Strong Minds and Bravery. Trump's "Crimes against America" - Judge Luttig

Trump 4th indictment but whose counting?

I’ve got some real resistance to being sad that this is happening to a former president. It’s my firm opinion Trump had no qualifications for the office of president and he occupied it under false pretenses. It’s clear on how he handled so much, denying the voices of both other elected officials and appointed ones such as Dr. Fauci working in the interest of the public. Republicans are deluded. They have turned themselves into pretzels defending the indefensible. They got the White House with Trump and spent four years trying to protect us from him (so some said) and in the end failed miserably. I’m elated we may be at the beginning of positive change.

Judge Luttig has surfaced as a voice of the once Republican Party clarity and the clarity of an American patriot who although retired, held a government job as judge. John Eastman recently indicted in Georgia was a clerk for Luttig. I cannot say what the Judge thinks about this now. I hope he mentions it one day. A voice also at the Jan 6 Hearings the Judge is speaking here about the Jan 6 related indictments of Smith Luttig holds GOP’s feet to the fire in their support of Trump. The wind in his sails so to speak. However his general sentiment about the Georgia case would likely be somewhat similar since the components of the cases overlap in some facts. The Judge and his cronies are pretty much begging for fast litigation, ASAP, naming the Smith pick of January 2, 2024 for trial. Luttig speaks here about those indictments and the culpability of Republican surrounding Trump.

Trump’s presence in the White House was as an interloper. His first media op was with Russians in the oval. He gathered “with me or ‘agin’ me” lists from the beginning. Daughter and son in law holding sway without elected or properly appointed jobs. Daughter to be a calming influence. Son in law to bring the illusive peace deal to the Middle East. Dial it back to the day. We were lit by gas from the beginning. Weak minds and strong, both fell in line as asked. We went to the field and cut a switch. We brought it back and were summarily beaten and told to expect more. ok. We remember. We shielded ourselves in a variety of ways. Some watched and went nuts or changed to flow with it all. Some watched and made notes. Fani Willis made notes and her notes are ready as are Jack Smith’s.

Ms. Willis brings us nineteen defendants. An organization dedicated to one crime. Committing crimes and non criminal acts in furtherance of their goals. Daily. Over and over. Repetition of the crimes, gaslighting those seeking the crimes doens’t change the facts.

The crimes in Georgia are also bringing to light a pattern of behavior from the beginning of the 45th presidency. Behavior that insured more people would be likely to comply as they were asked to break the law. Do this, sign that, “just in case”, “trust the plan”, “don’t you trust the boss?”. Goya beans anyone?

One at the top making the decisions? One who gathered the others? A band of criminals. A rummy of ruin. Gray hairs gone gutsy? Or a man who gathered others through oaths, promises, and intimidation to give him unchecked power. Nineteen seems way too few generally but with luck we will do better.

Perils of Pauline is where we find ourselves. Our country has been bound up and laid on the tracks. The danger is being screamed from the roofs and too many are unconcerned. I no longer will speak to them in my writing or in my thoughts. All that one needs to do in our time is to acknowledge the peril and understand who the players are to be on the side of the equation that fosters life. It’s simple. Just watch Fani.

Read the incitements or not. Understand the legal wordy stuff that leads to the verdict? Dismantle it all. If you like. You don’t have to to understand it. The more you see though, the more clear it is. Clear as Fani defending her state, her citizens from criminality and the assault of the 45th President of the Untied States. He was in office as he lied, intimidated others to lie about the election making demands to keep him in office. To be clear, the sitting president demanded to stay seated as he was voted out. We all played that awful game with chairs. Musical chairs. He didn’t learn then, he’s not going to learn now, right Senator “I think he’s learned his lesson”. “They” became to embarrassed to trot her out to say her line after a while.

