By now you know that Trump has been indicted, for the fourth time, in Fulton County Georgia. His co-defendants include people like Rudy Giuliani and other lawyers like John Eastman, Sidney Powell (the “kraken”), attorney-general-wannabe Jeff Clark, and more, as well as lesser known figures in Georgia and others involved in the campaign. You can find the full indictment
The full written transcript is available via Tim Darnell of the ATLANTA NEWS FIRST. You can also listen to most damning parts & clearly hear the words of other Witnesses.
Be certain, that Jack Smith already has probative evidence from all the Participants on the conference call including: Brad Raff ....Ryan Germany, Mark Meadows, Jordan Fuchs, Cleta Mitchell & likely others which may go something like this:
Prosecutor Question: "Mr. Meadows: Did someone hand the President a piece of paper when he told Brad ... "I just want to find Ahh ... [ pregnant pause ] ... 11,780 votes which is 1 more than we have ..."
Mr. Meadows: "Yes, I believe it was unnamed Co-conspirator #6." or "one of his Capos'". ( Hat tip Valere )
Bryan Sean McKown: I break out in laughter, I can't help it, every time I hear that line, because of the very nakedness, the brashness of, "all I need . . . all I want is for you . . . to find . . . 11,780 votes . . . which is one more than I have . . . because . . ."
Many times, I am able to set aside a moment and LAUGH AT the Carnival-Man for the sheer garishness and unintended COMEDY of his Mob-Boss ACT.
Thanks for your commentary.
And Sue Sanders IS Super. Enjoyed her "Devil in Georgia."
Carol, Kathy & many Others, thank you & I am greatly relieved other Community members were able to understand my Comment. Think about tfg's infamous call to Brad ... we have all heard it ... what 20 or 30 times? My Trial Attorney ears tell me a lot was going on both sides of that of that conference call ... I should refer to that call as the attack on Brad, the attack on our democracy. As Joyce has said many times, "We are all in this Together".
Also, I would like to thank you for your service as a trial attorney to bring honor to our democracy every day. I know you’re certainly didn’t get rich doing that. I appreciate very much that you shared your thoughts about ‘capo’ (my term) handing the note. My area is educational policy studies (university) and spent a couple of decades on a League of Women Voters board. I’m a geek and very interested in preserving democracy. But as aware as I am of legislative shenanigans, I am completely unaware of what goes on in the courtroom inside. I appreciate very much the image you presented of the note handing. But at the same time, I am shocked at the idea. Maybe Mark Meadows needs to start wearing riot gear. I understand that Trump recently asked associates what they thought Mark Meadows was up to. Shudder about that since ‘the Don’ likes to send warnings. This would really be funny if the threats Donald Trump makes we’re not so frightening. I think we all have collective PTSD from January 6. I indeed am glad we are in this together.
Trial work is not that different from 3 Dimensional Chess. You must use your eyes & use you ears & keep the mouth shut instead of yapping. Must react quickly.
Love your term "capo' I should have used that term. Good one.
These two short (60 seconds) videos will make you laugh. My wife and I couldn’t stop cracking up after seeing them.
Note: Just in case it’s of concern to anyone both videos are on tictoc. Quite honestly I’ve never seen anything on tictoc until my wife showed me the first video a couple of days ago.
ps: you’ll have to click the speaker/ volume icon on the bottom of the video player to hear the sound. It’s just like the one you’ll find on YouTube videos. For some reason the volume is off by default.
Thank you very much for your tireless undaunting comments & explanations for the average reader who is not trained in the law. You bring it home! All the best. Get your rest. As you say, we are in this for the long haul. Our democracy and freedom are at stake, regardless of what the right claims.
Y'know, "We're all in this together," has struck me toniight as more than a platitude. With Joyce, other sub stacks and the wonderful commenters, the company I keep these days is sterling.
Democracy Labs created this interactive Relationship Map to help keep track of all 19 indictees and the charges against each of them. The map includes text, images, videos and audio of the indictments against them. And you can search for indictees by the charge against them! The map is online and I'm planning to update with new information as it comes out. https://thedemlabs.org/2023/08/15/follow-trumps-georgia-indictments-with-relationship-map-ai-generated-audio-files/
Thanks again Joyce. I don’t think Meadows can be trusted. He’s knee deep in conspiracy and probably as defiant as TFG. He and others in the Republican Party have turned their backs on America and don’t grasp the depths to which they have fallen but we do and 2024 will hold all of them accountable. The fire beneath the flame speaks our truth. We all matter. Hail to our beloved country and all we hold dear. Appreciate your in depth report tonight on the indictments and for your strength to keep at it for all of us. How dear you are 🇺🇸🗽
Over the years as I worked in the movie industry, I spent a few days working in the Atlanta jail, the description of the smells is spot on, it was a horrible place to have to spend any time, and a fitting home for our criminal class. I fully expect that when some of the indicted get a look at one of the rest stops, on their way to their future home, they will have second thoughts about a plea deal.
Dick, I produced a film inside a Louisiana jail, and when our stand-in for a prisoner in an orange jumpsuit failed to appear, I put on the jumpsuit. Let me tell you, when the cell door clanked shut, that trapped feeling was very uncomfortable! Even though I consciously knew I only had to stand in the cell for a few takes, my body didn't and the smell of fear drenched me!
I worked at the Main Jail in FTLD as a Charge Nurse for a while. Joyce’s description is on point. The smell in GP is unlike anything I have ever smelt and could not adequately describe.
Remember that in a free society, the cruelest punishment is the deprivation of liberty. The food, the smells, the crowding, are the punishments of losing your freedom and having to live in what a reluctant state grudgingly offers those who have squandered their natural rights.
Yes, D Deakin. there will be no cell phones allowed at the Booking nor at the separate Arraignment on another Day ... nor at any hearing on tfg's violations of Court Orders.
That is, if any of his "prescriptions" are legal. I know he takes something for high cholesterol, but I doubt he should be taking something like Adderall at his age.
Brian, this may have an obvious answer - but as a lay person to the courts until having Joyce’s column, do you think Mark Meadows is requesting a federal court trial because if he is convicted, he will have a chance at a country club prison? Sorry if this is such a basic question for you or anyone. It just occurred to me that he wants to escape the Georgia jail. And I know they’re all considered innocent. My nature is to plan ahead, so I’m just wondering. This might be an obvious answer to attorneys. And I appreciate very much you’re answering because I know how busy Joyce is.
The reason his lawyers are seeking removal is that the federal district court draws jurors from some very conservative counties in addition to Fulton County. Fulton County only draws jurors from Fulton County and Fulton County is not Trump country. Even though the trial will be in federal court, it will still be the same charges, using the same rules of evidence, prosecuted by the same prosecutor. If Trump is convicted, he will be sentenced under Georgia law to custody in Georgia. But he will not be housed in a regular Georgia prison. I don't know what they will do. I think he could be transferred to a federal facility. But because of security concerns and the needs of the U.S. Secret Service agents guarding him, I think they'll find a house somewhere, surround it was a fence, covered with razor wire, where the agents can reside next door.
Just as a purist, I would like to see him facing a jury from Fulton County. I would like the eyes on him to be those from a population that has been hurt by him. So far as where he goes to prison, if that’s the case, a house with razor wire and high security is best. I think it would be dangerous for him to go into any prison population. I think it would be difficult for the Secret Service - not at all what they signed up for. It would actually be like sending them to prison. He might be in prison in Washington DC first because of Jack Smith’s indictments. In that case, I’d like to see him go to Langley, where he could be guarded by the CIA. I think it would be more secure than any kind of federal prison. I believe he is near implosion. If he still able to make a cognitive decision using higher order reasoning instead of the devolvement fear-based behavior he seems to be entering, I would like to see his attorneys offer Jack Smith a guilty plea tied to conditions that: 1) his public office aspirations are finished; 2) he will not be allowed to use social media in any capacity; 3) he cannot host gatherings of more than 10 people (excluding children under 10 years; 4) he cannot attend gatherings of more than 10 people (nn4) he must deed Mara Largo (free of debts including mortgage) to the U.S. government for use as a veterans hospital for Traumatic Brain Injured soldiers ; 5) he needs to surrender his passport; 6) he must remain under house arrest in New Jersey; 7) register as a felon who can never vote; pay the legal fine for insurrection, cleaning the Capitol, all government court costs; he may not have any communication ever again with any of the co-conspirators, any of his prior staff or any elected official - no matter the level whether city, county, state, federal, foreign leaders or officials; 8) and, finally, he has to accept conditions of parole from a DOJ approved parole officer who will verify whether Trump has
He knows at a deep level that he is cooked and the odds of him going to prison is very high. This gives him a life outside of prison and it’s much more than he deserves (in my view and indeed, I know that he is still innocent until proven guilty. That’s what jack Smith and Joyce want us to say. So I’m making that statement because the terms are conditional on him being found guilty. I just don’t think he has any cards to play in the game at all. And the reason I made some tough parameters is because Jack Smith is truly a shark. He’s not letting go of his prey. So somebody would have to convince Jack Smith that he would be doing a huge service to the country by accepting a guilty plea with strong parameters, and he can probably think some up on his own. At the minimum, Trump needs to donate Mar-a-Lago.
I was thinking the very same thing! Ya think maybe a few days stay at Rice Street would convince him to shut his Pie Hole?? (or, I mean, quit the Truth Social posts, anyway) And, to me, TFG stands for The F'ing Goon, but I like your rendition, also.
Nothing shuts Trump's gob. Nothing convinces him to shut up. I still laugh at Susan Collins' famous assertion that being impeached over the Mueller Report taught him a lesson and would make him change his behavior.
Somehow, conjuring him in Rice Street makes me think that he might shut up. But I think you’re correct in the sense that he would go in an underground way to have an obvious surrogate post for him. It’s always good to have a loyal capo around to do the dirty work (such as Brian suggested: ‘note handing.’
No doubt Meadows is but the first of several defendants to file a "removal" suit, but if Judge Lewis Caplan's ruling in tRump's petition to remove DA Bragg's "hush money" case to federal court is any guide, these boys will fail, and amongst them His Orangeness. Don't know much about federal Judge Steve Jones, who will hear the motions, but if it's important, he's an Obama appointee.
It didn’t work for HR Haldeman but the times have changed and I’ve heard that this request could be honored rather easily. Meadows is either looking for a more favorable jury pool or just to delay things.
Sad, but true since our government is now full of Nazis, and racists. We were told. None of us should be surprised now. Have you looked at the maps the Southern Law Center has created? List all the white hate groups, Nazis, in all the states. So, so, sad. I remember an elderly Jewish woman said we ran from the Nazis and they followed us. She was right. How in the world did our government allow World War II War Criminals into our country without allowing them to go through our Immigration Department? Now, look where we are?
Traitors among us then, traitors among us now.
Why did our government allow a Putin Russian Cyber Security Company to come into the United States to do business? A Trojan Horse. And I thought that was only done in the Biblical days. When will we ever learn?
For what it's worth, the removal to the fed. courts had two strong eras where it was predominantly used. The first was in the 1870's when federal enforcers against Klan activities sometimes became threatened and turned to violence and self-divorce (and sometimes when they attempted to enforce voting rights legislation within states.) Another time that I am aware of was during the era of prohibition when treasury agents often "needed" to resort to violence against illegal distillers. States thought they should be able to prosecute government agents for murder. There were also several cases during the 70's I have read where states and the military argued over whether the military or state could prosecute drug violations of military personnel.
Ms. Vance is probably much more versed than I, but she alludes to the idea that sometimes prosecutors don't quite know there might be a right to remove certain acts from state to federal jurisdiction.
What I have noticed, in the court cases on this issue that I have read, is that usually there seems to be a violation of state law that the state would normally prosecute but the government official violates the state law during the commission of attempting to enforce a federal statute. . While a lot of what Meadows participation in the alleged conspiracy are normal duties of a chief of staff, without reading the indictment over right now, I believe Meadows is a participate any many overt acts to further the conspiracy, but I believe if my recollection he is only charged with two violations of a statute, and at least one relates to his personal trip to Georgia which may sometimes occur, I do not believe can be described as a routine duty of the chief of staff. Outside of that, the overt acts that he participates in to pressure state officials to "change" the vote could never be seen as being "official duties." So I will defer to Andrew Weissmann and Ms. Vance that there may be more merit to Mr. Meadows case, I suspect they are also correct that his participatory actions and his overt actions not charged really cannot be categorized as normative functions of a chief of staff. I really do not see any arguments for any of the others charged to be able to use this escape route from prosecution except for Trump because none of the others have any official govt role. All of the lawyers and other co-defendants are private individuals or Georgia officials. I don't think Trump could have any appeal here because everything he is being charged with is violating his official role as president, not in fact, acting as a president. Certainly if Meadows appeal fails, Trump has no argument left for appeal. But Eastman, etc. had no official government role and no route to use this method to escape Georgia prosecution. They might argue other jurisdictional issues but the indictment craftily excludes all overt acts that don't actually occur on Georgian soil or in communication with Georgian officials via telephone where the recipients were on Georgian soil. Clark did have a DOJ job, but the DOJ itself contemporaneously rejected his proposals both as beyond the department's function and because he had no department authority or role in even investigating or participating in the issue of voter fraud. He simply was not within his purvey and outside of his role within the dept. Since he never got his promotion and the DOJ and the DOJ officials themselves told him he was acting or attempting to act outside of his official role, they already delegated his role in the conspiracy as not governmental so I do believe a court would even entertain any motion he could bring as a govt official. So I doubt, beyond Trump himself, there will be any other attempts to file a removal suit based on performing their normal govt. duties whether or not Meadows succeeds or not.
