Important Updates in the Trump Criminal Probes

I.  The Georgia Criminal Investigation (The Matter of Trump and Pals Trying to Overturn the Election Results in Georgia)

At the end of January, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis said that charging decisions were “imminent.” About a month later, when a reporter wanted to know where the decisions were, she clarified that she meant “lawyer imminent” and not “reporter imminent.”

I’d like to add that there is also “teenager imminent”:

• • When are you going to clean your room?
  • Imminently.

Okay, so, fast forward to April 18, when Willis filed this motion asking the court to disqualify one of the defense lawyers, Kimberly Bourroughs Debrow, from her multiple representations of 10 of the 11 fake electors.

(Initially, two lawyers represented all 11 jointly, but last year, the court ordered them to separate. As a result of that court order, the other lawyer represented one of the potential defendants and Debrow represented the other 10. The order no doubt came from the fact that one potential defendant was differently situated from the other ten, so they could not be represented as a group.)

In her April 18 motion, Willis went further than just asking the court to bar Debrow from simultaneous representation of ten potential defendants: Willis wanted Debrow entirely prohibited from representing any defendants in this matter.

Willis brought the motion under Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct 1.6, 1.7, and 1.9 That means we have read those rules 🤓. Fortunately, in the age of Google, there is no need for an expensive legal database. You can find the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct here.

• Rule 1.6: says that lawyers shall maintain in confidence all information gained in the professional relationship with a client.
• Rule 1.7 A lawyer shall not continue representation if there is a conflict of interest.
• Rule 1.9: A lawyer shall not use information gained in the professional relationship with a client to the disadvantage of that client.

Accusing a lawyer of violating those three rules and asking that she be barred from further representation in the matter is lawyer talk for: “Something juicy happened.” So let’s skip to the statement of facts to find out what Willis says happened.

The facts:

• Last summer, Willis told all eleven fake electors that they were targets of the investigation.

There are three categories of witnesses in grand jury proceedings.

• • • 1. A target has been linked to the crime with substantial evidence. They are likely to be named criminal defendants.
      2. A witness has no criminal liability (at the moment), but has evidence the grand jury needs.
      3. A subject is in between: there is some evidence, but not yet enough for a person to be considered a target. A subject could become a target or a mere witness.

In other words, all of the fake electors were informed that they were potentially in big trouble.

• Also last year, Willis’s office also told the court that some of the fake electors would receive offers of immunity.

An offer of immunity is obviously good for people with criminal liability. It means they will not be prosecuted for the crimes being investigated as long as they tell the truth. A potential defendant would be stupid not to take that offer. Of course, Trump’s idea is that all people should be “loyal” to him, which means staying quiet and going to prison to protect him. We’ve already seen a case where potential witnesses against Trump were represented by Trump-paid lawyers. If the witnesses are represented by Trump-paid lawyers (or lawyers paid by Trump allies) the lawyer’s goal would likely be to get the witnesses to protect Trump when the witnesses expect their lawyers to look out for their best interests. (Click here and scroll down for the example of Cassidy Hutchinson.)

The Court did not order Willis’s office to reveal which electors could potentially receive immunity from prosecution. Instead, the Court instructed the two lawyers, Pierson and Debrow, to extend a blanket offer of immunity to each to gauge each elector’s interest.

• On August 5, 2022, Pierson and Debrow reported that none of their clients were interested in offers of immunity.
• On April 12th and 14th 2023, the DA’s office interviewed the electors and learned that they were never presented with offers of immunity. Oops. And wow. This means that the defense lawyers did not tell the potential defendants that offers of immunity were on the table. Instead, the defense lawyers lied to the prosecution and said none of the defendants were interested in offers of immunity. As Willis said to the court, “This situation reached an impracticable and ethical mess.”

And that’s not all. The DA’s office, during these interviews, also learned that one of the electors engaged in “acts that are violations of GA law” and that the other fake electors were not involved with those additional acts. Willis did not reveal in this motion what those illegal acts were.

What obviously happened was at the eleventh hour, Willis learned that she had more cooperating witnesses. The more cooperating witnesses, the better if the goal is to try to get the people at the top.

No surprise, a week after Willis filed her motion to disqualify Debrow from further representation in the matter, we learned that Willis’s timetable was delayed “in part because a number of witnesses have sought to cooperate as the investigation has neared an end.”

Willis also gave a specific time frame for when we can expect charging decisions: Between July 11 and September 1. Her reason for giving these dates was so that law enforcement could prepare extra security.

The announcement did something else interesting. Remember when Trump got all that attention when he announced he was getting arrested in Manhattan on a Tuesday in March? Law enforcement scrambled to prepare, and then he wasn’t arrested on Tuesday. By announcing a timeframe, Willis steals Trump’s thunder and prevents him from creating chaos with law enforcement.

She knows who she is dealing with.

II. The DOJ January 6 Investigation Updates

Update #1: We learned this week that Mike Pence testified for 7 hours in front of a grand jury. He was questioned about the January 6 attack. Seven hours in front of a grand jury is a very long time. Unlike a regular trial, there are not routine objections and sidebar discussions to slow down the proceedings. He was reportedly cooperative, which means he answered a lot of questions.

Update #2: On Friday, The New York Times confirmed what anyone could have guessed: The Justice Department is gathering evidence about whether Trump and his allies solicited donations with false claims of election fraud. Specifically, the DOJ prosecutors are trying to determine whether Trump and pals violated federal wire fraud statutes as they raised as much as $250 million through a political action committee by saying they needed the money to fight to reverse election fraud even though they knew there was no evidence of fraud. The prosecutors are looking at the inner workings of the committee, Save America PAC, and at the Trump campaign’s efforts to prove its baseless case that Trump had been cheated out of victory.

More updates:

Sometime in April: After former Fox anchor Abby Grossberg aired snippets of tapes she recorded while working at Fox, Federal investigators reached out to Grossberg and her lawyer. The tapes included recordings of Fox host Maria Bartiromo discussing 2020 election conspiracy theories with Trump lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, where they were “being candid off-air and saying something contrary to what they said on-air.”

Grossberg’s lawyer said that she is committed to cooperating fully with law enforcement – which could include an eventual FBI interview or meetings with other investigators. They are currently discussing a targeted subpoena so she can turn over the tapes investigators are interested in.

Here’s the really interesting part: The tapes include Ted Cruz talking to host Maria Bartiromo about his plans to delay Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s victory on January 6, 2021. Ted Cruz said the tapes include duplicates of what he said in public the next day. (🎶That’s his story and he’s sticking to it🎶.)

April 24, 2023: DOJ prosecutors and Grossberg’s lawyers are “in the process of negotiating a targeted subpoena” for the relevant tapes.

III. Proud Boys Trial

Tarrio info is in red.

This trial is one of the most important things that too few people are paying attention to. (The indictment is here.)

In the last seditious conspiracy trial, Oath Keeper leaders Stewart Rhodes and Kelly Meggs were convicted of seditious conspiracy. The other defendants were convicted of related felony charges. (For more on that, see this announcement.)

Because of the way the Constitution defines treason, seditious conspiracy is the closest we have to a charge of treason. The Constitution says this:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Supreme Court has said that the “enemy” must be a country in which we are at open war, meaning a war declared by Congress. The framers of the Constitution were clearly afraid that the word was too vague and explosive, and that charges of treason might be brought against people with opposing political views, so they gave a very specific definition.

You can see that “treason” would not apply to the insurrection. (And no, allegiance to Russia or being influenced by Russia doesn’t make it treason because we are not in a declared war with Russia. Even when Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted of handing nuclear secrets to the Soviets at the height of the cold war, they were convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage, not treason.)

Here are the elements of seditious conspiracy (emphasis added):

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States  . . . 

Those seditious conspiracy convictions last November were a big deal. Because seditious conspiracy is rarely charged, the verdict was seen as a “signal victory for the Justice Department” that “could hold lessons for future Jan. 6 cases.”

While it was a victory in that two of the defendants were found guilty of seditious conspiracy, the others were not found guilty of seditious conspiracy. In other words, it really is not easy for this charge to stick.

Now the Proud Boys leaders (Enrique Tarrio, Ethan Nordean, Zachary Rehl, Dominic Pezzola, and Joe Biggs) are on trial for seditious conspiracy and related felonies.

The Proud Boys are the militia Trump told to “stand back and stand by” during a 2020 election debate. To put it mildly, these guys are vile racists. They call themselves a “pro-Western fraternal organization for men who refuse to apologize for creating the modern world; aka Western Chauvinists.” In other words, hold to the theory that they are members of the race that created modern civilization, another version of the “our race is superior” theory.

Interesting fact #1: One of their co-conspirators, the leader of the North Carolina chapter of the Proud Boys, Charles Donohue, cut a deal with the prosecutors. He pleaded guilty to Conspiracy and Assault Charges. As part of the plea agreement, he agreed to cooperate with the government’s ongoing investigation. It’s likely that his cooperation explains how the DOJ prosecutors have access to all those encrypted messages they are presenting as evidence.

During the leadup to the insurrection, the defendants posted inflammatory stuff on social media like:

• “If Biden steals this election. . . We won’t go quietly.”
• “No Trump . . . No Peace. No quarter.”
• “It’s time for fucking War if they steal this shit” [referring to the Presidential election.]
• “The spirit of 1776 has resurfaced . . .”

In late December they created a new chapter known as the Ministry of Self-Defense.

Interesting Fact #2: One of the defendants, Tarrio never entered the Capitol building.

This is from Lawfare:

Tarrio’s case is distinct in that he was not present in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6. He had been arrested on Jan. 4, for vandalism committed in December 2020, and ordered to leave the city. So he watched Jan. 6 unfold from a hotel room in Baltimore. Nevertheless, the government charges him for his alleged role in planning the events, and it alleges that he continued to monitor and participate in them from afar.

It’s always easier to get guys who are inside the building smashing things and attacking people (particularly if they are filming themselves smashing things and attacking people) than it is to get the planners who were never even near the building.

If Tarrio is convicted of seditious conspiracy, it will be the first verdict of seditious conspiracy for a person who did not participate in the violence. If you read my DOJ investigation FAQ, you know why this is a big deal.

IV. The DOJ Stolen Classified Documents Case

While I was at it, I also updated the timeline on the stolen documents cases.

Mostly what has happened over the past month or so is that Trump tried (and failed) to prevent his lawyer, Evan Corcoran, from testifying  and providing evidence.

March 21, 2023: A federal judge ruled that the crime-fraud exception applies and Corcoran must testify. Mr. Corcoran had to give the government what is likely to be dozens of documents related to his work for Mr. Trump as well as return to a grand jury on Friday to answer questions he had previously sought to avoid with assertions of attorney-client privilege.

March 24, 2023: Evan Corcoran testified before the grand jury. Also on this date, we learned that in December, one of Trump’s lawyers, Tim Parlatore, voluntarily testified to the grand jury about the classified documents. (I left this on the timeline on the date we learned about it to emphasize that we often learn much later about things that happened.

Once Corcoran became a witness, he was no longer able to represent Trump in this matter. There is an ethics rule that generally forbids lawyers from acting as an advocate in a trial if the lawyer is likely to be called as a witness. (Marcy Wheeler pointed out that Corcoran didn’t recuse himself on his own–his firm forced him to do it.)

April 12, 2023: Federal investigators are asking witnesses whether Trump showed off to aides and visitors a map he took with him when he left office that contains sensitive intelligence information.  (In other words, did Trump show classified material to others, which obviously makes things worse?)

Now, if you really want to nerd out, I created a tab on the menu of this website called “Trump Criminal Investigations” so you can click and see all three timelines. Cool? (Nerdy is this year’s pink).

* * *

There is also E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit against Trump in which Carroll appears to be well on her way to persuading a jury that Trump raped her and then defamed her.

Trump and his defenders went into the 2016 election trying to explain away the Access Hollywood tape and his famous “grab em by the pussy” comment by calling it “locker room talk.” This time he may go into the 2024 election with an actual jury finding that he did, literally, grab a woman by the pussy and rape her.

I expect the Republican Party to continue defending him, which tells you everything you need to know about the Republican Party.

JJ Makes an Appearance for His Fans

• Breed: Rescue Terrier
• Occupation: Guard Dog
• Special Skills: Multi-tasking. Pictured here taking a sunbath while making sure no dangers (mail carriers, skateboarders, or squirrels) get past the front door while remaining all dressed up in a bowtie.

Alternate caption: “How Teri’s readers feel after clicking through and reading all of the timelines.”