Yet another long-awaited report into President Trump’s 2020 election subversion attempt will be partially released this week.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1448111
Yet another long-awaited report into President Trump’s 2020 election subversion attempt will be partially released this week.
Here’s hoping that all the good parts have not been “redacted.”
Apropos of nothing, there’s a principle that, if an attorney-client discussion involves the lawyer in illegal acts, it isn’t “privileged.” It would make sense if that were applied to so-called “Executive Privilege.”
The term “Modified limited hangout” from the Nixon era comes to mind.
If DA Willis wanted this information embargoed because an indictment is imminent, and the judge sets a release date of Thursday, is it reasonable to conclude that an indictment will be unsealed on Thursday?
One can hope…!
Willis argued at a hearing against the release of the report, and said that her decision on indictments in the case was “imminent.”
The term is “shit or get off the pot”.
If Willis did not want it released she must have her reasons. Hopefully this will not hurt her case by alerting witnesses of everything that has already been learned so they can line up their stories.
Willis argued at a hearing against the release of the report, and said that her decision on indictments in the case was “imminent.”
This hearing was in January. We are now mid February. I dont think “imminent” was the right word choice.
Hope so…litigators want to weigh in?
Here we go.
That sounds promising… 
“Georgia Judge Approves Partial Release Of Trump Big Lie Report .”
“Trump’s Little-Whites and Fibs to be Released Now, Bald-Faced and Whoppers to Come Later.”
Yikes is all I’m really competent to say.
Why would DA Willis not want the grand jury report released?
I would speculate she believes it would be to her disadvantage, implying the grand jury report does not favor prosecution.
United States v. Nixon , also known as the Watergate Scandal, has established that even a President has a legal duty to provide evidence of one’s communications with his aides when the information is relevant to a criminal case. . . . the courts have held that the applicability of the privilege should be decided on a case by case basis by weighing the need for the administration of justice against the need to protect confidentiality.
Am glad that tubby Donnie is being put on the Weber grill even if it causes him to slowly and painfully experience the hot coals.
NBD.
Sizzle, Donnie, sizzle.
Lets get this ball rolling.
She’s not opposed to its eventual release, only its release pending her charging decisions. In that interim, its release would likely provide her targets ample opportunity to fuck with the evidence and straighten out their stories.
I remain unconvinced she has a viable felony charge on Trump (and state RICO is not viable with the very bad Georgia Supreme Court).
The only indictment that mattes is Trump’s. Was Willis trying to hide that the Grand Jury didn’t find Trump’s actions illegal?
I find it hard to believe that pressuring officials to change the vote is not a crime. But who knows they might have found a way of letting him off the hook, like it was just a joke and no damage was done. I find it very hard to believe that Willis will dare indict Trump. The fake electors are probably off the hook as well, what crime could they possible could have committed. Probably those indictments are for those low level officials that gave access to the voting machines to the ninjas.