I hope it's not important.. I don't want to start doing tfg's work for him by identifying every judge by who appointed them. The media is already sliding into that more and more. We can look at prior rulings for whatever info we need.
The sound I hear is the popping of rivets on the side of the ship of the GOP: Its captain is on the bridge, having steered it into the iceberg. The plates are coming apart. And in Massachusetts, the bankrupt Republican party is suing itself to death: the people in charge are still in fealty to that malevolent captain, and they don't seem to know how to work the lifeboats.
Here's the entire article: "The Massachusetts Republican Party is no stranger to infighting, but this is taking it to a new level.
The former chairman of the Massachusetts GOP and more than 20 current state GOP committee members are suing the party’s new leader and the very panel the committee members sit on, accusing the party of wrongly killing a lawsuit against its own treasurer.
The complicated and circuitous complaint — filed Tuesday by ex-chairman Jim Lyons against his successor, Amy Carnevale — threatens to resurface an internal battle the party had tried to bury months ago. It’s also likely to further inflame the deep-seated divisions snaking through the GOP at a time when it’s trying to fight fewer battles, not more.
The new legal brawl is a complex one.
Lyons, who in January lost his reelection bid as party chair to Carnevale, filed a complaint in Middlesex Superior Court in an attempt to revive a separate lawsuit Lyons had brought last year against party treasurer Patrick Crowley. Lyons had accused Crowley of a “breach of his fiduciary duties,” saying Crowley had frozen the party’s bank account amid a dispute over passage of its budget.
The previous lawsuit hung over the party for months before Carnevale and the state committee, in its first meeting in over a year, voted in June to drop it.
Now, Lyons, former GOP gubernatorial nominee Geoff Diehl, and 21 other state committee members — representing more than one-quarter of the 80-seat body — are asking a judge to consider claims under the original complaint, arguing it was “responsible and just.” Lyons also argues that by moving to drop the original lawsuit against Crowley, Carnevale, too, has forgone “her fiduciary duties to the party.”
By deciding not to pursue the suit, “the MassGOP turned a blind eye to the damages caused by Mr. Crowley’s actions, which principally injures their members and voters by financially undermining themselves,” Lyons wrote in the complaint.
Carnevale said in a phone interview Wednesday she had yet to see the complaint, but criticized it as a “nuisance lawsuit” given the first one has been dismissed. The party’s attorney, Brian Kelly, previously told state committee members that moving ahead with the first lawsuit would take “a lot of time and a lot of money” with little chance of success, Carnevale said.
This new lawsuit “is an attempt to inhibit our ability to move forward,” Carnevale said. “Certainly it does not help with our ability to recruit candidates and run candidates for office and try to instill confidence with the donors we have, to try to turn the page.”
Reached by phone Wednesday, Lyons declined to comment, saying he wasn’t in position to talk. Efforts to reach Diehl, a state committee member who lost last year’s governor’s race to Democrat Maura Healey, were not successful Wednesday afternoon.
Many of the other state committee members listed in the new lawsuit were also plaintiffs in the original suit against Crowley.
The party has for years struggled under dismal election results, weak fund-raising, and internal squabbles.
Not a single Republican currently holds statewide office after former governor Charlie Baker and former lieutenant governor Karyn Polito decided not to run for reelection and finished their second terms in January. The GOP is also a super-minority in the Legislature, where Republicans hold just 28 of the 200 seats between the House and Senate.
Carnevale, a longtime lobbyist, took over a party that was hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, and facing a tangle of lawsuits and campaign finance probes. Party leaders have described her as “fair-minded” and well suited to make good on a pledge to bring the party together.
But fractures remain. At the party’s June meeting, routine discussions over ratifying new members and approving a budget broke down into proxy battles, the Globe reported. One state committee member supportive of Carnevale described it at the time as “utter chaos.”
Now comes the new lawsuit, in which Lyons is asking a judge to impose a permanent injunction “restraining . . . Crowley from any and all actions intending to disrupt the ongoing business affairs of the MassGOP.”
Crowley, who continues to serve as party treasurer, did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday."
well weight. Imagine he called someone else a fat pig the other day. Of course he's deranged which is why he has been indicted by Smith, and I would venture to say Bragg, Chutkan and Willis are not racists (maybe reverse-racists if you believe such a thing exists) but he's certainly the only racists.
I wonder if there are any"reverse-racists" at Rice that might require him to call them sir.
Thank you, Joyce, for laying out the facts and explaining so much about how the law works, what we can anticipate, and what we’re seeing now.
I read the indictment and hope every American will. I wish the so-called Republican politicians cared about our country more than they do about tfg, and would read it with open minds.
The GOP no longer exists and should change its name to reflect who and what they really are.
As you always say, Joyce--we’re in this together. And I’m sure glad you’re here giving us context and helping us understand.
"The GOP no longer exists and should change its name to reflect who and what they really are." Agree. In email discussions with friends, I've taken to abbreviating the party references to RF, for RepubliFascists. Hey, if the shoe fits; and I think this one does.
Regarding Meadows isn’t he sworn to uphold the constitution. He had a constitutional obligation to not follow orders if they were against the law. I remember General Miley responding to Trump that he would follow any order as long as it complied with the law. Thanks Joyce!
Good question. I need to research that. Do officials like press secretaries and chiefs of staff, and white house counsels need to swear an oath of allegiance?
It appears all elected, appointed. or civil workers must swear an oath. No one swears an oath of allegiance to a party, but to the constitution, and in most cases to fulfill the duties of their job.
One thing that federal workers often hear is a career supervisor or political appointee talking about loyalty to the agency or the boss. One purpose of the Oath of Office is to remind federal workers that they do not swear allegiance to a supervisor, an agency, a political appointee, or even to the President. The oath is to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and faithfully execute your duties. The intent is to protect the public from a government that might fall victim to political whims and to provide a North Star – the Constitution – as a source of direction. Other laws have been enacted that support that view. For example, in 1939, Congress passed and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Hatch Act. We call it that today, but the actual name of the law is “An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities.”
So let me ask this; if Drumpf's ego gets in the way and he does NOT surrender by the 25th, is it your opinion that anyone is actually prepared to do anything, or will be get the same hand-wringing "Well we don't want to arrest him and stir up his cultists" that we get from everyone else?
Isn't he still capable of just up and leaving the US for a non-extradition country, or has his passport been seized/he been placed on a watch list and I missed it?
I expect the temptation of being President again and pardoning himself is first and foremost in his mind, but still...
He'll show up - the media exposure is life-blood to him. It'll drive up donations. He won't leave until he sees the police van coming up his driveway. And where the heck is Melania? Triple-checking the pre-nup and looking for property in Slovenia?
The tone of this essay is serious, and if I was one of the Georgia defendants, I’d be trying to minimize my exposure to what is coming at me. It appears that no legal wizard will save any of them. Where does a carnival barker hide? Maybe in a Russian seaside resort, but no Secret Service detail of officers will be along with him for protection. DJT can’t carry many of his cardboard boxes of press clippings and signed sports memorabilia himself. Do Russian valets understand rantings screamed in English? If the former carny President wasn’t such a silly bullying slob, you might actually feel some compassion for him. But, then again......not!
In the bygone days of yore when Giuliani successfully used RICO to prosecute corporations I became a huge fan of RICO as a way to bring down malfeasance. A corporation is certainly an "entity"; if the corporation breaks laws (more than one) it has certainly conspired to do so. I have never been a big fan of regulatory commissions for the very simple, presidents can just bypass or redirect the commissions to favor or disfavor their own policies. While there is a lot of this in most agencies that many realize; nowhere is it more obvious than the back-and-forth enforcements of environmental agencies. I have long felt that congress should pass strong laws of what actions are illegal and make it a crime to violate the standards. I have long felt corporations should be regulated under RICO standards; i.e. legislation that umbrelled all corporate malfeasance as prima facie by the nature of incorporation as regulated by RICO laws.
And even before the public Jan. 6 hearings I felt from what I knew then before the committee made us aware of more of the details of the conspiracy that led to Jan 6 were plentiful enough that the DOJ could have proceeded with RICO charges and there were obviously indications that he had broken several laws while president. Look the idea that if a president does it is not a crime is absurd. If a president does it and it is a crime the president should most definitely be investigated, prosecuted and imprisoned. I also believe that any one in the executive, judiciary or legislative branches who commits any crime that is successfully prosecuted should not face double any maximum time for the said crime. I mean leaders who make, execute, or judicate the law must suffer greater consequences for breaking the law.
So obviously I have been awaiting and applaud Ms. Willis' prosecution via RICO.
One more point, I think presidents should be excluded from pardoning any elected officials or any members of their own administration. There are many valid reasons for both presidents and governors to have pardoning powers, but there is no constitutional reason congress cannot define any limitations on presidential pardons even if they could not eliminate the pardon power altogether. But I cannot see any valid reason for presidents being able to pardon their own appointed officials. I'm sorry, but there is always going to be too much vested interest for that to be acceptable for me to accept it as not somehow unacceptably abusive of the pardoning power.
On whether Trump should be permitted to be out on bail, the fact that he remains so is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the DOJ or New York are not weaponized against him but his and some of his cronies have actually weaponized (in actually, through rhetorical threats, and violent allusions to threats on his own part) that have made them fearful to revoke his bail. No one else would not be sanctioned for having already violated his bail conditions. The problem is, as I see it, is that the more they allow him to "rant" the more precarious the situation becomes of some violent retaliation from those who may be susceptible to his venial proclamations. If they would actually "lock him up" I think it will actually reduce the likelihood of violence. Although I imagine there might be the possibility of some immediate violent response were he put in jail, I think the longer he is able to spout his "deranged" calls for violent retaliation, the greater possibility of potentially inciting unstable responses. He is much more dangerous on bail than he would be in jail., I believe.
The Devil went down to Georgia
He was looking for an election to steal
He was in bind, the vote was way behind, and he was willing to make a deal....
"You play pretty good politics Brad, but to give the devil his due, I bet this toilet of gold against your soul cuz I think I'm better than you...."
Super Sue Sanders, very good one!
The full written transcript is available via Tim Darnell of the ATLANTA NEWS FIRST. You can also listen to most damning parts & clearly hear the words of other Witnesses.
Be certain, that Jack Smith already has probative evidence from all the Participants on the conference call including: Brad Raff ....Ryan Germany, Mark Meadows, Jordan Fuchs, Cleta Mitchell & likely others which may go something like this:
Prosecutor Question: "Mr. Meadows: Did someone hand the President a piece of paper when he told Brad ... "I just want to find Ahh ... [ pregnant pause ] ... 11,780 votes which is 1 more than we have ..."
Mr. Meadows: "Yes, I believe it was unnamed Co-conspirator #6." or "one of his Capos'". ( Hat tip Valere )
Bryan Sean McKown: I break out in laughter, I can't help it, every time I hear that line, because of the very nakedness, the brashness of, "all I need . . . all I want is for you . . . to find . . . 11,780 votes . . . which is one more than I have . . . because . . ."
Many times, I am able to set aside a moment and LAUGH AT the Carnival-Man for the sheer garishness and unintended COMEDY of his Mob-Boss ACT.
Thanks for your commentary.
And Sue Sanders IS Super. Enjoyed her "Devil in Georgia."
And isn't, "...one more than I have..." one (among others) a blatant admission he lost the 2020 election?
YES GJ .... that is why Jack Smith will want to know exactly WHO gave the Mob Boss the exact total 11,780.
YES, it is Admissible as an "Admission Against Interest" and Modis Operandi ... meaning the Perp,'s way of doing things.
It may have been unintended comedy; but I think ‘mob boss’ was intended: ‘don’ Trump and ‘capo’ Meadows.
