General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIt's common sense, I cannot make it any clearer than this.
If an ex-presidents own former White House counsel informed the president what he is about to do is illegal and the ex-president did it anyway. That ex-president is Fucked!
Trumps own WH counsel and others told Trump and Eastman what they were planning is illegal. Trumps WH counsel already testified that Eastman admitted during a White House meeting where Trump was present his plan was illegal.
If Trumps former WH counsel and others are testifying to this in front of a Grand Jury. Game over.
Ocelot II
(115,276 posts)as between a president and WH counsel (the client isn't the president but the office of the president, i.e. the government), and executive privilege is out the window as well (see Nixon v. U.S.), they'll have to spill the beans to the grand jury. It will go a long way to prove the element of intent in charging TFG with criminal offenses.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)I have no doubt.
no_hypocrisy
(45,771 posts)Memoranda from the Attorneys that they warned of illegality and client chose otherwise. Perhaps signed Disclaimers by TFG.
Attorneys cover their asses big time in situations like this.
Walleye
(30,708 posts)DENVERPOPS
(8,678 posts)was when he was talking to foreign diplomats or leaders of other countries, in person, or on the phone, many times he insisted that the interpreter and/or person formally recording the conversation not attend certain discussions. In one case, when the conversation was completed, he reportedly grabbed the notes the recorder had taken and destroyed them. The reports also stated that this most often happened when communicating with guess who???????? PUTIN
Walleye
(30,708 posts)Ocelot II
(115,276 posts)for taking notes during a conversation. He doesn't like it when people keep track of what he says.
Marcuse
(7,392 posts)DENVERPOPS
(8,678 posts)that the main sewer line exiting the white house has a thing called a "Muffin Monster" installed in the sewer line. It is like a giant, in line, heavy duty garbage disposer that grinds up everything organic and non-organic and shreds/pulverizes anything coming down the line.
Prisons commonly use them........
LAS14
(13,749 posts)I doubt that having someone's telling you something constitutes proof that you knew it was true.
The testimony about Eastman sounds like hearsay.
I'm actually half convinced that Trump is going to walk on the Jan 6 thing. We've heard for years that he never says anything outright. That his staff have learned to intuit what he wants. The only "evidence" of his actually saying something incriminating is the events in the car on the way home to the White House, and that, as far as we know, is only hearsay.
Common sense screams that he's as guilty as can be. Would that common sense reigned in the courtroom.
Walleye
(30,708 posts)I guess everything depends on somebody down the ladder not wanting to go to jail and telling all they know. In this case probably would take more than one witness
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)Walleye
(30,708 posts)DENVERPOPS
(8,678 posts)they finally nail the biggest mafia heads in history including Al Capone, by nailing them for Tax Evasion?????????
Now that they have Trump's accountant testifying, and Trump's tax returns, it should be slam dunk.......at least you would think......
That having been said, I won't hold my breath waiting for punishments to be reality for Trump, Republican Senators, Trump's advisors and personal staff, Secretary of whatever, etc etc etc.... Oh, and two of the biggest co-contributors to corruption, Ivanka and Jared.....
The way I see it is that regardless how corrupt or illegal any or all their actions, every single case will end up in the Supreme Court on an "emergency filing" and we all know how that will go.......
Walleye
(30,708 posts)I think Trump is counting on that
DENVERPOPS
(8,678 posts)he will be elevated to be a Martyr forevermore by the Republicans and the 70 million Trump cult followers....
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)No jury would believe that pile of horse shit.
rampartc
(5,263 posts)Ocelot II
(115,276 posts)Hearsay isn't all third-hand statements; it's just any statement offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter in dispute (and there are many exceptions to the rule). Statements about what TFG told Eastman and the other lawyers wouldn't be offered to prove the truth of some matter, but to prove TFG's state of mind, that is, his knowledge and understanding that what he wanted to do was illegal. Also, admissions by a party aren't hearsay at all (F.R. Evid. 801), so if one of the lawyers testifies that TFG said something like, "I know it's illegal but I want to do it anyhow because they can't stop me," that statement would be admissible in a trial.
onecaliberal
(32,483 posts)Answered my question.
dchill
(38,320 posts)czarjak
(11,191 posts)gab13by13
(20,864 posts)Go get em Jack.
Walleye
(30,708 posts)Is that considered legal advice?
GenXer47
(1,204 posts)Walleye
(30,708 posts)Joinfortmill
(14,238 posts)onecaliberal
(32,483 posts)Prison.