The Jan. 6 Investigation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trump lost a big one today:
Judge says Trump could be culpable for January 6 and says lawsuits against the former President can proceed

Civil lawsuits seeking to hold Donald Trump accountable for the January 6, 2021, insurrection can move forward in court, a federal judge said Friday in a ruling outlining how the former President could conceivably be responsible for inciting the attack on the US Capitol.

Trump's statements to his supporters before the riot "is the essence of civil conspiracy," Judge Amit Mehta wrote in a 112-page opinion, because Trump spoke about himself and rallygoers working "towards a common goal" of fighting and walking down Pennsylvania Avenue.
"The President's January 6 Rally Speech can reasonably be viewed as a call for collective action," Mehta said.

Democratic members of the House and police officers who defended the US Capitol on January 6 sued Trump last year, claiming he prompted his supporters to attack. Friday, Mehta wrote that the three lawsuits could move to the evidence-gathering phase and toward a trial -- a major loss in court for Trump.
"To deny a President immunity from civil damages is no small step. The court well understands the gravity of its decision. But the alleged facts of this case are without precedent," Mehta wrote.

"After all, the President's actions here do not relate to his duties of faithfully executing the laws, conducting foreign affairs, commanding the armed forces, or managing the Executive Branch," Mehta added. "They entirely concern his efforts to remain in office for a second term. These are unofficial acts, so the separation-of-powers concerns that justify the President's broad immunity are not present here."
Click to expand...

While he homed in on Trump's legal liability, the judge ruled in favor of three close allies to Trump who also spoke at the rally on January 6 -- his attorney Rudy Giuliani, his son Donald Trump Jr. and Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, saying he would dismiss the claims against them.
Click to expand...
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/18/politics/trump-giuliani-swalwell-january-6-lawsuit/index.html
 
Stacyhs said:
Trump lost a big one today:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/18/politics/trump-giuliani-swalwell-january-6-lawsuit/index.html
Click to expand...

This is huge. I could see any number of people who could now go after him

Members of the Capitol Police and their families
Members of the DC Metro Police and their families
Journalists who were attacked
Congressional staffers
Even the people who have been arrested and now face charges

Trump could literally face the rest of his life in multiple simultaneous litigation.

To quote a well known fast food slogan...
TrumpRonaldMc.jpg


"I'm lovin' it!"​
 
RecoveringYuppy said:
Some of these people are already going after him. That's what this ruling is for. The judge is ruling on lawsuits already filed.
Click to expand...

I mean, there could be people other than those already filed. So far, only Rep. Eric Swalwell, Rep Bennie Thompson (Jan. 6 Committee Chairman), and Capitol Police officers have filed. Nothing yet from DC Metro or any of the journalists who were attacked.

A number of the Capitol rioters have claimed in their defences that they were "following their President's instructions". I don't think any of them have filed a lawsuit yet, but this decision opens the door for them because they certainly have standing to do so.
 
The Supreme Court has declined to take up Trump's fight to keep documents from the J6 Committee. This means Trump has no further recourse to keep documents from them. Looks like his stacking the SC with right wingers isn't going exactly the way he expected. I mean, where is their loyalty to him? :rolleyes:
 
Stacyhs said:
The Supreme Court has declined to take up Trump's fight to keep documents from the J6 Committee. This means Trump has no further recourse to keep documents from them. Looks like his stacking the SC with right wingers isn't going exactly the way he expected. I mean, where is their loyalty to him? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yup.. its going to be tough blaming "Obama Judges" for this.
 
I know it's way too much to hope that one of those new judges will turn out to be another Earl Warren, but maybe a little of that is seeping in.

For those too young to remember, Earl Warren was a lifelong Republican, a former governor of California, a running mate of Dewey against Truman, a failed nomination rival of Eisenhower. When Eisenhower became president, he appointed Warren to the Supreme Court (hoping some say, to get him out of the way), and, like a modern-day Becket, it seems, he found a gravitas he hadn't displayed much of before, becoming the bane of the conservatives who had put him there.

So far it seems the court is more dedicated to undoing his legacy, but one can vainly hope that there's still a little bit of a ghost of Warren rattling around the chambers.
 
bruto said:
I know it's way too much to hope that one of those new judges will turn out to be another Earl Warren, but maybe a little of that is seeping in.

For those too young to remember, Earl Warren was a lifelong Republican, a former governor of California, a running mate of Dewey against Truman, a failed nomination rival of Eisenhower. When Eisenhower became president, he appointed Warren to the Supreme Court (hoping some say, to get him out of the way), and, like a modern-day Becket, it seems, he found a gravitas he hadn't displayed much of before, becoming the bane of the conservatives who had put him there.

So far it seems the court is more dedicated to undoing his legacy, but one can vainly hope that there's still a little bit of a ghost of Warren rattling around the chambers.
Click to expand...

The Republicans of Warren's time are not on the same planet as today's GOP. Today we have Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavenaugh, etc.
 
bruto said:
I know it's way too much to hope that one of those new judges will turn out to be another Earl Warren, but maybe a little of that is seeping in.

For those too young to remember, Earl Warren was a lifelong Republican, a former governor of California, a running mate of Dewey against Truman, a failed nomination rival of Eisenhower. When Eisenhower became president, he appointed Warren to the Supreme Court (hoping some say, to get him out of the way), and, like a modern-day Becket, it seems, he found a gravitas he hadn't displayed much of before, becoming the bane of the conservatives who had put him there.

So far it seems the court is more dedicated to undoing his legacy, but one can vainly hope that there's still a little bit of a ghost of Warren rattling around the chambers.
Click to expand...


This would be the Warren Commission guy of course.
 
Stacyhs said:
The Supreme Court has declined to take up Trump's fight to keep documents from the J6 Committee. This means Trump has no further recourse to keep documents from them. Looks like his stacking the SC with right wingers isn't going exactly the way he expected. I mean, where is their loyalty to him? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Already demonstrated plenty well in the clear bias shown towards the Trump Administration compared to the Biden Administration. That they're not being utterly sycophantic towards Trump likely has much more to do with the fact that they have little to fear from him and they know it, on top of trying to leave a fig leaf for Republican propagandists to work with in their fight to prevent Democrats from actually doing anything to fix the SC or counter the Federalist Society's long-term efforts to politicize and subvert the SC.
 
Last edited:
Jan. 6 committee subpoenas six more Trump lawyers involved in effort to stop certification of Biden’s election win: Cleta Mitchell, Christina Bobb, Kurt Olsen, Katherine Freiss, Phillip Kline, Kenneth Chesebro
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom