I hear Alcatraz is nice. A bit of a fixer-upper, but Trump always likes to give a place his “personal touch.”
The Committee hasn’t recommended that JAG consider charges under the military. They’ve recommended that DOJ pursue charges under the federal criminal laws, which are tried in civil courts, not court martial.
If JAG decides to pursue charges, that would raise the issue whether (a) a CinC is military for the purposes of court-martial jurisdiction and (b) whether a former CinC, out of office for close to two years, is still military.
I don’t know if those questions have ever been asked before, let alone answered.
Yeah.
All those with ‘Trump in an orange jumpsuit’ fantasies are doomed to disappointment. He’ll never see the inside of an actual prison; house arrest is the most we can hope for (though possibly not at Mar-a-Lago; too hard to secure).
I do still cherish dreams of seeing Mark Meadows and Mike Flynn, among others, in orange, I’ll admit. We shall see.
Of the “secondaries”, John Eastman, more than anyone, needs to get oranged out.
ETA: Debatabe if Eastman can even be considered in the same “league” with those others, what with him having been just some shitty law prof and briefly clerked for Justice Thomas.
I really think if we wanna see the ultimate shit show, no jail time, just seizing all his assets. It’ll be a huge display of mental illness when verdict is read.
We can’t have TFG blabbing national secrets to convicted felons. He would need to be separated from other inmates.
You don’t think he’s actually read his stolen documents, do you?
Imagine what a golf course would look like on Alcatraz. Probably be the highest par course in the world. Not to mention a lot of shooting from the rough. One thing for certain: even playing alone, Trump will still cheat on his scorecard.
Headlines, probably. Cover sheet, glanced at it. Actual document, not a chance. He’s waiting for the Illustrated Classics comic book version to simplify it to his level of understanding.
And another lawyer on Team Trump is potentially in trouble.
The Committee report says that the lawyer for one of the witnesses told her to lie:
The lawyer has been identified by CNN as “Stefan Passantino, the top ethics attorney in the Trump White House”.
Mr Passantino has denied the allegation, but has had to take a leave of absence from his law firm:
Aside: “top ethics attorney in the Trump White house.” << snerk >>
More details from the NYT article:
The committee said in its report that a lawyer had advised a client, believed to be Ms. Hutchinson, that she could pretend to not recall certain facts, refrain from discussing facts that cast Mr. Trump in a negative light, and not correct testimony that was untruthful. According to the committee, the lawyer instructed the client about a particular issue that would cast a bad light on Mr. Trump: “No, no, no, no, no. We don’t want to go there. We don’t want to talk about that.”
“The committee has substantial concerns regarding potential efforts to obstruct its investigation, including by certain counsel (some paid by groups connected to the former president) who may have advised clients to provide false or misleading testimony to the committee,” the panel wrote.
It added: “The committee is aware that both the U.S. Department of Justice and the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office have already obtained information relevant to these matters, including from the committee directly. We urge the Department of Justice to examine the facts to discern whether prosecution is warranted.”
In his statement, Mr. Passantino said he “believed Ms. Hutchinson was being truthful and cooperative with the committee throughout the several interview sessions in which I represented her.”
Roll 'em up, then lock 'em up!
He was the only one who could spell “ethics”.
He was either as busy as a one-armed paperhanger with the hives, or just sat there, because no-one was coming to him with ethics concerns.
It’s been written that he is more likely to read something if it mentions him.
Who knows what morsels he may remember from verbal briefings?
Does it count if they were asking him how to avoid doing ethical things? Like asking a beekeeper how to avoid bees?
You, Trump, have the right for Trump to remain silent. Anything Trump says can and will be used against Trump in a court if law. If Trump cannot afford an attorney…
We could start a precedent. All former Presidents convicted of crimes serve their sentences outside the territory of the country. Sort of a Man Without a Country vibe.
Alkatrump?
The nice thing is you don’t have to fix anything substantive. Just a thin veneer of gold paint is all you need.
And a Sharpie to draw a land bridge from San Francisco on his map of the prison.
That’s sort of a real thing in some industries.
For example, I work for a state government agency that enforces workplace safety laws. It’s extremely common to hire a safety compliance inspector, put them through 6 months of training, and then watch them quit so that a private company can hire them on (at much higher pay) so that they can advise them on how to hide their safety violations from inspectors. It’s a real problem and that group has a lot of turnover.
But yes, some places will bring on a person to help them avoid being caught. I could see a person being brought on not to help them be ethical, but show them how to hide ethics violations.
It’s an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth” in real life.