As we move towards what looks more and more inevitably like the first indictment of the former President in Manhattan (unless Fani Willis’s “imminent” suddenly takes wing or Jack Smith runs strong in the home stretch), there is lots of uncertainty about the details, including the most important one: what, precisely, will Trump be charged with? Let’s set that question aside for today, because the reality is, we’re unlikely to be able to answer it before an indictment, if there is one, becomes public, and we’re able to see the actual charges.
There is something that has confused me since first hearing Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger. I'm hoping maybe you can clarify it for me or point out if I'm missing something. The full quote that has been used as the most damning moment of the call is, "What I want to do is this. I just want to find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than [the 11,779 vote margin of defeat] we have, because we won the state." By stating that the 11,780 votes he "wanted" were "one more that we have," is Trump not admitting that he knows he lost the election in Georgia? It seems pretty plain to me that this is an admission and acknowledgement that he lost in Georgia, despite his bogus assertions to the contrary. Yet, I've heard no one make this argument and I find that very confusing. Can you help me understand why I'm mistaken?
The more I read here (and in a couple other places) the more I realize that proving intent is the big challenge. I would think this is a chunk, but Trump will TRY to chip away in the same way he's trying (not sure he'll succeed) in defining the Access Hollywood tape as "locker room talk" for the E. Jean Carroll suit coming up. (I saw that that and the testimony of two other people with sex assault by T testimony were let IN by the judge. April will be fun.)
I grinned at the "who gets there first" notions in this piece. There is so much focus on "someone...anyone... indict!" that there has been less focus on "first doesn't mean only" as yet. Not saying that's what Joyce does, just something I've noticed of late.
Don't care who goes first as long as they've got it hermetically sealed!
I'm really interested (E. Jean Carroll cases again) in the judge asking if the jury should be anonymous. While one of the points goes to an Irish mobster who got onto an anonymized jury and let Don Gotti off THAT trial, there have been many reports of Trump supporters threatening the lives, livelihoods, and family members of people directly and indirectly involved in anything they don't like, especially if Trump tells them to do it,
I would think jurors would be at profound risk in any Trump case from the thugs. (I'm still bemused that at campaign events he promises to pardon all the 1/6 perps, which is the same thing he promised before he left office and didn't even try. But culters gonna cult.)
We don't do anonymous juries in America. Good grief, would you want to be judged by a bunch of people who could be literally anybody? We have a constitutional right to trial by our peers, and through our lawyers, we get to choose, as does the prosecutor, who those people are.
Interestingly, Trump had no interest in checking the legality of the votes in the states he actually won. Cheating is what Trump does best - winning is all that matters, so winning illegally was never an issue for him.
Mr. Mark, is that not the very point. Trump has a long of habit in confessing crimes while at the same time claiming innocence. Like you the very first time I heard the recording of the call I heard him confess. And I have also wondered for two years while no one seemed to point it out. But perhaps only because the entire call was so patently and blatantly illegal.
That's a good question, Mark. On the surface it appears to be a statement against interest which one would think that the prosecution would us this which could be devestating in especially a jury trial. I've been retired for 16 years and have been paying more attention to government matters which leaves my eldery memory behind.....lol. Joyce can certain give a great explanation. I have been so impressed with her and would love to have had one or more classes with her back in the previous decade, but alas she is a young filly and I am an aged former stallion.
I just signed up for Joyce's letters. I have seen her many times on TV giving her assessment of the legal issues of the day. As a lawyer (retired) I understand her explanations and appreciate her presentation style. Yes, let's get this Trump bum indicted and convicted!
Great summary, Joyce. I noticed you used the terminology, “sharp practices,” a couple of times in the newsletter. Can you expand on the legal meaning of this?
"Sharp practice broadly refers to actions taken by someone that pushes the boundaries of rules or standards. In law, sharp practices are actions by lawyers which go against the accepted standards of practice, but they do not necessarily break an actual law. "
Sadly, the past 6-8 years has shown me that the ‘wheels of justice’ produce very little that I view as fine. This on top of a lifetime, since the Chicago 7 mockery, to awaiting the brewing disaster in Texas, of observing rich, white garbage like trump damage the gears and teeth of the wheel.
What we now have is a course, often broken and not working, machine that rarely dispenses the product we seek and expect in a timely manner.
As long as you have the money to pay your defense lawyers, it seems like you can delay forever.
No wonder so many contractors went under after Trump stiffed them for work performed. They didn’t have the money to sue him after it was all said & done.
Trump sued cities where he owns property & businesses to get what he wanted. These towns couldn’t go up against Trump’s deep pockets & his lawyers.
Lock up #KingCon & let’s get on with the fall out from his MAGA minions.
America will never be the same until we hold Trump accountable.
I do not believe the Chicago 7 was a mockery or should be included in your other examples. It was complicated and highly political but I agreed in the results.
Thank you for again for providing some sanity into the discussion on what the courts may do in response to Trump’s legal morass and criminality. I feel more optimistic that he will be held to account for at least some of his many crimes against the American people.
Nice to hear from you, Joyce! Let’s see if the judges involved in these delay tactics are principled enough to rule correctly and not just hand another gift to trump.
I sincerely hope that Trump and his minions both familial and otherwise are brought to justice at some point in their lifetimes as well as ours. To echo the remarks of others in this Substack, to think they won’t earn their comeuppance would be devastatingly tragic.
I hope you are right but am much less optimistic. My bet is that an indictment for mischaracterizing a payment to an escort is much ado about nothing and will actually help him get re-elected, just like his lawyer said. As to the documents, yet again much ado about nothing plus my bet is that he could declassify by behavior under his executive powers while he was president. It makes no difference whatever the “procedures” were. Presidential power overrides them. As to Georgia- total immunity under his executive powers which he had in full until the instant he did not. He will argue I imagine that it was his duty and he had full power to protect the United States elections and that is what he was doing with his perfect phone calls. This is a political Court and not a legal Court but plenty of room to rule for trump regardless. My bet is he ultimately prevails. As to the insurrection, Garland snoozes and trump’s ultimate defense is winning election and self pardon, My opinion. Now, is the first female president going to be Lake, Marge or Nikki by vice presidential succession? Tick Tock.
By the way, Garland got McVeigh, who killed hundreds of my coworkers, so your "snoozing" comment is ill informed. Or do you actually want Trump to prevail so your Eeyore can be right?
Hi Joyce - a NEW meaning to "March Madness" - who is gonna get the to the "cockroach" 1st? I will be smoking a cigar (i dont smoke) and ringing my grandmother's authentic cowbell as i hum "happy days are here again..." THANKS for keeping us informed - your work is ESSENTIAL!!
Terrific analysis, Joyce. But this is no way to spend a vacation in Sweden!
In the delay column, let us not forget the "routine tax audit" that was, according to Trump, preventing him from making his tax returns public. Apparently that routine audit, involving hundreds of millions of dollars in loss carryovers, is still ongoing some 6 or 7 years later. And isn't there an ongoing investigation (an IG?) into whether he intervened or got the IRS Commissioner to intervene to impede the examination of his income tax returns for years when he was President.
I sure hope, when the first domino falls, the rest come tumbling down in rapid succession.
I am quite certain that will occur. Not just the cases surrounding Trump, but hopefully other illegal actions by political cronies, Gosar, Johnson, Goetz. A lot of these actors need to join Mr.Trump on his cellblock. Trump demands the most attention because he demands attention to focus on himself. Trump is not as stupid as some claim (though he is probably quite ignorant) but so psychopathic that he has to behave stupidly simply because his paranoid psychosis always makes him criminality a victim. Not myself a lawyer, but I do know courts have consistently held such psychopathy is not a legal defense of psychiatric misfunction.
Thank you for taking time on a much deserved vacation for your informative news updates and explanations. It is a given with all the charges he knew he would be facing that he chose to run and announced early.more time to get his base fired up. Frankly just wish he would choke on his ego and disappear for good. Though there are a long line of others that could carry on where he left off.
Thanks again for the explanation Joyce. I personally think that the justice system is tired of TFG using the court system to settle his whims. It is past time for lady liberty to take him to task for everything. Safe travels home.
There is something that has confused me since first hearing Trump's call with Brad Raffensperger. I'm hoping maybe you can clarify it for me or point out if I'm missing something. The full quote that has been used as the most damning moment of the call is, "What I want to do is this. I just want to find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than [the 11,779 vote margin of defeat] we have, because we won the state." By stating that the 11,780 votes he "wanted" were "one more that we have," is Trump not admitting that he knows he lost the election in Georgia? It seems pretty plain to me that this is an admission and acknowledgement that he lost in Georgia, despite his bogus assertions to the contrary. Yet, I've heard no one make this argument and I find that very confusing. Can you help me understand why I'm mistaken?
I would think it goes to knowledge.
The more I read here (and in a couple other places) the more I realize that proving intent is the big challenge. I would think this is a chunk, but Trump will TRY to chip away in the same way he's trying (not sure he'll succeed) in defining the Access Hollywood tape as "locker room talk" for the E. Jean Carroll suit coming up. (I saw that that and the testimony of two other people with sex assault by T testimony were let IN by the judge. April will be fun.)
I grinned at the "who gets there first" notions in this piece. There is so much focus on "someone...anyone... indict!" that there has been less focus on "first doesn't mean only" as yet. Not saying that's what Joyce does, just something I've noticed of late.
Don't care who goes first as long as they've got it hermetically sealed!
I'm really interested (E. Jean Carroll cases again) in the judge asking if the jury should be anonymous. While one of the points goes to an Irish mobster who got onto an anonymized jury and let Don Gotti off THAT trial, there have been many reports of Trump supporters threatening the lives, livelihoods, and family members of people directly and indirectly involved in anything they don't like, especially if Trump tells them to do it,
I would think jurors would be at profound risk in any Trump case from the thugs. (I'm still bemused that at campaign events he promises to pardon all the 1/6 perps, which is the same thing he promised before he left office and didn't even try. But culters gonna cult.)
We don't do anonymous juries in America. Good grief, would you want to be judged by a bunch of people who could be literally anybody? We have a constitutional right to trial by our peers, and through our lawyers, we get to choose, as does the prosecutor, who those people are.
Interestingly, Trump had no interest in checking the legality of the votes in the states he actually won. Cheating is what Trump does best - winning is all that matters, so winning illegally was never an issue for him.
Mr. Mark, is that not the very point. Trump has a long of habit in confessing crimes while at the same time claiming innocence. Like you the very first time I heard the recording of the call I heard him confess. And I have also wondered for two years while no one seemed to point it out. But perhaps only because the entire call was so patently and blatantly illegal.
What a great comment!
Mark, its plain to me as well!
That's a good question, Mark. On the surface it appears to be a statement against interest which one would think that the prosecution would us this which could be devestating in especially a jury trial. I've been retired for 16 years and have been paying more attention to government matters which leaves my eldery memory behind.....lol. Joyce can certain give a great explanation. I have been so impressed with her and would love to have had one or more classes with her back in the previous decade, but alas she is a young filly and I am an aged former stallion.
let's nail this evil blight.
I just signed up for Joyce's letters. I have seen her many times on TV giving her assessment of the legal issues of the day. As a lawyer (retired) I understand her explanations and appreciate her presentation style. Yes, let's get this Trump bum indicted and convicted!
Mike Bahn
Joyce’s style is the best ❤️
Welcome Mike- we’re a terrific community. And yes Joyce rocks!
Great summary, Joyce. I noticed you used the terminology, “sharp practices,” a couple of times in the newsletter. Can you expand on the legal meaning of this?
tom j...bluff park
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/sharp_practice
Many thanks, Deb.
Thank you!
Thank you for this information.
This is from Cornell Law school website:
"Sharp practice broadly refers to actions taken by someone that pushes the boundaries of rules or standards. In law, sharp practices are actions by lawyers which go against the accepted standards of practice, but they do not necessarily break an actual law. "
Thank you!
Another example of the wheels of justice grinding slowly but exceedingly fine, or some such. Thank you, Joyce!
Sadly, the past 6-8 years has shown me that the ‘wheels of justice’ produce very little that I view as fine. This on top of a lifetime, since the Chicago 7 mockery, to awaiting the brewing disaster in Texas, of observing rich, white garbage like trump damage the gears and teeth of the wheel.
What we now have is a course, often broken and not working, machine that rarely dispenses the product we seek and expect in a timely manner.
I find it all irredeemably sad.
I had to live with litigious people. The one thing to know is that it takes a hell of a lot of time. "Timely" can mean 10 years for most cases.
As long as you have the money to pay your defense lawyers, it seems like you can delay forever.
No wonder so many contractors went under after Trump stiffed them for work performed. They didn’t have the money to sue him after it was all said & done.
Trump sued cities where he owns property & businesses to get what he wanted. These towns couldn’t go up against Trump’s deep pockets & his lawyers.
Lock up #KingCon & let’s get on with the fall out from his MAGA minions.
America will never be the same until we hold Trump accountable.
