Trump slammed by another judge / now he may have been part of a fraudulent conspiracy

Obviously a radical commie America hating liberal commie who eats children as a side gig.

 

New Eastman emails unearthed 'straightforward crime' by Trump: CNN legal analyst (msn.com)

The particularly impactful part, argued Litman, was where the judge accused the former president of signing off on statements about supposed voter fraud in the election that he knew were lies.

"Further into the writing of Judge David Carter," said anchor Bianna Golodryga. "Here is what he wrote. 'The emails show that President Trump knew that the specific numbers of voter fraud were wrong but continued to tout those numbers.' And here's the point I'd like to highlight and get your thoughts on: "Both in court and to the public. The Court finds that these emails are sufficiently related to and in furtherance of a conspiracy to defraud the United States.' How consequential are these words and findings by this judge, and specifically that it was not just Trump's comments in public, but in court?"

"You zero in on it exactly, Bianna," said Litman. "We know, of course, it's no news that Trump would be lying in the public, but in the court, that is a crime and a straightforward one. So in March, when he made this finding that kind of brought the world in this case, it was much more amorphous and about an overall fraud that he might have been a party to."
......................................
"This says flat-out, he signed, because for this lawsuit, there were a couple times he knew what he had to sign was false," said Litman. "It's something the DOJ will sit up and take notice of immediately ... they would otherwise be considering a freestanding charge of lying to the court."

 

I stopped reading it at California...

So judges are now doing the work of prosecutors? No standing? Not their purview?

 

Because you have a distinct inability to judge facts on their own merit. Ad hominem is a way of life for you. It's so sad.

 

I have little doubt Trump knew everything that was going on. Did he specifically encourage the violence? I don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me if he knew it was going to happen. But also think it would be tough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. We're talking about a man who doesn't use email and doesn't allow people around him to take notes, etc. Also, listening to Maggie Haberman's book right now has reminded me just how many jams Trump has managed to navigate out of in his career.

 

DT was claiming attorney/client privilege. The privilege is lost when the communications are in furtherance of a crime. The judge was tasked with determining if the emails were such. He ruled that these emails re: the documents DT signed for submittal of the suit were in the furtherance of a crime and therefore not privileged. That is the exact task he was assigned to do.

 

What prosecutorial work is the judge usurping from the prosecution? He ruled on a motion filed with the court that certain emails should be protected by executive privilege. Should prosecutors and not judges now issue rulings on motions filed by parties?

Tell me you don’t know how the judicial system works without saying you don’t know how the judicial system works.

 

Do you think the SCOTUS will agree with that opinion?

 

yes, except they will not even agree to hear it

 

I have no idea, but it will go to the appeals court (not SCOTUS) first, and whether they ultimately choose to hear it (or not, which would be my guess) doesn’t mean the district court judge usurped prosecutorial powers, which was your initial assertion.

 

Love it when attorneys discuss a topic. I learn new words like usurped.