If Corcoran was unwittingly part of the cover up, why wouldn't he sign the affidavit himself instead of getting Bobb to do it? She's got bus tire tracks on her back.
It’s a common question. Somehow Bobb got herself acting as what’s called “The Custodian of Record” on this matter, which is someone who supposedly knows where all the documents are and can answer questions about it. I can see Corcoran saying, “Yeah, Ms. Bobb, why don’t we make that you. It’s really just a procedural thing…”
I heard a podcast say that Smith is in his Oprah phase. I had no idea what that meant until he said "YOU get a subpoena, YOU get a subpoena and YOU get a subpoena!" I then got it and think it's hilarious. I hope that eventually means "YOU get to go to jail, YOU get to go to jail and TRUMP goes to jail-finally!"
Forget about the prison time. Forget about the monetary fines. Just disbar each one and spread their shameful actions from every mountaintop. Make certain that they get a mention in history books about this period as the most shameful Americans. And while we are at it, take away their citizenship.
I’m all for disbarment! We see it happening in lots of cases now, from Giuliani to Eastman to Powell. Hope there are some real consequences for the lawyers.
When will all these "unprecedented" legal gyrations designed to evade prosecution finally result in some actual charges and convictions? Regardless of other charges that may sometimes be more difficult to prove in court,*trump's modus operandi - and not merely a "pattern" - in every case that bears his stamp involves lying, deceit, abusing others, and obstruction of justice, all for clearly selfish motives. Why is this so difficult to prove, and why does he continue to get away with it after all these years? Why is he not in prison, if for no other crime, then at least for this?
It would be foolish for us to pretend that everyone gets equal treatment under the law. We aren’t all ex-presidents, so we don’t have claims of executive privilege. We aren’t grifters who took in hundreds of millions, so we don’t have armies of lawyers. We aren’t the head of a major political party so we don’t have senators and congressmembers interfering or saving our asses. We didn’t have an entire prior Justice Department under a corrupt AG blocking investigations and muddying the waters intentionally.
All of this is to say, this is a VERY hard case to win, not on the facts and evidence, but on the politics. Every move is being scrutinized and is subject now to “Congressional oversight.” Extremist MAGA followers are prepared to take up arms, terrorize, and cause another January 6 if necessary. An indictment is likely to raise him up in the eyes of his followers and make him even more powerful than before.
There can’t be room for error, and we need to get a jury of 12 people in a divided country to convict him. Failure to win a conviction will only embolden and strengthen him more. We are in very perilous and unprecedented times, so if it takes a bit longer even than Watergate (which took 2 years before indictments) then I’m okay with that. Accountability is a process, not just a result, in my mind.
Thank you for that very thoughtful and perfectly expressed response, Jay. You are right, of course, but that's exactly why we're all so frustrated. We believe in justice and that justice should be blind to all those unfair factors. Yet here we are, and there he is in Mar A Lago, plotting his comeback and revenge instead of packing up for prison.
Found a typo, Jay. Under "Is Smith likely to succeed against Corcoran?" First paragraph, third sentence, 'so' instead of 'some.' Great column, though. Thanks for explaining it all so clearly.
I get it. It's easy to fall into the trap of reading what ought to be there instead of what is. It's all about managing expectations. As it is with everything.
It's almost as if, under the circumstances, the exception should be attorney-client privilege, and the presumed state should default to crime-fraud, whenever they spectre of a Trump attorney is raised...
One part confuses me. If trump didn't tell Corcoran that all documents were recovered, there's no attorney client privilege. Corcoran is on the hook for the falsity. BUT--if trump told Corcoran to tell the DOJ they were all recovered, didn't trump waive the privilege by telling Corcoran to tell a third party?
I've been retired long enough to have forgotten the fine points of the privilege.
Didn’t know there were guidelines for determining “preponderance of the evidence” one being “greater than 50 percent.” Not sure where Corcoran lands, but the Criminal in Chief has stunning ability to bring out the worst in people and engage them to become criminals themselves. Like “when you’re a star they help you do it.”
Corcoran can take the fifth though, correct, even if the crime fraud exception applies and he has to testify? That would provide a catch-22, it can't be used against him, but he doesn't have to answer questions? That would be his way out, and Trump and Bob's too (though signing a false document would still be an issue for Bob).
Appreciate this clear analysis of what may be happening with tRUmp’s attorneys.
Also: “Trump’s faint brain waves.” 😂😉
I can’t help myself sometimes.
Don’t stop helping yourself Jay. I enjoy it so much!
My thoughts exactly, Sharon! Jay, thank you.
If Corcoran was unwittingly part of the cover up, why wouldn't he sign the affidavit himself instead of getting Bobb to do it? She's got bus tire tracks on her back.
