This week’s news cycle was again dominated by the grand jury’s case against Donald Trump for his attempts to disregard the will of voters and stay in power after the 2020 election. Already we are starting to see indications of legal strategies from the prosecution and former president Trump’s defense. The Justice Department is also pushing for strict evidence review rules to prevent future incendiary public statements that could jeopardize impartiality in the upcoming trial. Meanwhile, we approach another expected indictment, this time in Georgia, over Trump’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election in that state. Lastly, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is embroiled in yet more controversy over gifts and favors from conservative megadonors.
Here’s what you need to know for the weekend:
Main Points for the Weekend:
1. Memo Revelation and Legal Maneuvers Add New Complexity to the Federal Case against Trump
There is no bigger story right now than the grand jury’s criminal case against Donald Trump over his attempt to overturn the 2020 Election. It rightfully has captured the attention of the public, the media, and the political establishment as the issues at hand strike through the heart of our democratic republic system of government. Revelations also are coming out on a daily basis. This week, a new piece of the puzzle emerged: a previously undisclosed internal campaign memo authored by Trump’s lawyer, Kenneth Chesebro. The memo outlines a plan involving false electors, reportedly designed to shift public attention to voter fraud claims. Crucially, Chesebro acknowledges in the memo the audaciousness of the strategy. He also predicts in the memo the Supreme Court would probably reject it, but says they could still cast doubt on the integrity of votes. According to the New York Times, which first reported on the memo, it “had been a missing piece in the public record of how Mr. Trump’s allies developed their strategy to overturn Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory.”
Meanwhile, the Justice Department keeps making important moves. They have urged the imposition of rules around how Donald Trump and his legal team discuss evidence during the evidence review process. As part of this proceeding, they have expressed public worry about Trump’s propensity to make public pronouncements about matters that are not supposed to be public, and therefore have suggested a protection order. Concurrently, we learned this week that a search warrant was granted early this year for Trump’s now-inactive Twitter account to uncover more information for the case. Lastly, Judge Chutkan rejected Trump’s latest attempt to delay the case.
- Top point to make: Amid all legal maneuvering, we should not lose sight of what is most important here: that a fair trial be allowed to proceed quickly and peacefully. Trump’s track record of openly sharing sensitive information regarding legal matters on social media raises concerns about the first point: fairness. Revealing evidence has the potential to influence the trial’s course and public perception. In that light, implementing a protective order to safeguard the integrity of the evidence and proceedings seems prudent. Trump’s request to delay the trial, meanwhile, works against the second point: a prompt trial. Delaying proceedings could risk dampening public confidence in the justice system and prolonging the uncertainty surrounding the case. In the interest of transparency, expediency, and upholding the integrity of the legal process, the judge was wise to advance the trial without unnecessary delays.
- If you read one thing: AP, 8/10/23, Indictment shows White House lawyers struggling for control as Trump fought to overturn election: A few hours after rioters laid siege to the Capitol, overpowering police in a violent attack on the seat of American democracy on Jan. 6, 2021, the White House’s top lawyer, Pat Cipollone, called his boss with an urgent message. It’s time to end your objections to the 2020 election, Cipollone told Donald Trump, and allow Congress to certify Joe Biden as the next president. Trump refused. The extraordinary moment — fully detailed for the first time in the latest federal indictment against Trump unsealed last week — vividly illustrates the extent to which the former president’s final weeks in office were consumed by a struggle over the law, with two determined groups of attorneys fighting it out as the future of American democracy hung in the balance.
2. Georgia District Attorney Readies Grand Jury for Expected Charges in Trump Election Interference Case in Her State
District Attorney Fani Willis is preparing to take the election interference case to a grand jury, reportedly as early as next week. Her case focuses on the aftermath of the 2020 election and scrutinizes the actions of Trump and his allies in Georgia. The breadth of the indictments she might seek remains a key question. Willis appears to be positioning herself for a comprehensive legal offensive targeting coordinated attempts to overturn the election, with reports of “more than a dozen” charges. It reportedly may include charges around the harassment of Fulton County poll workers that occurred after Trump’s allegations of a fraudulent election. This strategic approach aligns with the use of Georgia’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. This is a statute often employed in organized crime cases to address patterns of criminal behavior. A legal analyst suggests this could result in Trump going to prison for five years. Meanwhile, Trump is voicing attacks on Willis’ character on social media with unsourced allegations.
- Top point to make: The expected Georgia indictment stands out as a particularly important milestone in the investigation of interference in the 2020 election. The intricate web of conspiracy and the depth of alleged involvement make this case particularly intricate. It is fortunate that the district attorney overseeing this prosecution is dedicated to meticulously unraveling the complexities and ensuring that justice is served. The fact that this indictment has been in the making for over two and a half years underscores her commitment to thoroughness and accuracy. The gravity of the charges against Trump demands such an approach.
- If you read one thing: New York Times, 8/8/23, Georgia’s Trump case looms: The fourth criminal case against Donald Trump is likely to intensify next week, when Fani Willis, the district attorney in Fulton County, Ga., is expected to take her election interference case to a grand jury. Willis has focused her investigation on the weeks after Trump lost the 2020 election, looking into calls that Trump made to pressure local officials, a plan by Trump allies to create a slate of bogus electors and the harassment of local election workers. One big question is how broad the indictments will be, according to our colleague Richard Fausset, who is based in Atlanta. The federal Jan. 6 case, whose indictments were announced last week, was a “very narrowly focused indictment,” Richard told us. “In Georgia, there is the possibility that this will be a multi-defendant indictment that would take in a wide rage of actors who would be accused of violating numerous state crimes in their effort to overturn the election.”
3. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ Lavish Vacations and Gifts from Wealthy Benefactors Raise Ethical Concerns
Controversy continues to swirl around Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The catalyst is a ProPublica report from Thursday. The report shows that a group of industry magnates and ultra-wealthy executives showered Thomas with luxury over decades. He has been treated to exotic vacations, sporting events, and even had private jets dispatched for his convenience. Thomas’ benefactors were largely conservatives. Recent reports over the last several months have detailed other financial arrangements between Thomas and his wealthy acquaintances that have prompted suspicion about conflicts of interest. This story contributes to the concerns that have been increasingly mounting about Thomas’ conduct, and that of the Supreme Court in general.
- Top point to make: Allegations of corruption within the Supreme Court should carry a great deal of weight, because of the court’s role as the ultimate authority on legal matters in the United States. The gravity of its decisions, which have far-reaching implications for the nation’s laws and principles, demands an unimpeachable standard of integrity among its justices. The Supreme Court must stand as a bastion of ethical conduct and impartiality to maintain the foundational principles of fairness and justice for all. All credible allegations about conflicts of interest should be investigated.
- If you read one thing: ProPublica, 8/10/23, Clarence Thomas’ 38 Vacations: The Other Billionaires Who Have Treated the Supreme Court Justice to Luxury Travel: During his three decades on the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas has enjoyed steady access to a lifestyle most Americans can only imagine. A cadre of industry titans and ultrawealthy executives have treated him to far-flung vacations aboard their yachts, ushered him into the premium suites at sporting events and sent their private jets to fetch him — including, on more than one occasion, an entire 737. It’s a stream of luxury that is both more extensive and from a wider circle than has been previously understood. Like clockwork, Thomas’ leisure activities have been underwritten by benefactors who share the ideology that drives his jurisprudence. Their gifts include at least 38 destination vacations, including a previously unreported voyage on a yacht around the Bahamas; 26 private jet flights, plus an additional eight by helicopter; a dozen VIP passes to professional and college sporting events, typically perched in the skybox; two stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica; and one standing invitation to an uber-exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic coast. This accounting of Thomas’ travel, revealed for the first time here from an array of previously unavailable information, is the fullest to date of the generosity that has regularly afforded Thomas a lifestyle far beyond what his income could provide. And it is almost certainly an undercount.
Expert Voices
Marc Elias, founder of Democracy Docket: “Former President Donald Trump has again been indicted by a federal grand jury…But Trump did not try to steal the 2020 election alone. The indictment lists six co-conspirators in his attack on democracy, all of whom ‘used knowingly false claims of election fraud to get state legislators and election officials to subvert the legitimate election results.’ Five of them are attorneys. The indictment makes clear that this was not a conspiracy of sleazy political operatives or even violent insurrectionists. Instead, the indictment reveals that this attack on democracy was effectuated by lawyers using bad faith legal maneuvers and intentional acts.” Democracy Docket: Trump, Five Lawyers and Their Conspiracy Against Our Democracy
Jason Stanley, professor of philosophy at Yale University: “What Trump is doing is, he’s asking for personal loyalty to him to outweigh the rule of law…We see this in any authoritarian takeover of a system. We see the authoritarian say, ‘Devotion to me is more important than the rule of law.’…‘What jumped out to me is that we finally have a structural understanding of the way lies can undermine democracy, of the way trust is central for our democracy,’ he said. ‘Democracy relies on faith in its institutions and laws. Otherwise, there’s no stability’.” NPR
Ruth Ben-Ghiat, professor of history at New York University: “‘The use of lies takes place in a larger effort to turn the public against alternate sources of authority,’ she said. Those sources might include independent courts, legislative bodies and law enforcement agencies. Or — it may be the fourth estate. ‘If you’re looking to see if somebody’s going to be a strongman, what you find is even when they start campaigning, they immediately start trying to turn the public against the press, saying [the press is] biased and that they are the truth teller against the establishment,’ said Ben-Ghiat. As that leader’s supporters increasingly come to believe that he is the only source of truth, she said, they will be primed to believe his claims of a stolen election.” NPR
Lana Goitia-Paz, All Voting is Local Georgia campaign manager: “Spalding County has caved to conspiracy theorists and Big Lie proponents by deciding to hand count ballots prior to certification. Hand counting ballots is slow and far more error-prone than machine counting. Elections become bogged down, and certification may be delayed when a county insists on hand counting. Additionally, hand counting ballots will add to the funding challenges that already burden the county. Instead of using resources to enhance the voting experience, Spalding will expend more staff time and money to run an unnecessary hand count. Extensive hand counts are promoted by those who wish to sow distrust into our elections. There will surely be discrepancies between machine tabulations and the hand count, simply due to human error. It’s why we switched to machine counting in the first place. By taking this action, officials are only fueling conspiracy theories and rhetoric seeking to question the integrity of our elections. All Voting is Local Georgia will continue to support the use of electronic voting machines, which are quicker to tabulate and more accurate, leading to more secure elections in Georgia.” All Voting Is Local
