering with evidence, seeking to influence or intimidate potential witnesses, and ‘otherwise seriously jeopardizing’ the Government’s ongoing investigations.” “These are not hypothetical considerations in this case,” the prosecutors wrote. -- Following his defeat in the 2020 presidential election, the former President propagated false claims of fraud (including swearing to false allegations in a federal court filing), pressured state and federal officials to violate their legal duties, and retaliated against those who did not comply with his demands, culminating in violence at the U.S. Capitol on January 6.In response, Twitter said the prospect of violence was “facially implausible” and argued that Trump already knew many details about Smith’s investigation. US district court judge Beryl Howell ultimately rejected the social media company’s arguments. The new filings also show Twitter turned over at least 32 direct messages from Trump’s account, @realdonaldtrump, to prosecutors. Prosecutors also obtained data that could show his location at the time certain tweets were sent, or if anyone else was accessing his account.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Sept 27, 2023 17:04:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Sept 29, 2023 18:31:45 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Judge sets hearing on Trump gag order in January 6 caseUS district judge Tanya Chutkan has scheduled a 16 October hearing on federal prosecutors’ request for a limited gag order in the case charging Donald Trump with scheming to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election. Special counsel Jack Smith had requested a gag order barring Trump from making inflammatory and intimidating public statements about potential witnesses, lawyers and other people involved in the case. Smith’s proposed order would bar “statements regarding the identity, testimony, or credibility of prospective witnesses” and “statements about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors that are disparaging and inflammatory, or intimidating.” Trump’s lawyers earlier this week denounced the gag order request as a “desperate attempt at censorship”.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 6, 2023 18:03:08 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Beyond weighing in on the House speaker’s race, Donald Trump is also trying to get federal charges brought against him for trying to overturn the 2020 election dismissed, the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports: Lawyers for Donald Trump have urged a federal judge to dismiss the criminal case over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, advancing a sweeping interpretation of executive power that contends that former presidents are immune from prosecution for conduct related to their duties while in office.
The request to throw out the indictment, handed up earlier this year by a federal grand jury in Washington, amounts to the most consequential court filing in the case to date and is almost certain to precipitate a legal battle that could end up before the US supreme court.
In their 52-page submission to the presiding US district judge, Tanya Chutkan, Trump’s lawyers essentially argued that Trump enjoyed absolute immunity from criminal prosecution because the charged conduct fell within the so-called “outer perimeter” of his duties as president.
The filing contended that all of Trump’s attempts to reverse his 2020 election defeat in the indictment, from pressuring his vice-president, Mike Pence, to stop the congressional certification to organizing fake slates of electors, were in his capacity as president and therefore protected.
Whether Trump’s motion to dismiss succeeds remains uncertain: it raises novel legal issues, such as whether the outer perimeter test applies to criminal cases, and whether Trump’s charged conduct even falls within a president’s duties.
Prosecutors in the office of the special counsel, Jack Smith, could counter that Trump cannot make either argument. The outer perimeter test is widely seen as applying to only civil cases, for instance, and Trump is alleged as having acted not in his capacity as a president, but as a candidate.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 10, 2023 15:15:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 10, 2023 15:15:44 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Special counsel for the federal January 6 case has also requested that Trump be restricted from doing juror research and publishing the identities of jurors, the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports. The request is, in part, because of Trump’s previous use of social media to “attack others”, argued the special counsel.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 16, 2023 17:48:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 16, 2023 17:50:20 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Judge imposes partial gag order against Trump in election subversion caseFederal judge Tanya Chutkan has imposed a limited gag order against Donald Trump in the 2020 election subversion case. Chutkan’s order prevents posting or reposting attacks against the special counsel, his staff, court staff or personnel, and statements against potential witnesses or expert testimony. The judge declined to impose restrictions on criticizing the government in general, including the justice department and Biden administration. She also will allow statements alleging the case is politically motivated.
Judge Tanya Chutkan says with Trump’s public prejudicial statements in the 2020 election case, there is a real risk that witnesses may be intimidated. Trump cannot “launch a pre-trial smear campaign,” Chutkan says, adding violations of order could lead to sanctions.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 16, 2023 18:13:52 GMT -5
(The Guardian) From the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell, here’s a full rundown of what happened earlier today, when the federal judge handling his trial on charges of trying to overturn the 2020 election imposed a partial gag order on Donald Trump: Donald Trump has been issued a limited gag order by the federal judge overseeing the criminal case over his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, prohibiting him from making public statements attacking prosecutors, court staff and potential trial witnesses.
The former president was not prohibited from generally disparaging the Biden administration, the US justice department and the trial venue of Washington DC, and will continue to be allowed to allege that the case was politically motivated.
Those were the contours of a tailored protective order handed down on Monday by Tanya Chutkan, the US district judge who said she would enter a written ruling at a later date but warned Trump’s lawyers that any violation of the order could lead to immediate punitive sanctions.
The ruling was the culmination of a two-hour hearing in federal district court after prosecutors in the office of the special counsel Jack Smith had asked the judge to impose restrictions on Trump’s attacks that they felt could intimidate witnesses – and Chutkan agreed. “There is a real risk that witnesses may be intimidated,” Chutkan said as she explained her decision from the bench, adding that just because Trump was a 2024 presidential candidate and the GOP nomination frontrunner did not give him free rein to “launch a pre-trial smear campaign”.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2023 23:57:48 GMT -5
All these trials are just witchunts to stop Trump from running in 2024. Neither Trump or Biden should be running. So far there isnt a decent candidate running. Quite sad
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Oct 30, 2023 13:25:54 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Over the weekend, a federal judge reinstated a limited gag order on Donald Trump, intended to prevent him from making statements maligning those involved in his prosecution for trying to overturn the 2020 election, the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell reports: Donald Trump was once again bound by the gag order in the federal criminal case charging him with conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results, after a judge on Sunday reinstated restrictions prohibiting him from attacking prosecutors, court staff and potential trial witnesses.
The US district judge Tanya Chutkan also denied the former US president’s request to suspend the gag order indefinitely while his lawyers appealed.
Trump had been granted a reprieve when the judge temporarily lifted the gag order while she considered that request. Prosecutors argued last week that the order should be reimposed after Trump took advantage and posted a slew of inflammatory statements.
The statements included Trump’s repeated attacks on the special counsel Jack Smith, whom he called “deranged”, and Trump’s comments about the testimony that his former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows had provided to the grand jury during the criminal investigation.
Prosecutors argued that each of Trump’s statements were exactly the sort of comments that the order was designed to prevent, including intimidating or influencing witnesses who could wind up testifying against him at trial, and weighing on the substance of their testimony.
“The defendant has capitalized on the court’s administrative stay to, among other prejudicial conduct, send an unmistakable and threatening message to a foreseeable witness in this case,” prosecutors said in their brief. “Unless the court lifts the administrative stay, the defendant will not stop.”
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Nov 20, 2023 16:31:37 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Trump legal team and prosecutors to face off in court over gag order in election caseAttorneys representing Donald Trump and federal prosecutors will face off on Monday in federal court about the perimeters of a gag order placed on the former president, which prevents him from attacking witnesses, prosecutors, or others associated with the election interference case. Both sides will present their argument before a US federal appeals court on Monday at 9.30 am ET, with the hearing expected to last one hour. Prosecutors with the Justice department have said that the gag order is critical for a fair trial, as Trump’s public comments on the trial have led to harassment or witness intimidation from his supporters. Meanwhile, Trump’s attorneys believe that the gag order impedes on his “core political speech”, especially with Trump being the Republican frontrunner for the 2024 presidential election. A limited gag order was placed on Trump last month, prohibiting him from “from making any public statements, or directing others to make any public statements” about witnesses, their testimony, the prosecution and their staff, as well as the court’s staff, NBC News reported.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Nov 20, 2023 16:33:43 GMT -5
(The Guardian) The Guardian’s Hugo Lowell is currently in Washington DC for the court hearing. Jack Smith is currently in the courtroom for oral arguments at the DC Circuit, with the hearing set to begin at 9.30 am. He’s sitting in the front row of pews.
The hearing on Donald Trump’s gag order has began. The former president’s attorney John Sauro is arguing first. A main argument from Trump’s defense team is that there is “no evidence” that Trump has made social media posts about “non-public” witnesses. The three judges that make up the panel are judges Patricia Millett, Cornelia Pillard, and Brad Garcia, who were all appointed by Democratic presidents.
|
|