Nobody really knows what is meant by "officer of the government." It might include the president. It might not. A president occupies a unique position under the Constitution.
Basically what the judge did was punt the issue to the appellate court.
The judge found that Trump incited an insurrection (a finding of fact) but didn't find that he was an officer of the federal government (a matter of law).
The Third Section of the Fourteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution after the Civil War to keep former Confederates out of the government.
The idea was to prevent backsliding.
It didn't work because, by the late 1890s, the government and Supreme Court were stuffed full of Confederate sympathizers who rolled back the advances made during Reconstruction and gave us racial segregation.
You can keep out the insurrectionists but not the insurrection sympathizers.
@SummerDay@Teri_Kanefield if a court rules that the Commander in Chief of the armed forces doesn’t hold a military office, I’ll join you in saying things are illogical. 🖖🏼
I've never practiced in New York, but I think it's safe to say this is a slam dunk in the Loser Department.
Complaint #1: The court, in newsletters, linked to articles that the Trumps think are unflattering to them. (I have no idea what this is about. It's pages 3-4)
They include pictures to show that the clerk is "co-judging" the case.
From the brief:
"As these photographs reflect, the Principal Law Clerk is given unprecedented and inappropriate latitude. Indeed, before the Court rules on most issues, the Court either pauses to consult with her on the bench or receives from her contemporaneous written notes."
As evidence that everyone, even people who don't like Trump, thinks it is biased, they quote the National Review.😂
"GOP strategists urge congressional candidates to campaign against a national abortion ban"
"Disturbed by tough election losses on Tuesday, Republicans say the party needs to make clear to voters, in speeches and TV ads, that it doesn't favor banning all abortions."
Their idea: Say the GOP is for "reasonable limits on late-term abortions" as opposed to Dems' "taxpayer-funded abortion without limits.”🙄
Someone asked me what I think is going on with Trump's lawyers attacking the clerk.
Yesterday I said this:
"It's hard to tell what is going on with that. My best guess is that Trump's lawyers are fatigued, know they are losing, and are getting weird and paranoid."
Judge Engoron, who sees it all up close, said there is misogyny.
I just saw a picture of the clerk and I have revised my opinion.
Someone asked: "I've read suspicions that they are trying to provoke the judge and get some grounds for a later mistrial. What's your thought on that?"
That won't work. I spent 12 years writing appeals for people who lost their trials, so I can speak with confidence when I say provoking a judge doesn't get you a mistrial. Kise knows that.
Provoking a judge makes you look bad in front of appellate judges, most of whom were trial judges and are generally in sympathy with the judge.
@Teri_Kanefield Even if it is constitutional, I am reminded of the old tradition that only one person on a ship can be called "captain", regardless of rank.
This is also one reason we quickly amended the Constitution to stop putting the runner-up as VP. It only takes a moment's thought and a little experience with...people like Jordan, to see the obvious outcomes in a moment of crisis.
And if such moment fails to happen by chance, surely it will be nudged along.
I guess he forgot that on November 14, 2020, he named Powell as a member of his "truly great team" of "wonderful lawyers."
Not that it matters. She doesn't have to be his lawyer to be a witness against him.
I would have thought, instead, he would have tried to claim any communication she had with him was privileged. He loves trying to invoke attorney-client privilege.
I said I'd get back to US law and politics, but it all seems trivial right now.
Biden's speech earlier was top notch. I attached a snippet.
Also, from recent reporting:
"The Biden administration is now coordinating with other countries on a plan that would offer safe passage out of Gaza for civilians who risk getting caught in the crossfire in the densely populated coastal enclave, administration officials said."
I gather Trump's lawyer, Alina Habba, is presenting Trump's "They're Out To Get Me" defense.
It won't work, of course.
It also cynically assumes that everyone (or lots of people). commit fraud and poor Trump is the one being picked on by the government.
"If they get me for defrauding the government out of a billion dollars they can do it to you! They're not after me. They're after you! I'm just standing in their way!"
SCOTUS, minus a recused Clarence Thomas, rejected Eastman's attempt to challenge the lower court's rulings that described him as a linchpin in former President Donald Trump’s bid to subvert the 2020 election.
That means the finding that he likely committed crimes stands.
It looks like he got a nice deal in exchange for truthful testimony:
"Hall agreed to testify truthfully when called, to five years probation, a $5,000 fine, 200 hours of community service and a ban on polling and election administration-related activities. He also recorded a statement for prosecutors and pledged to pen a letter of apology to Georgia voters."
And, as per the article, Yes, Definitely a victory for the prosecutors.
@Teri_Kanefield He's appealing and suing the judge, right? I guess that will delay any consequences for a while.
Though perhaps his creditors might start calling loans immediately while there are still assets to grab, and I don't think appeals would hold them off, but I don't know.