Carol, Kathy & many Others, thank you & I am greatly relieved other Community members were able to understand my Comment. Think about tfg's infamous call to Brad ... we have all heard it ... what 20 or 30 times? My Trial Attorney ears tell me a lot was going on both sides of that of that conference call ... I should refer to that call as the attack on Brad, the attack on our democracy. As Joyce has said many times, "We are all in this Together".
Also, I would like to thank you for your service as a trial attorney to bring honor to our democracy every day. I know you’re certainly didn’t get rich doing that. I appreciate very much that you shared your thoughts about ‘capo’ (my term) handing the note. My area is educational policy studies (university) and spent a couple of decades on a League of Women Voters board. I’m a geek and very interested in preserving democracy. But as aware as I am of legislative shenanigans, I am completely unaware of what goes on in the courtroom inside. I appreciate very much the image you presented of the note handing. But at the same time, I am shocked at the idea. Maybe Mark Meadows needs to start wearing riot gear. I understand that Trump recently asked associates what they thought Mark Meadows was up to. Shudder about that since ‘the Don’ likes to send warnings. This would really be funny if the threats Donald Trump makes we’re not so frightening. I think we all have collective PTSD from January 6. I indeed am glad we are in this together.
Trial work is not that different from 3 Dimensional Chess. You must use your eyes & use you ears & keep the mouth shut instead of yapping. Must react quickly.
Love your term "capo' I should have used that term. Good one.
Thank you so much. Did you also like ‘don Don’?
He is seeming sooo don/capo
so I call him don Don
You know I did ....👍. I do use "tfg" but, around the House I just call don Don "wreck".
Valere, you may not be a lawyer, but your commentary is often spot on.
I can only thank you to Brad in GA , the Arizona AG and others for doing the right thing.
OMG
Oh, that's good!
These two short (60 seconds) videos will make you laugh. My wife and I couldn’t stop cracking up after seeing them.
Note: Just in case it’s of concern to anyone both videos are on tictoc. Quite honestly I’ve never seen anything on tictoc until my wife showed me the first video a couple of days ago.
https://www.tiktok.com/@sickofthebs50/video/7267379911600475438
https://www.tiktok.com/@sickofthebs50/video/7267008196479569198
ps: you’ll have to click the speaker/ volume icon on the bottom of the video player to hear the sound. It’s just like the one you’ll find on YouTube videos. For some reason the volume is off by default.
EXCELLENT!! Thanks, George!!
clever!
You're good, Sue Sanders! Thank you.
Very good.
Thank you very much for your tireless undaunting comments & explanations for the average reader who is not trained in the law. You bring it home! All the best. Get your rest. As you say, we are in this for the long haul. Our democracy and freedom are at stake, regardless of what the right claims.
Best use of a Substack sub that I've found!
Y'know, "We're all in this together," has struck me toniight as more than a platitude. With Joyce, other sub stacks and the wonderful commenters, the company I keep these days is sterling.
There's Hope! (:
Democracy Labs created this interactive Relationship Map to help keep track of all 19 indictees and the charges against each of them. The map includes text, images, videos and audio of the indictments against them. And you can search for indictees by the charge against them! The map is online and I'm planning to update with new information as it comes out. https://thedemlabs.org/2023/08/15/follow-trumps-georgia-indictments-with-relationship-map-ai-generated-audio-files/
Thanks. Silly, but I love that T looks like a demented beaver.
I had to look and he sure does look like a nasty demented beaver.
Thank you, Deepak! Very comprehensive!
Thank you for sharing with us.
Thanks again Joyce. I don’t think Meadows can be trusted. He’s knee deep in conspiracy and probably as defiant as TFG. He and others in the Republican Party have turned their backs on America and don’t grasp the depths to which they have fallen but we do and 2024 will hold all of them accountable. The fire beneath the flame speaks our truth. We all matter. Hail to our beloved country and all we hold dear. Appreciate your in depth report tonight on the indictments and for your strength to keep at it for all of us. How dear you are 🇺🇸🗽
“Smells like a combination of bologna and body odor” and that’s the least of the misery waiting for him and his gang of co-conspirators.
Over the years as I worked in the movie industry, I spent a few days working in the Atlanta jail, the description of the smells is spot on, it was a horrible place to have to spend any time, and a fitting home for our criminal class. I fully expect that when some of the indicted get a look at one of the rest stops, on their way to their future home, they will have second thoughts about a plea deal.
Dick, I produced a film inside a Louisiana jail, and when our stand-in for a prisoner in an orange jumpsuit failed to appear, I put on the jumpsuit. Let me tell you, when the cell door clanked shut, that trapped feeling was very uncomfortable! Even though I consciously knew I only had to stand in the cell for a few takes, my body didn't and the smell of fear drenched me!
I'm not going to be forgetting that description any time soon!
I worked at the Main Jail in FTLD as a Charge Nurse for a while. Joyce’s description is on point. The smell in GP is unlike anything I have ever smelt and could not adequately describe.
So very richly earned!
Remember that in a free society, the cruelest punishment is the deprivation of liberty. The food, the smells, the crowding, are the punishments of losing your freedom and having to live in what a reluctant state grudgingly offers those who have squandered their natural rights.
I'd love to see That Fooking Guy doing pre-trial detention in that Rice Street jail. With his bugaboos about "ickiness" it would really mess him up.
TC: And, no diet Cokes nor pure caffeine available.
And, don't forget about the fast food deliveries. Make him eat the prison food!
I gotta tell ya, I'm really enjoying just thinking about this. And, finally, can they take his stupid phone away from him???
Yes, D Deakin. there will be no cell phones allowed at the Booking nor at the separate Arraignment on another Day ... nor at any hearing on tfg's violations of Court Orders.
Excellent!
No Adderall either.
Yeah, I was wondering about the Adderall.
I suspect his medications will be re-evaluated once he is incarcerated, and at the very least, a generic will be prescribed. Whatever is cheapest.
That is, if any of his "prescriptions" are legal. I know he takes something for high cholesterol, but I doubt he should be taking something like Adderall at his age.
Not uncommon anymore.
Brian, this may have an obvious answer - but as a lay person to the courts until having Joyce’s column, do you think Mark Meadows is requesting a federal court trial because if he is convicted, he will have a chance at a country club prison? Sorry if this is such a basic question for you or anyone. It just occurred to me that he wants to escape the Georgia jail. And I know they’re all considered innocent. My nature is to plan ahead, so I’m just wondering. This might be an obvious answer to attorneys. And I appreciate very much you’re answering because I know how busy Joyce is.
The reason his lawyers are seeking removal is that the federal district court draws jurors from some very conservative counties in addition to Fulton County. Fulton County only draws jurors from Fulton County and Fulton County is not Trump country. Even though the trial will be in federal court, it will still be the same charges, using the same rules of evidence, prosecuted by the same prosecutor. If Trump is convicted, he will be sentenced under Georgia law to custody in Georgia. But he will not be housed in a regular Georgia prison. I don't know what they will do. I think he could be transferred to a federal facility. But because of security concerns and the needs of the U.S. Secret Service agents guarding him, I think they'll find a house somewhere, surround it was a fence, covered with razor wire, where the agents can reside next door.
Just as a purist, I would like to see him facing a jury from Fulton County. I would like the eyes on him to be those from a population that has been hurt by him. So far as where he goes to prison, if that’s the case, a house with razor wire and high security is best. I think it would be dangerous for him to go into any prison population. I think it would be difficult for the Secret Service - not at all what they signed up for. It would actually be like sending them to prison. He might be in prison in Washington DC first because of Jack Smith’s indictments. In that case, I’d like to see him go to Langley, where he could be guarded by the CIA. I think it would be more secure than any kind of federal prison. I believe he is near implosion. If he still able to make a cognitive decision using higher order reasoning instead of the devolvement fear-based behavior he seems to be entering, I would like to see his attorneys offer Jack Smith a guilty plea tied to conditions that: 1) his public office aspirations are finished; 2) he will not be allowed to use social media in any capacity; 3) he cannot host gatherings of more than 10 people (excluding children under 10 years; 4) he cannot attend gatherings of more than 10 people (nn4) he must deed Mara Largo (free of debts including mortgage) to the U.S. government for use as a veterans hospital for Traumatic Brain Injured soldiers ; 5) he needs to surrender his passport; 6) he must remain under house arrest in New Jersey; 7) register as a felon who can never vote; pay the legal fine for insurrection, cleaning the Capitol, all government court costs; he may not have any communication ever again with any of the co-conspirators, any of his prior staff or any elected official - no matter the level whether city, county, state, federal, foreign leaders or officials; 8) and, finally, he has to accept conditions of parole from a DOJ approved parole officer who will verify whether Trump has
He knows at a deep level that he is cooked and the odds of him going to prison is very high. This gives him a life outside of prison and it’s much more than he deserves (in my view and indeed, I know that he is still innocent until proven guilty. That’s what jack Smith and Joyce want us to say. So I’m making that statement because the terms are conditional on him being found guilty. I just don’t think he has any cards to play in the game at all. And the reason I made some tough parameters is because Jack Smith is truly a shark. He’s not letting go of his prey. So somebody would have to convince Jack Smith that he would be doing a huge service to the country by accepting a guilty plea with strong parameters, and he can probably think some up on his own. At the minimum, Trump needs to donate Mar-a-Lago.
Lock Him Up. Solitary.
Numbers are off para 3) has two parts. And a DOJ parole officer will need to verify compliance with all the conditions.
I was thinking the very same thing! Ya think maybe a few days stay at Rice Street would convince him to shut his Pie Hole?? (or, I mean, quit the Truth Social posts, anyway) And, to me, TFG stands for The F'ing Goon, but I like your rendition, also.
Nothing shuts Trump's gob. Nothing convinces him to shut up. I still laugh at Susan Collins' famous assertion that being impeached over the Mueller Report taught him a lesson and would make him change his behavior.
Somehow, conjuring him in Rice Street makes me think that he might shut up. But I think you’re correct in the sense that he would go in an underground way to have an obvious surrogate post for him. It’s always good to have a loyal capo around to do the dirty work (such as Brian suggested: ‘note handing.’
I don't think he trusts anyone to speak for him, which is why keeping his yap shut is impossible for him. He's a narcissist, after all.
I like yours too.
Awwwww, thanks!
At the very least, make him tour the jail with a stern warning that any more guff and he stays there.
Bologna sandwiches. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
And drinking water out of a baggie!
He can't even drink water out of a glass unless he uses both hands!
No doubt Meadows is but the first of several defendants to file a "removal" suit, but if Judge Lewis Caplan's ruling in tRump's petition to remove DA Bragg's "hush money" case to federal court is any guide, these boys will fail, and amongst them His Orangeness. Don't know much about federal Judge Steve Jones, who will hear the motions, but if it's important, he's an Obama appointee.
Yeah, I don't think Meadow's "job description" included administrative organizing of an anti-government coup.
It didn’t work for HR Haldeman but the times have changed and I’ve heard that this request could be honored rather easily. Meadows is either looking for a more favorable jury pool or just to delay things.
What a sad situation it is that we even have to give consideeration to who appointed a particular judge.
Sad, but true since our government is now full of Nazis, and racists. We were told. None of us should be surprised now. Have you looked at the maps the Southern Law Center has created? List all the white hate groups, Nazis, in all the states. So, so, sad. I remember an elderly Jewish woman said we ran from the Nazis and they followed us. She was right. How in the world did our government allow World War II War Criminals into our country without allowing them to go through our Immigration Department? Now, look where we are?
Traitors among us then, traitors among us now.
Why did our government allow a Putin Russian Cyber Security Company to come into the United States to do business? A Trojan Horse. And I thought that was only done in the Biblical days. When will we ever learn?
WRT "enemies within" that your refer to, I'm reminded of the Pogo cartoon from oh, so many years ago (the 1950s?).
I'm sad to say that we have enemies of America that are Americans.
For what it's worth, the removal to the fed. courts had two strong eras where it was predominantly used. The first was in the 1870's when federal enforcers against Klan activities sometimes became threatened and turned to violence and self-divorce (and sometimes when they attempted to enforce voting rights legislation within states.) Another time that I am aware of was during the era of prohibition when treasury agents often "needed" to resort to violence against illegal distillers. States thought they should be able to prosecute government agents for murder. There were also several cases during the 70's I have read where states and the military argued over whether the military or state could prosecute drug violations of military personnel.
Ms. Vance is probably much more versed than I, but she alludes to the idea that sometimes prosecutors don't quite know there might be a right to remove certain acts from state to federal jurisdiction.
What I have noticed, in the court cases on this issue that I have read, is that usually there seems to be a violation of state law that the state would normally prosecute but the government official violates the state law during the commission of attempting to enforce a federal statute. . While a lot of what Meadows participation in the alleged conspiracy are normal duties of a chief of staff, without reading the indictment over right now, I believe Meadows is a participate any many overt acts to further the conspiracy, but I believe if my recollection he is only charged with two violations of a statute, and at least one relates to his personal trip to Georgia which may sometimes occur, I do not believe can be described as a routine duty of the chief of staff. Outside of that, the overt acts that he participates in to pressure state officials to "change" the vote could never be seen as being "official duties." So I will defer to Andrew Weissmann and Ms. Vance that there may be more merit to Mr. Meadows case, I suspect they are also correct that his participatory actions and his overt actions not charged really cannot be categorized as normative functions of a chief of staff. I really do not see any arguments for any of the others charged to be able to use this escape route from prosecution except for Trump because none of the others have any official govt role. All of the lawyers and other co-defendants are private individuals or Georgia officials. I don't think Trump could have any appeal here because everything he is being charged with is violating his official role as president, not in fact, acting as a president. Certainly if Meadows appeal fails, Trump has no argument left for appeal. But Eastman, etc. had no official government role and no route to use this method to escape Georgia prosecution. They might argue other jurisdictional issues but the indictment craftily excludes all overt acts that don't actually occur on Georgian soil or in communication with Georgian officials via telephone where the recipients were on Georgian soil. Clark did have a DOJ job, but the DOJ itself contemporaneously rejected his proposals both as beyond the department's function and because he had no department authority or role in even investigating or participating in the issue of voter fraud. He simply was not within his purvey and outside of his role within the dept. Since he never got his promotion and the DOJ and the DOJ officials themselves told him he was acting or attempting to act outside of his official role, they already delegated his role in the conspiracy as not governmental so I do believe a court would even entertain any motion he could bring as a govt official. So I doubt, beyond Trump himself, there will be any other attempts to file a removal suit based on performing their normal govt. duties whether or not Meadows succeeds or not.
I’m wondering if Meadows will turn himself in or if he has even another contingency planned?
You mean, he still has his passport, right?
I hope it's not important.. I don't want to start doing tfg's work for him by identifying every judge by who appointed them. The media is already sliding into that more and more. We can look at prior rulings for whatever info we need.
The sound I hear is the popping of rivets on the side of the ship of the GOP: Its captain is on the bridge, having steered it into the iceberg. The plates are coming apart. And in Massachusetts, the bankrupt Republican party is suing itself to death: the people in charge are still in fealty to that malevolent captain, and they don't seem to know how to work the lifeboats.
The ReFascists are suing themselves here in MA? Do you have any links to accounts of that?
Here you are: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/08/16/metro/jim-lyons-amy-carnevale-massgop-geoff-diehl-lawsuit/?p1=BGSearch_Advanced_Results
Thank you but there's a paywall. Would you by any chance be willing to post a relevant paragraph here?
Here's the entire article: "The Massachusetts Republican Party is no stranger to infighting, but this is taking it to a new level.
The former chairman of the Massachusetts GOP and more than 20 current state GOP committee members are suing the party’s new leader and the very panel the committee members sit on, accusing the party of wrongly killing a lawsuit against its own treasurer.
The complicated and circuitous complaint — filed Tuesday by ex-chairman Jim Lyons against his successor, Amy Carnevale — threatens to resurface an internal battle the party had tried to bury months ago. It’s also likely to further inflame the deep-seated divisions snaking through the GOP at a time when it’s trying to fight fewer battles, not more.
The new legal brawl is a complex one.
Lyons, who in January lost his reelection bid as party chair to Carnevale, filed a complaint in Middlesex Superior Court in an attempt to revive a separate lawsuit Lyons had brought last year against party treasurer Patrick Crowley. Lyons had accused Crowley of a “breach of his fiduciary duties,” saying Crowley had frozen the party’s bank account amid a dispute over passage of its budget.
The previous lawsuit hung over the party for months before Carnevale and the state committee, in its first meeting in over a year, voted in June to drop it.
Now, Lyons, former GOP gubernatorial nominee Geoff Diehl, and 21 other state committee members — representing more than one-quarter of the 80-seat body — are asking a judge to consider claims under the original complaint, arguing it was “responsible and just.” Lyons also argues that by moving to drop the original lawsuit against Crowley, Carnevale, too, has forgone “her fiduciary duties to the party.”
By deciding not to pursue the suit, “the MassGOP turned a blind eye to the damages caused by Mr. Crowley’s actions, which principally injures their members and voters by financially undermining themselves,” Lyons wrote in the complaint.
Carnevale said in a phone interview Wednesday she had yet to see the complaint, but criticized it as a “nuisance lawsuit” given the first one has been dismissed. The party’s attorney, Brian Kelly, previously told state committee members that moving ahead with the first lawsuit would take “a lot of time and a lot of money” with little chance of success, Carnevale said.
This new lawsuit “is an attempt to inhibit our ability to move forward,” Carnevale said. “Certainly it does not help with our ability to recruit candidates and run candidates for office and try to instill confidence with the donors we have, to try to turn the page.”
Reached by phone Wednesday, Lyons declined to comment, saying he wasn’t in position to talk. Efforts to reach Diehl, a state committee member who lost last year’s governor’s race to Democrat Maura Healey, were not successful Wednesday afternoon.
Many of the other state committee members listed in the new lawsuit were also plaintiffs in the original suit against Crowley.
The party has for years struggled under dismal election results, weak fund-raising, and internal squabbles.
Not a single Republican currently holds statewide office after former governor Charlie Baker and former lieutenant governor Karyn Polito decided not to run for reelection and finished their second terms in January. The GOP is also a super-minority in the Legislature, where Republicans hold just 28 of the 200 seats between the House and Senate.
Carnevale, a longtime lobbyist, took over a party that was hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, and facing a tangle of lawsuits and campaign finance probes. Party leaders have described her as “fair-minded” and well suited to make good on a pledge to bring the party together.
But fractures remain. At the party’s June meeting, routine discussions over ratifying new members and approving a budget broke down into proxy battles, the Globe reported. One state committee member supportive of Carnevale described it at the time as “utter chaos.”
Now comes the new lawsuit, in which Lyons is asking a judge to impose a permanent injunction “restraining . . . Crowley from any and all actions intending to disrupt the ongoing business affairs of the MassGOP.”
Crowley, who continues to serve as party treasurer, did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday."
Thank you. What a mess.
Yes, well it's probably in part a result of having such a moribund GOP here in MA. A strong and ethical two-party system works best, I think.
I wish I could like 1,000 times, but only allowed one.