It’s a common question. Somehow Bobb got herself acting as what’s called “The Custodian of Record” on this matter, which is someone who supposedly knows where all the documents are and can answer questions about it. I can see Corcoran saying, “Yeah, Ms. Bobb, why don’t we make that you. It’s really just a procedural thing…”
Exactly.
I heard a podcast say that Smith is in his Oprah phase. I had no idea what that meant until he said "YOU get a subpoena, YOU get a subpoena and YOU get a subpoena!" I then got it and think it's hilarious. I hope that eventually means "YOU get to go to jail, YOU get to go to jail and TRUMP goes to jail-finally!"
From your lips to the grand jury’s ears.
Forget about the prison time. Forget about the monetary fines. Just disbar each one and spread their shameful actions from every mountaintop. Make certain that they get a mention in history books about this period as the most shameful Americans. And while we are at it, take away their citizenship.
I’m all for disbarment! We see it happening in lots of cases now, from Giuliani to Eastman to Powell. Hope there are some real consequences for the lawyers.
I was thinking a red "T" branded on their foreheads would be fitting.
I so enjoy your input on these legal issues! It also nice to realize that Jack has got some brass balls! Woo hoo.
Let is hope that justice prevails.
When will all these "unprecedented" legal gyrations designed to evade prosecution finally result in some actual charges and convictions? Regardless of other charges that may sometimes be more difficult to prove in court,*trump's modus operandi - and not merely a "pattern" - in every case that bears his stamp involves lying, deceit, abusing others, and obstruction of justice, all for clearly selfish motives. Why is this so difficult to prove, and why does he continue to get away with it after all these years? Why is he not in prison, if for no other crime, then at least for this?
It would be foolish for us to pretend that everyone gets equal treatment under the law. We aren’t all ex-presidents, so we don’t have claims of executive privilege. We aren’t grifters who took in hundreds of millions, so we don’t have armies of lawyers. We aren’t the head of a major political party so we don’t have senators and congressmembers interfering or saving our asses. We didn’t have an entire prior Justice Department under a corrupt AG blocking investigations and muddying the waters intentionally.
All of this is to say, this is a VERY hard case to win, not on the facts and evidence, but on the politics. Every move is being scrutinized and is subject now to “Congressional oversight.” Extremist MAGA followers are prepared to take up arms, terrorize, and cause another January 6 if necessary. An indictment is likely to raise him up in the eyes of his followers and make him even more powerful than before.
There can’t be room for error, and we need to get a jury of 12 people in a divided country to convict him. Failure to win a conviction will only embolden and strengthen him more. We are in very perilous and unprecedented times, so if it takes a bit longer even than Watergate (which took 2 years before indictments) then I’m okay with that. Accountability is a process, not just a result, in my mind.
Thank you for that very thoughtful and perfectly expressed response, Jay. You are right, of course, but that's exactly why we're all so frustrated. We believe in justice and that justice should be blind to all those unfair factors. Yet here we are, and there he is in Mar A Lago, plotting his comeback and revenge instead of packing up for prison.
tRump has trained his minions well. 'Lie, deny, and demand proof.'
Well, there actually IS proof, so maybe he didn't. *looks for popcorn*
Found a typo, Jay. Under "Is Smith likely to succeed against Corcoran?" First paragraph, third sentence, 'so' instead of 'some.' Great column, though. Thanks for explaining it all so clearly.
My proofreader hates it when I make changes after she has proofed the article, and this is why!
I get it. It's easy to fall into the trap of reading what ought to be there instead of what is. It's all about managing expectations. As it is with everything.
Thank you for the very helpful analysis. So much swampiness . . . (Remember when Cheetolini claimed he was going to "drain the swamp"?? . . .).
It's almost as if, under the circumstances, the exception should be attorney-client privilege, and the presumed state should default to crime-fraud, whenever they spectre of a Trump attorney is raised...
One part confuses me. If trump didn't tell Corcoran that all documents were recovered, there's no attorney client privilege. Corcoran is on the hook for the falsity. BUT--if trump told Corcoran to tell the DOJ they were all recovered, didn't trump waive the privilege by telling Corcoran to tell a third party?
I've been retired long enough to have forgotten the fine points of the privilege.
Thank you for making this all easy to understand.
Didn’t know there were guidelines for determining “preponderance of the evidence” one being “greater than 50 percent.” Not sure where Corcoran lands, but the Criminal in Chief has stunning ability to bring out the worst in people and engage them to become criminals themselves. Like “when you’re a star they help you do it.”
Corcoran can take the fifth though, correct, even if the crime fraud exception applies and he has to testify? That would provide a catch-22, it can't be used against him, but he doesn't have to answer questions? That would be his way out, and Trump and Bob's too (though signing a false document would still be an issue for Bob).
Can you explain why no charges are being made against Matt Gaetz for sex trafficking underage girls?