INDICTED (INDICATED) #3 USA v Donald Trump - Judge Tanya Chutkan - #J6 Election Interference, Fake Electors - Jack Smith

[keith]

This could have gone just about anywhere. This is the first one that caught my eye.

Random song came up on my car stereo while I was waiting for SWMBO. It reminded me that Ry had the Trumpistas figured out years ago.

[Volkonski]

Jack Smith taps war crimes prosecutor to help put away Trump: report

https://www.rawstory.com/jack-smith-war-crimes-trump/

Special counsel Jack Smith, who cut his teeth prosecuting war crimes at The Hague, has tapped his deputy from those prosecutions to help him in the investigations of former President Donald Trump, reported POLITICO on Friday.

"Alex Whiting worked alongside Smith for three years, helping prosecute crimes against humanity that occurred in Kosovo in the late 1990s," reported Kyle Cheney. "The Yale-educated attorney also worked as a prosecutor with the International Criminal Court from 2010 to 2013. He has taught law classes at Harvard since 2007 as well, hired as an assistant professor by then-Dean Elena Kagan — now a Supreme Court justice — and rising to a visiting professorship in 2013."

The role Whiting is performing for the special counsel is not currently known; however, according to the report, he has been seen multiple times this week at the district courthouse in Washington, D.C.

[RTH10260]

With all the defendants flipin' he needs assistance to catch up

[RTH10260]

poster believes that a post by the former guy may conflict with a protection order given against harassment of potential whitnesses, here former General Milley

[Kendra]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... =9#image=1

Judge Tanya Chutkan, the jurist overseeing the landmark prosecution by special counsel Jack Smith against former President Donald Trump for the plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election, just got assigned another Trumpworld legal case.

Politico reporter Kyle Cheney revealed she will be hearing the defamation suit brought by ex-Trump attorney Stefan Passantino against former Mueller investigation prosecutor Andrew Weissmann.

Passantino claims Weissmann, a frequent legal analyst who appears on CNN and MSNBC, defamed him when the commentator said the lawyer coached former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson to lie to the House January 6 Select Committee.

[RTH10260]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... =9#image=1

Judge Tanya Chutkan, the jurist overseeing the landmark prosecution by special counsel Jack Smith against former President Donald Trump for the plot to overturn the 2020 presidential election, just got assigned another Trumpworld legal case.

Politico reporter Kyle Cheney revealed she will be hearing the defamation suit brought by ex-Trump attorney Stefan Passantino against former Mueller investigation prosecutor Andrew Weissmann.

Passantino claims Weissmann, a frequent legal analyst who appears on CNN and MSNBC, defamed him when the commentator said the lawyer coached former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson to lie to the House January 6 Select Committee.

But wasn't that the statement Hutchinson made to the J6 committee? How can repeating this be defamation?

[roadscholar]

She clarified what she testified to, and it wasn’t that she was coached to lie per se, but rather to avoid giving the whole truth, to assist in the cover-up. And saying “I don’t recall” when you know damned well you do, that’s a lie. So in that sense he was telling her to lie, I suppose. Legally not perjurious (?) because proving you remember something you said you didn’t is difficult. BUT it’s the kind of thing Cassidy said wouldn’t pass the “mirror test,” knowing every time she looks in the mirror for the rest of her life that she materially misrepresented the facts. Facts too important to keep quiet about, for the good of the country.

A Republican with real integrity. Lordy, how I wish there were more of them.

[raison de arizona]

tfg response to proposed gag order
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 8.60.0.pdf

IMG_5856.jpeg (345.46 KiB) Viewed 1141 times

[bill_g]

She clarified what she testified to, and it wasn’t that she was coached to lie per se, but rather to avoid giving the whole truth, to assist in the cover-up. And saying “I don’t recall” when you know damned well you do, that’s a lie. So in that sense he was telling her to lie, I suppose. Legally not perjurious (?) because proving you remember something you said you didn’t is difficult. BUT it’s the kind of thing Cassidy said wouldn’t pass the “mirror test,” knowing every time she looks in the mirror for the rest of her life that she materially misrepresented the facts. Facts too important to keep quiet about, for the good of the country.

A Republican with real integrity. Lordy, how I wish there were more of them.

I watched Rachel Maddow last night. She devoted the hour to Cassidy Hutchinson, and her new book "Enough". Her clarifications and expansion on her previous testimony were part of the interview.

[Gregg]

She clarified what she testified to, and it wasn’t that she was coached to lie per se, but rather to avoid giving the whole truth, to assist in the cover-up. And saying “I don’t recall” when you know damned well you do, that’s a lie. So in that sense he was telling her to lie, I suppose. Legally not perjurious (?) because proving you remember something you said you didn’t is difficult. BUT it’s the kind of thing Cassidy said wouldn’t pass the “mirror test,” knowing every time she looks in the mirror for the rest of her life that she materially misrepresented the facts. Facts too important to keep quiet about, for the good of the country.

A Republican with real integrity. Lordy, how I wish there were more of them.

I watched Rachel Maddow last night. She devoted the hour to Cassidy Hutchinson, and her new book "Enough". Her clarifications and expansion on her previous testimony were part of the interview.

I watched her tonight on Lawrence O'Donnel. I was working while it was playng as white noise in the office but WOW, she tossed her own Trump loving dad, who has since passed away even, under the bus,
then backed up to make sure,
a few times.

It was harsh. Also, she mentions Alexander Buterfield, one of my personal heroes from Watergate, who a minute later was on with them telling her "Good Job" and such.

And then she back up the bus a few more times.... just to be sure.

[p0rtia]

Re Hutchinson's father -- my take was that she told the truth, which was painful and incredibly insightful.

In an earlier interview, she said that one of the things that -- five years earlier -- had attracted her to fuckhead: he reminded her of her father.

Her father, she relates, chose fuckhead over her, and treated her the way fuckhead treats people, with bullying and lies. I don't see any bus-backing going on. Rather, an incredibly painful truth, hammered home at the most vulnerable time in her life.

I also adore Butterfield. Funny, funny man.

[MN-Skeptic]

I watched her tonight on Lawrence O'Donnel. I was working while it was playng as white noise in the office but WOW, she tossed her own Trump loving dad, who has since passed away even, under the bus,
then backed up to make sure,
a few times.

It was harsh. Also, she mentions Alexander Buterfield, one of my personal heroes from Watergate, who a minute later was on with them telling her "Good Job" and such.

And then she back up the bus a few more times.... just to be sure.

Young people can be very trusting and idealistic. I think that Cassidy is outraged that people she idolized were absolute scum of the earth, and that older, more experienced people who should have seen through the lies and been likewise outraged, were instead silently complicit or just willing to be duped. It's hard when the heroes in your life turn out to be major disappointments.

[RTH10260]

[raison de arizona]

BREAKING: Judge CHUTKAN *denies* Trump's motion to recuse.

https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... 3cr0257-61

[bob]

BREAKING: Judge CHUTKAN *denies* Trump's motion to recuse.

The judge unsurprisingly said it (almost always) isn't bias* if the court forms opinions from evidence presented in court. And, in the two J6 sentencing hearings cited in the recusal motion, she did just that.

Oh:

At the outset, it bears noting that the court has never taken the position the defense ascribes to it: that former “President Trump should be prosecuted and imprisoned.”

* * *

That inferential leap is not reasonable in light of the relevant facts, record, and law.

The judge goes on to discuss a case wherein Nixon said similar things about a Watergate judge.

* In the legal sense; as courts use that term.

[Gregg]

Re Hutchinson's father -- my take was that she told the truth, which was painful and incredibly insightful.

In an earlier interview, she said that one of the things that -- five years earlier -- had attracted her to fuckhead: he reminded her of her father.

Her father, she relates, chose fuckhead over her, and treated her the way fuckhead treats people, with bullying and lies. I don't see any bus-backing going on. Rather, an incredibly painful truth, hammered home at the most vulnerable time in her life.

I also adore Butterfield. Funny, funny man.

You're probably right, but I just gotta say. My father was not always what i'd call enlightened. My faux racist comment I toss out sometimes about "well, not the colored folk" are the way my dad actually talked, in the 70s he talked that way a lot and as he aged and America kind of got better, he phased it out mostly. My point is, saint though he was for 90% of my memorites of him, he'd have to have done a lot more than have some really bad years when the crazy came for me to ever utter a word to anyone about him. And I was just listening to it as white noise so I wasn't fully in context, but it sounded like she was really laying into him, to me. And the amazing thing is, after telling this story about hwo bad "they" are and how ''they'' drove her father to that place.... she's still at best agnostic about leaving them in the mirror.

She won't vote for Trump but I'll bet good money that she's all in for any of the 7 dwarves who were at the Reagan Library the other night. She said as much.

[p0rtia]

Re Hutchinson's father -- my take was that she told the truth, which was painful and incredibly insightful.

In an earlier interview, she said that one of the things that -- five years earlier -- had attracted her to fuckhead: he reminded her of her father.

Her father, she relates, chose fuckhead over her, and treated her the way fuckhead treats people, with bullying and lies. I don't see any bus-backing going on. Rather, an incredibly painful truth, hammered home at the most vulnerable time in her life.

I also adore Butterfield. Funny, funny man.

You're probably right, but I just gotta say. My father was not always what i'd call enlightened. My faux racist comment I toss out sometimes about "well, not the colored folk" are the way my dad actually talked, in the 70s he talked that way a lot and as he aged and America kind of got better, he phased it out mostly. My point is, saint though he was for 90% of my memorites of him, he'd have to have done a lot more than have some really bad years when the crazy came for me to ever utter a word to anyone about him. And I was just listening to it as white noise so I wasn't fully in context, but it sounded like she was really laying into him, to me. And the amazing thing is, after telling this story about hwo bad "they" are and how ''they'' drove her father to that place.... she's still at best agnostic about leaving them in the mirror.

She won't vote for Trump but I'll bet good money that she's all in for any of the 7 dwarves who were at the Reagan Library the other night. She said as much.

[somerset]

She won't vote for Trump but I'll bet good money that she's all in for any of the 7 dwarves who were at the Reagan Library the other night. She said as much.

https://thehill.com/homenews/4222761-ca ... Republican.

During an appearance on MSNBC’s “The Rachel Maddow Show,” Hutchinson told host Rachel Maddow that while she still considers herself a Republican, she doesn’t believe that her former employer is a “strong Republican.”

[p0rtia]

Regarding the above: I saw the interview with Rachel. I don't recall her making any positive statements about the 2024 Republican contenders.

Indeed, her primary thrust was to try to haul what's left of the GOP back to governance -- away from the lies and horrors of fuckhead.

Which is why I was surprised to hear that she had said she would support any current GOP candidate.

IMO she is using understatement to express the obvious when she says "not a strong Republican." I also assume she was talking about Mark Meadows, who is not running for president.

She was mighty forceful in her condemnation of her own acts and the acts of others who surrounded fuckhead, and who to this day act in his name (her take on McCarthy, for example, was scathing). I listened to three interviews she gave, for the record. Nicolle Wallace's was the best, because it was mostly about how she and others got sucked in, and what to do about it now to make people see the truth. Listening to her explain that it took over a year for her to fully realize that she had been a fool and, more tellingly, had believed a pack of lies, was fascinating to me.

Now, that said, I've heard a lot of people excoriating her for presumably keeping info for her book---a criticism which I think is without merit until we confirm that there is relevant material in her book that she did not tell the Jan 6 committee (just because _we_ hadn't heard it before means nothing). And plenty of people happily throw her in with the Bill Barrs and John Boltons of the world (Malcolm Nance's angry rant comes to mind). I just not one of them (with the caveat stated above that when she turns up in the future working for Mike Pence or someone of that ilk, I'm done).

[RTH10260]

[raison de arizona]

What tfg did to him is unforgivable.

[AndyinPA]

That could be said about most of his life, but, yeah, I agree.

[RVInit]

Regarding the above: I saw the interview with Rachel. I don't recall her making any positive statements about the 2024 Republican contenders.

Indeed, her primary thrust was to try to haul what's left of the GOP back to governance -- away from the lies and horrors of fuckhead.

Which is why I was surprised to hear that she had said she would support any current GOP candidate.

IMO she is using understatement to express the obvious when she says "not a strong Republican." I also assume she was talking about Mark Meadows, who is not running for president.

She was mighty forceful in her condemnation of her own acts and the acts of others who surrounded fuckhead, and who to this day act in his name (her take on McCarthy, for example, was scathing). I listened to three interviews she gave, for the record. Nicolle Wallace's was the best, because it was mostly about how she and others got sucked in, and what to do about it now to make people see the truth. Listening to her explain that it took over a year for her to fully realize that she had been a fool and, more tellingly, had believed a pack of lies, was fascinating to me.

Now, that said, I've heard a lot of people excoriating her for presumably keeping info for her book---a criticism which I think is without merit until we confirm that there is relevant material in her book that she did not tell the Jan 6 committee (just because _we_ hadn't heard it before means nothing). And plenty of people happily throw her in with the Bill Barrs and John Boltons of the world (Malcolm Nance's angry rant comes to mind). I just not one of them (with the caveat stated above that when she turns up in the future working for Mike Pence or someone of that ilk, I'm done).

I don't recall exactly which of the many interviews she has given recently, but the basic gist of what she said left me with the distinct impression that she will vote for any of the Republican candidates as long as it isn't Trump. She declared "somewhat disappointing" that the majority of the candidates would support Trump if he's the candidate, but I didn't hear anything to indicate that would prevent her from voting for any of them. She made it clear she is a Republican. She will not be voting for Biden.

She also looked almost like she was going to vomit the whole time she was talking to Maddow. I'm sure she considers Rachel Maddow to be a true enemy, but her book publisher probably suggested strongly that any appearance she does is only going to sell more books. She would not have come forward had it not been for Liz Cheney and an unnamed Republican that offered to put her in touch with Cheney, who she seems to view as a good role model. Cheney is to be commended for her contribution to the Jan 6 committee, but she still holds repulsive views and we will go back to hating her guts if she ever ends up back in Congress. I know, that would be a miracle if the Republican party ever emerges from the sewer in her lifetime.

[AndyinPA]

That's kind of what I got out of it after also watching all three hours. I came off watching thinking that she was to be commended for what she has done, but she's still naive when it comes to the big picture.

If you're still voting for the republicans, you don't understand the party is gone; the cult is in charge.

[p0rtia]

Short of going back and re-listening to Maddow, O'Donnell, and Wallace to try to find a mention by her that she was planning on voting for a MAGA Republican any time soon, I'll retire from the fray. I don't remember her talking about voting at all. So I either missed it, or I just did not hear what you guys heard.

I took her as choosing the category that houses people like Micheal Steele and Charlie Sykes, who have chosen to retain their party registration despite plans to vote for Biden and every other Dem on ballot. Hoping to resurrect the "old" party at some point in the future. Meanwhile they spend all their time trying to end MAGA.