Court rules "more likely than not" that Trump conspired to commt a crime with Eastman

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Court rules "more likely than not" that Trump conspired to commt a crime with Eastman

In a ruling released today, the court ordered that 91 of the 101 documents withheld from Congress by John Eastman must be turned over to the Jan 6 committee.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.260.0.pdf

While many of the documents were ruled as to not being covered by work privilege the court had to rule on whether the remaining 11 were protected by attorney client privilege or whether that privilege could be breached because they were produced in the furtherance of a crime.

The court reaches two conclusions that stand out.

After determining that obstructing the Joint Session of Congress was clearly a crime the court states:

Based on the evidence, the Court finds it more likely than not that President Trump
corruptly attempted to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on January 6, 2021.

And then in the determination of whether there was a conspiracy to obstruct Congress the court states:

Based on the evidence, the Court finds that it is more likely than not that President
Trump and Dr. Eastman dishonestly conspired to obstruct the Joint Session of Congress on
January 6, 2021.

While the standard of more likely than not is not a standard used to convict anyone in the US. It is a standard used to indict people.
Does this court ruling move us closer to an indictment of those pushing to have Pence overturn the election? It certainly raises some questions.

 

[martin]

If he was trying for his personal benefit to interfere in the process of certifying the election how could he not have acted corruptly?

 

[archives]

And now it will be appealed, delayed, postponed, appealed again, and if the GOP takes the House in November as expected, dropped in place of new lawsuits against Hunter. At this point, unless somewhere along the line actual charges are filed against any of these individuals none of it means anything

The Committee’s job is to put forth a iron clad final report to put infront of the American public, they will be the jury, and to deliver to the Justice Dept for review, all these other lengthened legalities at this point aren’t going anywhere

 

[anatta]

ROFL....this is it!!

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

ROFL....this is it!!

It is a pretty major ruling. A court has ruled that a sitting President more likely than not conspired to commit a felony. But it seems you don't want to discuss that fact.

 

[Grokmaster]

In a ruling released today, the court ordered that 91 of the 101 documents withheld from Congress by John Eastman must be turned over to the Jan 6 committee.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.260.0.pdf

While many of the documents were ruled as to not being covered by work privilege the court had to rule on whether the remaining 11 were protected by attorney client privilege or whether that privilege could be breached because they were produced in the furtherance of a crime.

The court reaches two conclusions that stand out.

After determining that obstructing the Joint Session of Congress was clearly a crime the court states:


And then in the determination of whether there was a conspiracy to obstruct Congress the court states:


While the standard of more likely than not is not a standard used to convict anyone in the US. It is a standard used to indict people.
Does this court ruling move us closer to an indictment of those pushing to have Pence overturn the election? It certainly raises some questions.

From one of the most reversed Federal courts in the country. BFD.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

From one of the most reversed Federal courts in the country. BFD.

Appeals courts don't overturn findings of fact. They can only overturn whether the documents should be turned over to the committee. That would require an error in the law, not an error of fact.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

It is a pretty major ruling. A court has ruled that a sitting President more likely than not conspired to commit a felony. But it seems you don't want to discuss that fact.

lol....no, is not a major ruling.....all it does is allow a prosecutor to use a document.......he still has to prove it amounts to more than a mole hill.....

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Appeals courts don't overturn findings of fact. They can only overturn whether the documents should be turned over to the committee. That would require an error in the law, not an error of fact.

actually that is not true....cases can be overturned on the basis of an error of fact as well as error of law......it is just that the standard of review is different........the appeal court has to determine no reasonable person would have concluded the basis of the decision was a fact.......it is much easier to prove that the wrong law was applied.....

 

[McRocket]

Trump is a manchild.

But when he is convicted and sentenced for something...then I will give a shit.

This obsession with Trump is even more ridiculous than the right's obsession with Biden.

You both need to get hobbies...DESPERATELY.

 

[BartenderElite]

ROFL....this is it!!

Just like "Da Russians," anatta. Just like "Da Russians."

 

[BidenPresident]

Trump is a manchild.

But when he is convicted and sentenced for something...then I will give a shit.

This obsession with Trump is even more ridiculous than the right's obsession with Biden.

You both need to get hobbies...DESPERATELY.

You support treason? Violent overthrow of the government? That is what Trump did.

 

[BartenderElite]

Trump is a manchild.

But when he is convicted and sentenced for something...then I will give a shit.

This obsession with Trump is even more ridiculous than the right's obsession with Biden.

You both need to get hobbies...DESPERATELY.

I am very focused on Trump - not sure if I'd call it an obsession.

But someone w/ his power & millions of followers, who wants to end the republic? It's worthy of attention, and concern.

 

[McRocket]

You support treason? Violent overthrow of the government? That is what Trump did.

I support innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Not by a bunch of salivating politicians claiming Trump is the Devil.

Until Trump has been convicted IN A COURT OF LAW of the things you claim he did...he is innocent of them in my opinion.

Can you not find something else to do with this paranoid hatred you have for the man?
Sheesh!!!

 

[BidenPresident]

I am very focused on Trump - not sure if I'd call it an obsession.

But someone w/ his power & millions of followers, who wants to end the republic? It's worthy of attention, and concern.

Well said. Fully agree.

 

[McRocket]

I am very focused on Trump - not sure if I'd call it an obsession.

But someone w/ his power & millions of followers, who wants to end the republic? It's worthy of attention, and concern.

Fine.
Knock yourself out.
And I was not talking to you.

I will let the courts handle it and NOT pass judgement until they have done their jobs.

And, IMO, a judge saying that 'more likely than not' is pathetic.
Either a person is guilty or innocent or shut your fucking mouth you dumbass judge.

 

[BidenPresident]

Can you not find something else to do with this paranoid hatred you have for the man?!

^^^ Another Trump cock sucker.

 

[Grokmaster]

In a ruling released today, the court ordered that 91 of the 101 documents withheld from Congress by John Eastman must be turned over to the Jan 6 committee.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840/gov.uscourts.cacd.841840.260.0.pdf

While many of the documents were ruled as to not being covered by work privilege the court had to rule on whether the remaining 11 were protected by attorney client privilege or whether that privilege could be breached because they were produced in the furtherance of a crime.

The court reaches two conclusions that stand out.

After determining that obstructing the Joint Session of Congress was clearly a crime the court states:


And then in the determination of whether there was a conspiracy to obstruct Congress the court states:


While the standard of more likely than not is not a standard used to convict anyone in the US. It is a standard used to indict people.
Does this court ruling move us closer to an indictment of those pushing to have Pence overturn the election? It certainly raises some questions.

IOW, we now have LEFTIDIOT, CALIFORNIA FEDERAL JUDGES ISSUING COMPLETE AND TOTAL SPECULATION FROM THE BENCH.

MEANWHILE , THE NY PROSECUTOR IS DROPPING THEIR "WITCH HUNT"..AFTER YEARS AND YEARS OF FAILURE.

WHAT A CROCK OF CRAP...AS THE AMERICAN LEFT HAS COMPLETED IS TOTAL TRANFORMATION INTO THE KEYSTONE COPS....


THIS WILL BE ANOTHER COMIC BOOK CATASTROPHE FOR THE STALINIST BUFFOONS...JUST LIKE THE NEW YORK SHENANIGANS....

 

[McRocket]

^^^ Another Trump cock sucker.

Bye troll.


Btw - I have never voted Dem or Rep in my life.

 

[BidenPresident]

Bye troll.


Btw - I have never voted Dem or Rep in my life.

Makes sense. You are a nothing.