I do not believe the Chicago 7 was a mockery or should be included in your other examples. It was complicated and highly political but I agreed in the results.
Thank you for again for providing some sanity into the discussion on what the courts may do in response to Trump’s legal morass and criminality. I feel more optimistic that he will be held to account for at least some of his many crimes against the American people.
Nice to hear from you, Joyce! Let’s see if the judges involved in these delay tactics are principled enough to rule correctly and not just hand another gift to trump.
I sincerely hope that Trump and his minions both familial and otherwise are brought to justice at some point in their lifetimes as well as ours. To echo the remarks of others in this Substack, to think they won’t earn their comeuppance would be devastatingly tragic.
Thanks for the update and safe travels.
I hope you are right but am much less optimistic. My bet is that an indictment for mischaracterizing a payment to an escort is much ado about nothing and will actually help him get re-elected, just like his lawyer said. As to the documents, yet again much ado about nothing plus my bet is that he could declassify by behavior under his executive powers while he was president. It makes no difference whatever the “procedures” were. Presidential power overrides them. As to Georgia- total immunity under his executive powers which he had in full until the instant he did not. He will argue I imagine that it was his duty and he had full power to protect the United States elections and that is what he was doing with his perfect phone calls. This is a political Court and not a legal Court but plenty of room to rule for trump regardless. My bet is he ultimately prevails. As to the insurrection, Garland snoozes and trump’s ultimate defense is winning election and self pardon, My opinion. Now, is the first female president going to be Lake, Marge or Nikki by vice presidential succession? Tick Tock.
Garland put Smith in place.
We don't want an indictment that fails.
By the way, Garland got McVeigh, who killed hundreds of my coworkers, so your "snoozing" comment is ill informed. Or do you actually want Trump to prevail so your Eeyore can be right?
Zzzzzzzz. A year too late to give his job away to Smith. Of course I don’t want trump to prevail. We will see.
Doesn’t get much scarier than one of the 3 you mentioned sitting in the Oval Office. Justice must prevail and soon.
45 remains delusional and is getting worse in thinking he can still go through with his stupid plan.
In summation, you’ve given up. Shame on you! If tfg or desantis wins, it’s an “indictment” of the American people. “Tick tock” at our own peril.
DeSantis is too crazy way beyond 45 crazy. He is beyond cruel.
Hi Joyce - a NEW meaning to "March Madness" - who is gonna get the to the "cockroach" 1st? I will be smoking a cigar (i dont smoke) and ringing my grandmother's authentic cowbell as i hum "happy days are here again..." THANKS for keeping us informed - your work is ESSENTIAL!!
Terrific analysis, Joyce. But this is no way to spend a vacation in Sweden!
In the delay column, let us not forget the "routine tax audit" that was, according to Trump, preventing him from making his tax returns public. Apparently that routine audit, involving hundreds of millions of dollars in loss carryovers, is still ongoing some 6 or 7 years later. And isn't there an ongoing investigation (an IG?) into whether he intervened or got the IRS Commissioner to intervene to impede the examination of his income tax returns for years when he was President.
I sure hope, when the first domino falls, the rest come tumbling down in rapid succession.
Skål
I am quite certain that will occur. Not just the cases surrounding Trump, but hopefully other illegal actions by political cronies, Gosar, Johnson, Goetz. A lot of these actors need to join Mr.Trump on his cellblock. Trump demands the most attention because he demands attention to focus on himself. Trump is not as stupid as some claim (though he is probably quite ignorant) but so psychopathic that he has to behave stupidly simply because his paranoid psychosis always makes him criminality a victim. Not myself a lawyer, but I do know courts have consistently held such psychopathy is not a legal defense of psychiatric misfunction.
Thank you for taking time on a much deserved vacation for your informative news updates and explanations. It is a given with all the charges he knew he would be facing that he chose to run and announced early.more time to get his base fired up. Frankly just wish he would choke on his ego and disappear for good. Though there are a long line of others that could carry on where he left off.
That’s the creepy part.
Have a safe trip. You are a precious resource to all of us!
Thanks again for the explanation Joyce. I personally think that the justice system is tired of TFG using the court system to settle his whims. It is past time for lady liberty to take him to task for everything. Safe travels home.
I would think lady luck has lost patience with him fully understanding his techniques by now. Some great soul will surely call him out.
Hope you've enjoyed your trip Joyce. Safe journey home and
thank you for your concise breakdown.