People tried to sound the alarm. We pulled one with Muller and then Barr put out the passion with bold lies we challenged but he was believed (and why?) as he swayed in front of camera and was thoughtful and waffled and wavered into Trumps waiting lap. We were all molded and changed by voices not real an real mixed on social media demanding again the impossible be true and the true be seen as invisible and the contested election that was not supported with facts will be challenged again and again and again. What should not be difficult but appears to be difficult is the clear line in the sand. Make it red if it pleases you. Fani has found it and I say, let’s all stand behind this woman.

Judge Luttig has gotten together with some other very well respected folks in the legal profession. They all agree the case Smith has brought against Trump in, what I think of as the “Jan 6” case, needs to happen in a very timely way for the health of the country. It’s paramount to understanding if, if, if, if he’s given the nomination etc, to foster understanding to vote for the *^%# or someone else. Again, this is a legal doc, but it’s short. Standout is on page 7. Here is the meat and potatoes below.

Notwithstanding his claims to the contrary, it is indisputable that the former president lost the 2020 president election by a vote of the American people and that the incumbent president, Joseph Biden, won that election, as countless authorities have universally concluded. See, e.g., John Danforth et al., Lost Not Stolen: The Conservative Case that Trump Lost and Biden Won the 2020 Presidential Election (July 2022) (comprehensively reviewing cases), https://lostnotstolen.org/download/378. Nor does the First Amendment protect the former president’s unlawful scheme to subvert the democratic process of the 2020 presidential election. As Justice Antonin Scalia explained, “[m]any long established criminal proscriptions—such as laws against conspiracy, incitement, and solicitation—criminalize speech (commercial or not) that is intended to induce or commence illegal activities” because such requests are “undeserving of First Amendment protection.” United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285, 298 (2008).

And any claim that the defendant relied on the advice of counsel in pursuing his course of conduct is of a type that is frequently litigated and can be addressed in the forthcoming trial. See United States v. West, 392 F.3d 450, 457 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (“A defendant may avail himself of an advice of counsel defense only where he makes a complete disclosure to counsel, seeks advice as

7

to the legality of the contemplated action, is advised that the action is legal, and relies on that advice in good faith.”).

As a matter of law, there is no serious question that the Vice President of the United States did not have the power under either the Constitution or the laws of the United States to refuse to count certain of the electoral votes, to recognize the false electoral votes of the defeated candidate, to adjourn or delay the January 6 meeting of Congress, or to refer the election to state legislatures to overturn the lawfully certified choice of their voters. See Eastman v. Thomson, et al., Case No. 8:22-cv00099-DOC-DFM (C.D.C.A. Mar. 28, 2022) (“The illegality of the plan was obvious.”). See also Matthew A. Seligman, The Vice President’s Non-Existent Unilateral Power to Reject Electoral Votes (Oct. 11, 2021), available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract_id=3939020. In all events, this Court can accommodate any unexpected or complicated legal issues if and when they arise, because the Speedy Trial Act separately excludes “delay resulting from any pretrial motion, from the filing of the motion through the conclusion of the hearing on, or other prompt disposition of, such motion.” 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(1)(D). Federal law fully anticipates and accounts for the realities of even this historic case.

The legitimate interests of the former president, the United States government, and the American public overwhelmingly favor proceeding with a prompt trial of the former president in accordance with the government’s proposed schedule and trial date.

Rachael Maddow by design or great stroke of luck had Hilary Clinton on her show which aired directly after Fani Willis’s presentation of the Georgia indictment. It’s here in full.

The reasons to vote haven’t changed. We must vote because our democracy depends on it. Indeed the changes we need to make to respond to the evermore urgent call of climate demand we vote with a small number of driving motivations -

a Women’s right to choose. Pretty much anything and everything without the melding of politicians.

b Democracy or Autocracy. Socialism is not on the menu of choices. Nor is Communism.

c Climate. Love it or leave it. Spoiler, neither the moon nor Mars are oxygen compliant.

Vote. Get others to vote too. Send them back to whatever state they live in while claiming to represent another. There’s more than one.

Thanks for being here.