Here’s an article you don’t need a subscription for.
FBI Search and Seizure at Trump's Mar-A-Lago Residence, August 8, 2022, Case Dismissed July 15, 2024
Thanks. 
This is a big piece for DOJ. A witness in the room where it happened.
I was STUNNED. This is huge.
If I understand correctly, the type of immunity he has only means his testimony can’t be used against him. If the government has other evidence to what he testifies about, they can still charge him. He would need transactional immunity to be in the clear from prosecution.
What happens to him if he lies or says he doesn’t recall? Perjury charges and a trial of his own? That could drag out forever.
Will it actually make any difference whatsoever if Patel gets in front of the Grand Jury and testifies something like:
“Donald Trump explicitly told me on (date) to ignore the subpoena to return documents, and to hide them. He told me he intended on selling these documents to the highest foreign bidder.”
I mean, it won’t change anyone’s mind - Republicans will just throw Patel under the bus and he’ll be subject to death threats.
This a reverse of the game that Trump always plays, throw a lot of shit against the wall (or ketchup) and see what sticks. Overload them with attacks from multiple venues in order to throw them off balance. Keep changing the conversation on him. I just hope that Garland doesn’t forget to go in for the kill or fuck it up when he does so.
None of us will know what he says to the grand jury, if he testifies against the Slobfather and other witnesses back him up, conviction should be a slam dunk. I assume if he clams up now, the deal goes away.
If he clams up now he goes to jail until he un-clams. Civil contempt.
Also I think it’s wrong to think of this as a deal between Patel and DOJ. It looks like DOJ wants to ask him questions in front of a grand jury, but they know he’ll just come in and plead the fifth, so they immunized him to take away that option. This could have happened without even talking to him.
What I think is going to happen is that he’ll show up to the grand jury, maybe after some legal wrangling to try and fail to get out of it, and then he’ll lie his ass off. That’s who he is. Then he’s on the hook for obstruction or similar. He’s immune from prosecution for telling the truth. He’s not immune from the consequences of lying.
Then DOJ will have real leverage on him to get him give up something on Trump.
That’s a fair and true observation.
I just learned tonight that Patel is a former US Attorney. He knows what’s at stake and what he’ll face if he lies. He doesn’t strike me as very Paul Manafort-ey. I think DOJ may already have sufficient leverage on him.
Here’s a question for the legal types…
Can he take advantage of this immunity and just confess every crime he ever committed as soon as they ask him a question?
I’m sure there’s something to stop this, judges being notorious buzz kills, but I’m unfamiliar with the process.
In this case, it would just mean they couldn’t use his confessions as evidence against him.
They way I understand it, if he admitted to carjacking someone last week, they couldn’t use that against him. However, they could show last week’s carjacking victim a picture of him and use their positive ID as probable cause.
ETA, this is what the WSJ article said:
The immunity grant leaves the government only able to charge Mr. Patel, if at all, using information obtained independently of his immunized testimony.
Whether or not they could use a hypothetical admission as a jumping off point to gather independently obtained evidence, I guess I don’t know. If this doesn’t cross it already, I assume there’s a line where it starts turning into illegal search and seizure.
I recall the term “immunity bath” from the Iran-Contra hearings. My impression was that if you spilled enough beans, prosecutors couldn’t touch you.
So the more he admits to, the more he’s immunized from? That’s a helluva incentive to spill every bean.
Your impression is I believe the impression that they want to give future witnesses asked to testify in future crimes. What good would it do to take an immunity offer if you saw in the past the goverment got “picky” on how they chose to apply it and sentenced people to jail time after they testified.
That wouldn’t work unless they had independent evidence that Patel did the carjacking. Any and all info he gave up under immunity is off-limits, and defense attorneys are quite good at making the connections for a judge to disallow stuff like that.
I don’t think Patel is going to give anything up. He’ll just answer every question with “I don’t recall” instead of invoking the 5th.
Were I a betting man, I’d put money on him straight up lying as opposed to just deflecting. It’s his nature and he thinks he’ll get away with it.
The sad part is that he might be right.
You might be right, but the one bet that’s a sure thing is that he’s not going to give Trump up.
Sometimes when people hear that a crony has been granted immunity in a case like this, they mistakenly assume that this is something they asked for, a sign that they are cooperating. It totally isn’t. The same thing happened with Weisselberg.
Oh, I don’t know. Weisselberg wasn’t facing 20+ years for a potential obstruction charge. Plus Weisselberg has given up plenty on the Trump Organization, if not against Trump himself.
“I don’t recall” isn’t the Magic Eight Ball Bullet Proof answer many think it is, either. There are ways to pierce this tactic:
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/when-can-i-say-i-dont-recall-in-testimony/