Indictment Watch - Mark Meadows' Shocking Trial Gambit
Aug 30, 2023
auto_awesome
Norm Eisen, former Obama Ethics Czar, joins the podcast to unpack Mark Meadows' shocking trial strategy of moving the case to federal court. They discuss conflicts in scheduling, frustrations with lack of investigation, and the need for full acknowledgment. The episode also explores the potential for individuals to flip and cooperate with the prosecution.
Mark Meadows is seeking to move his trial from state to federal court to gain legal advantages, but his testimony also exposes him to additional criminal exposure.
Scheduling conflicts between different trials and events require coordination between courts and parties to ensure fairness and adherence to legal obligations.
State criminal cases against individuals involved in the alleged conspiracy provide insurance against potential federal pardons and aim to hold Trump's accomplices accountable.
Deep dives
Mark Meadows Testifies in Fulton County Trial
Mark Meadows takes the stand in the Fulton County election subversion trial, testifying about his job at the White House and his attempts to overturn the 2020 election result. The testimony seeks to establish that Meadows' actions were part of his official government duties. His aim is to convince the judge to move the trial from state court to federal court, a more advantageous legal spot for Meadows. However, the testimony also exposes Meadows to additional criminal exposure by admitting his involvement and knowledge of the events after the election. The judge's upcoming decision on removal and immunity claims will have significant implications for Meadows and the other 18 codefendants in the racketeering case.
Challenges of Managing Legal Proceedings Schedule
The scheduling complexities arise due to the overlapping legal issues involving Donald Trump and the potential conflicts with campaign events and other trials. Meadows, for example, faces conflicts between his arraignment in the Fulton County case and depositions in the federal case he filed against Michael Cohen. Similar scheduling conflicts occur throughout the trials, with events like GOP debates, depositions, and primaries overlapping with court appearances. While judges have the authority to manage their dockets and work around these conflicts, the coordination between courts and parties is essential to ensure fairness and adherence to legal obligations.
Importance of Holding Trump Accountable in State Cases
The cases brought by Fannie Willis, Alvin Bragg, and Jack Smith play a crucial role in holding Donald Trump accountable for his actions related to the 2020 election. These cases focus on state criminal violations, providing insurance against potential federal pardons. Even if the trials are moved to federal court, the state crimes remain outside the scope of federal presidential pardons. The cases aim to address the larger network of individuals involved in the alleged conspiracy, ensuring that those who aided and abetted Trump face legal consequences as well. The cooperation of potential witnesses, including lawyers like Powell, Eastman, or Giuliani, could further strengthen the prosecution's case.
Jim Jordan's Attempt to Obstruct Investigations
Congressman Jim Jordan's efforts to obstruct investigations into Donald Trump and his associates continue as he targets prosecutors like Fannie Willis and Jack Smith. His recent letter to Willis, seeking internal information and insinuating about the case, is seen as an attempt to interfere with the prosecution's work. Jordan's actions align with the GOP's broader strategy to derail investigations into Trump and his MAGA cohorts. These attempts to block and hinder investigations are aimed at protecting Trump and preventing accountability. However, the strength of the cases and the determination of the prosecutors will ensure that justice prevails.
Likely Flip Candidates and Implications for the Prosecution
The potential for individuals to cooperate and provide testimony against Donald Trump exists, particularly among lawyers involved in the cases. Turning witnesses like Chasbro, Eastman, Powell, or Giuliani, who have federal exposure but are state defendants, would provide valuable insights into the alleged conspiracy. These lawyers are in positions to negotiate deals and testify as tour guides to the conspiracy, helping shed light on Trump's involvement and the network of individuals involved. Their cooperation could strengthen the prosecution's case, potentially leading to convictions and further unraveling the conspiracy.
This week on indictment watch we have my friend, mentor, and moral compass Norm Eisen the former Obama Ethics Czar. Norm’s prescient op/eds for The New York Times have predicted what would happen in all four indictments every step of the way. He joins me today to unpack what happened Monday in Georgia and the likelihood of Meadows and any of the defendants having their cases moved to Federal Court.
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode