Yep. This is all because of the republicans’ efforts to slow down the process of justice. Now we just need a blue wave in November to ensure trump gets the sentence he deserves.
The Government’s motion for immunity determinations presents a compelling case against Donald Trump’s assertion of presidential immunity for his actions related to the 2020 election. Their strongest arguments hinge on the following points:
1. **Premeditation and Private Motive:** The document paints a picture of a premeditated scheme orchestrated by Trump as a candidate, not as President. His pre-election rhetoric laying the groundwork for false claims of fraud (p. 5), coupled with his post-election disregard for facts and advisors’ warnings (p. 10), strongly suggests a private motive of retaining power, not a public-spirited execution of presidential duties. This is reinforced by the evidence that Trump only contacted Republican officials in states he lost (p. 126), further highlighting the partisan, campaign-related nature of his actions.
2. **Systematic Pressure Campaign:** The detailed accounts of Trump’s pressure campaigns targeting both state officials and Pence (pp. 17-46, 59-73) demonstrate a calculated and persistent effort to subvert the electoral process. The narrative is strengthened by the inclusion of specific examples, like the “ninth inning” analogy used in the call with Arizona Governor Ducey (p. 17) and Trump’s angry reaction to Raffensperger’s refusal to “find” votes (p. 30). These accounts, corroborated by contemporaneous documentation and witness testimony, are difficult to dismiss as simply legitimate presidential inquiries.
3. **Trump’s Knowledge of Falsehoods:** The document convincingly argues that Trump knew his fraud claims were baseless. He persisted in making them even after being repeatedly informed by his own advisors, including Pence, that they were false (p. 10). This undermines his defense that he genuinely believed the election was stolen and was acting in good faith as President to address those concerns. The repeated shifting of numbers in his fraud allegations (p. 15) further reinforces the impression that he was knowingly fabricating claims.
4. **Fake Elector Scheme as Obstruction:**Â The Government’s detailed reconstruction of the fake elector scheme (p. 48) reveals its inherently obstructive nature. The memos by co-conspirator CC5, the covert communications between campaign staff, and the deliberate effort to mislead the participating electors all point to a criminal conspiracy, not an exercise of presidential authority. The Government convincingly links this scheme directly to Trump’s pressure campaign on Pence, creating a unified narrative of obstruction.
5. **Focus on the 2:24 p.m. Tweet:** The Government’s analysis of the 2:24 p.m. Tweet attacking Pence (p. 80) is particularly compelling. They successfully contextualize the Tweet within a timeline of events, demonstrating that Trump sent it while watching the riot unfold, after Pence had definitively refused to comply with his demands, and after his advisors had pleaded with him to intervene and stop the violence. This paints a picture of a desperate candidate inciting violence to achieve his private goals, not a President acting to protect national interests.
6. **Targeting Pence’s Specific Role:** The Government effectively uses the Supreme Court’s narrow definition of “official conduct” regarding Pence to their advantage. They argue that Trump’s efforts were not aimed at generally advising Pence on his duties as Vice President, but specifically at pressuring him to abuse his ministerial role in the certification process—a process in which the Executive Branch has no legitimate involvement (p. 90). This weakens Trump’s claim to immunity, as it disconnects his actions from any legitimate presidential authority.
7. **Unofficial Nature of Public Communications:**Â The analysis of Trump’s public speeches and Tweets (pp. 115-144) effectively demonstrates their partisan, campaign-related nature. By comparing the language, content, and context of these communications with those made in official settings, the Government effectively argues that Trump was speaking as a candidate seeking re-election, not as a President addressing the nation. The comparison between the twitter realDonaldTrump, twitter POTUS45 and twitter whitehouse accounts (p. 129) further underscores this point.
By meticulously documenting Trump’s actions and carefully applying the Supreme Court’s framework, the Government has built a strong case that his efforts to overturn the election were private and criminal, not entitled to the shield of presidential immunity. The strength of their argument lies in the sheer weight of evidence, the detailed narrative, and the effective use of context to demonstrate Trump’s private motives and disregard for legal and constitutional boundaries.
tkmorgan76 on
Not to mention that every Republican on the Sureme Court seems hell-bent on the idea that a former president must be tried in the court of public opinion first.
I personally think criminals should be tried in a court of law, but if we’re doing it this way then let’s see the evidence!
6 Comments
Link to original post (Nitter instance):
https://nitter.poast.org/Tactelller/status/1841590810716078374#m
And we should already have justice
Yep. This is all because of the republicans’ efforts to slow down the process of justice. Now we just need a blue wave in November to ensure trump gets the sentence he deserves.
Eyes on the prize, vote blue, my friends
https://democrats.org/
One more important point::
Republicans knew ALL the criminality, corruption and the conman, yet they made him their candidate anyway.
The Republican Party have no one to blame but themselves.
https://preview.redd.it/pcs9p41rbetd1.png?width=630&format=png&auto=webp&s=bf3dc3ba03bf32a5e824bc9498bbb9603f7f36eb
[https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25182558/smith-immunity-brief.pdf](https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25182558/smith-immunity-brief.pdf)
The Government’s motion for immunity determinations presents a compelling case against Donald Trump’s assertion of presidential immunity for his actions related to the 2020 election. Their strongest arguments hinge on the following points:
1. **Premeditation and Private Motive:** The document paints a picture of a premeditated scheme orchestrated by Trump as a candidate, not as President. His pre-election rhetoric laying the groundwork for false claims of fraud (p. 5), coupled with his post-election disregard for facts and advisors’ warnings (p. 10), strongly suggests a private motive of retaining power, not a public-spirited execution of presidential duties. This is reinforced by the evidence that Trump only contacted Republican officials in states he lost (p. 126), further highlighting the partisan, campaign-related nature of his actions.
2. **Systematic Pressure Campaign:** The detailed accounts of Trump’s pressure campaigns targeting both state officials and Pence (pp. 17-46, 59-73) demonstrate a calculated and persistent effort to subvert the electoral process. The narrative is strengthened by the inclusion of specific examples, like the “ninth inning” analogy used in the call with Arizona Governor Ducey (p. 17) and Trump’s angry reaction to Raffensperger’s refusal to “find” votes (p. 30). These accounts, corroborated by contemporaneous documentation and witness testimony, are difficult to dismiss as simply legitimate presidential inquiries.
3. **Trump’s Knowledge of Falsehoods:** The document convincingly argues that Trump knew his fraud claims were baseless. He persisted in making them even after being repeatedly informed by his own advisors, including Pence, that they were false (p. 10). This undermines his defense that he genuinely believed the election was stolen and was acting in good faith as President to address those concerns. The repeated shifting of numbers in his fraud allegations (p. 15) further reinforces the impression that he was knowingly fabricating claims.
4. **Fake Elector Scheme as Obstruction:**Â The Government’s detailed reconstruction of the fake elector scheme (p. 48) reveals its inherently obstructive nature. The memos by co-conspirator CC5, the covert communications between campaign staff, and the deliberate effort to mislead the participating electors all point to a criminal conspiracy, not an exercise of presidential authority. The Government convincingly links this scheme directly to Trump’s pressure campaign on Pence, creating a unified narrative of obstruction.
5. **Focus on the 2:24 p.m. Tweet:** The Government’s analysis of the 2:24 p.m. Tweet attacking Pence (p. 80) is particularly compelling. They successfully contextualize the Tweet within a timeline of events, demonstrating that Trump sent it while watching the riot unfold, after Pence had definitively refused to comply with his demands, and after his advisors had pleaded with him to intervene and stop the violence. This paints a picture of a desperate candidate inciting violence to achieve his private goals, not a President acting to protect national interests.
6. **Targeting Pence’s Specific Role:** The Government effectively uses the Supreme Court’s narrow definition of “official conduct” regarding Pence to their advantage. They argue that Trump’s efforts were not aimed at generally advising Pence on his duties as Vice President, but specifically at pressuring him to abuse his ministerial role in the certification process—a process in which the Executive Branch has no legitimate involvement (p. 90). This weakens Trump’s claim to immunity, as it disconnects his actions from any legitimate presidential authority.
7. **Unofficial Nature of Public Communications:**Â The analysis of Trump’s public speeches and Tweets (pp. 115-144) effectively demonstrates their partisan, campaign-related nature. By comparing the language, content, and context of these communications with those made in official settings, the Government effectively argues that Trump was speaking as a candidate seeking re-election, not as a President addressing the nation. The comparison between the twitter realDonaldTrump, twitter POTUS45 and twitter whitehouse accounts (p. 129) further underscores this point.
By meticulously documenting Trump’s actions and carefully applying the Supreme Court’s framework, the Government has built a strong case that his efforts to overturn the election were private and criminal, not entitled to the shield of presidential immunity. The strength of their argument lies in the sheer weight of evidence, the detailed narrative, and the effective use of context to demonstrate Trump’s private motives and disregard for legal and constitutional boundaries.
Not to mention that every Republican on the Sureme Court seems hell-bent on the idea that a former president must be tried in the court of public opinion first.
I personally think criminals should be tried in a court of law, but if we’re doing it this way then let’s see the evidence!