Thanks very much Rev. Judith
It couldn't happen to a more deserving group. May the ship sink quickly, obliterating all aboard.
Genius example.
Along with Trump’s mug shot, hope they post his height and weight.
Yes! glad I didn't have anything in my mouth!
hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Poetic justice!
well weight. Imagine he called someone else a fat pig the other day. Of course he's deranged which is why he has been indicted by Smith, and I would venture to say Bragg, Chutkan and Willis are not racists (maybe reverse-racists if you believe such a thing exists) but he's certainly the only racists.
I wonder if there are any"reverse-racists" at Rice that might require him to call them sir.
Yes, please!
Thank you, Joyce, for laying out the facts and explaining so much about how the law works, what we can anticipate, and what we’re seeing now.
I read the indictment and hope every American will. I wish the so-called Republican politicians cared about our country more than they do about tfg, and would read it with open minds.
The GOP no longer exists and should change its name to reflect who and what they really are.
As you always say, Joyce--we’re in this together. And I’m sure glad you’re here giving us context and helping us understand.
"The GOP no longer exists and should change its name to reflect who and what they really are." Agree. In email discussions with friends, I've taken to abbreviating the party references to RF, for RepubliFascists. Hey, if the shoe fits; and I think this one does.
Or ReFascists
Regarding Meadows isn’t he sworn to uphold the constitution. He had a constitutional obligation to not follow orders if they were against the law. I remember General Miley responding to Trump that he would follow any order as long as it complied with the law. Thanks Joyce!
Good question. I need to research that. Do officials like press secretaries and chiefs of staff, and white house counsels need to swear an oath of allegiance?
It appears all elected, appointed. or civil workers must swear an oath. No one swears an oath of allegiance to a party, but to the constitution, and in most cases to fulfill the duties of their job.
One thing that federal workers often hear is a career supervisor or political appointee talking about loyalty to the agency or the boss. One purpose of the Oath of Office is to remind federal workers that they do not swear allegiance to a supervisor, an agency, a political appointee, or even to the President. The oath is to support and defend the U.S. Constitution and faithfully execute your duties. The intent is to protect the public from a government that might fall victim to political whims and to provide a North Star – the Constitution – as a source of direction. Other laws have been enacted that support that view. For example, in 1939, Congress passed and President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Hatch Act. We call it that today, but the actual name of the law is “An Act to Prevent Pernicious Political Activities.”
source: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/commentary/2019/10/the-oath-of-office-and-what-it-means/
So let me ask this; if Drumpf's ego gets in the way and he does NOT surrender by the 25th, is it your opinion that anyone is actually prepared to do anything, or will be get the same hand-wringing "Well we don't want to arrest him and stir up his cultists" that we get from everyone else?
Isn't he still capable of just up and leaving the US for a non-extradition country, or has his passport been seized/he been placed on a watch list and I missed it?
I expect the temptation of being President again and pardoning himself is first and foremost in his mind, but still...
He'll show up - the media exposure is life-blood to him. It'll drive up donations. He won't leave until he sees the police van coming up his driveway. And where the heck is Melania? Triple-checking the pre-nup and looking for property in Slovenia?
Well on her way to Hell I hope.
The tone of this essay is serious, and if I was one of the Georgia defendants, I’d be trying to minimize my exposure to what is coming at me. It appears that no legal wizard will save any of them. Where does a carnival barker hide? Maybe in a Russian seaside resort, but no Secret Service detail of officers will be along with him for protection. DJT can’t carry many of his cardboard boxes of press clippings and signed sports memorabilia himself. Do Russian valets understand rantings screamed in English? If the former carny President wasn’t such a silly bullying slob, you might actually feel some compassion for him. But, then again......not!
If Trumpchik defects to Russia, does he still get Secret Service protection, or do we contract with FSB?
In the bygone days of yore when Giuliani successfully used RICO to prosecute corporations I became a huge fan of RICO as a way to bring down malfeasance. A corporation is certainly an "entity"; if the corporation breaks laws (more than one) it has certainly conspired to do so. I have never been a big fan of regulatory commissions for the very simple, presidents can just bypass or redirect the commissions to favor or disfavor their own policies. While there is a lot of this in most agencies that many realize; nowhere is it more obvious than the back-and-forth enforcements of environmental agencies. I have long felt that congress should pass strong laws of what actions are illegal and make it a crime to violate the standards. I have long felt corporations should be regulated under RICO standards; i.e. legislation that umbrelled all corporate malfeasance as prima facie by the nature of incorporation as regulated by RICO laws.
And even before the public Jan. 6 hearings I felt from what I knew then before the committee made us aware of more of the details of the conspiracy that led to Jan 6 were plentiful enough that the DOJ could have proceeded with RICO charges and there were obviously indications that he had broken several laws while president. Look the idea that if a president does it is not a crime is absurd. If a president does it and it is a crime the president should most definitely be investigated, prosecuted and imprisoned. I also believe that any one in the executive, judiciary or legislative branches who commits any crime that is successfully prosecuted should not face double any maximum time for the said crime. I mean leaders who make, execute, or judicate the law must suffer greater consequences for breaking the law.
So obviously I have been awaiting and applaud Ms. Willis' prosecution via RICO.
One more point, I think presidents should be excluded from pardoning any elected officials or any members of their own administration. There are many valid reasons for both presidents and governors to have pardoning powers, but there is no constitutional reason congress cannot define any limitations on presidential pardons even if they could not eliminate the pardon power altogether. But I cannot see any valid reason for presidents being able to pardon their own appointed officials. I'm sorry, but there is always going to be too much vested interest for that to be acceptable for me to accept it as not somehow unacceptably abusive of the pardoning power.
On whether Trump should be permitted to be out on bail, the fact that he remains so is proof beyond reasonable doubt that the DOJ or New York are not weaponized against him but his and some of his cronies have actually weaponized (in actually, through rhetorical threats, and violent allusions to threats on his own part) that have made them fearful to revoke his bail. No one else would not be sanctioned for having already violated his bail conditions. The problem is, as I see it, is that the more they allow him to "rant" the more precarious the situation becomes of some violent retaliation from those who may be susceptible to his venial proclamations. If they would actually "lock him up" I think it will actually reduce the likelihood of violence. Although I imagine there might be the possibility of some immediate violent response were he put in jail, I think the longer he is able to spout his "deranged" calls for violent retaliation, the greater possibility of potentially inciting unstable responses. He is much more dangerous on bail than he would be in jail., I believe.
Finally! ... maybe, we hope!