Page 222 - Statutes News Today

Privileges to do their job on january six. in a sense, he was interfering with the right of every american, because he was trying to stop the recognition of the rightful president. it is not really a surprise, the direction hes going in. >> george, there had been somebody who thought there might be an insurrection charge. we spoke to early honig on the program last night, he didnt think the special counsel needed the drama of an insurrection charge, that it was a bridge perhaps too far before ja...

Insurrection was not one of them. it was deprivation of, rights conspiracy to defraud united states, champion with witness, and a lot of potential crimes within those descriptions. those are just the kind of, the headlines for each of the statutes. there is not, in terms of potential indictment, a charge for inciting as an insurrection. does that matter to you? >> now. im very comfortable with these charges. im somebody who has followed this case very closely. in addition to my participation in ...

An insurrection charge. i spoke to elie honig on the program last night said he didnt think the special counsel needed the drama of insurrection charge, that it was perhaps a bridge too far for myths taste only doesnt need to prove that trump is trying to overthrow the government. do you agree? >> i dont think its a business area to bring insurrection case as such, but i think the statutes that norm and his terrific volume that he and his colleagues prepared on the various statutory possibilitie...

Indictments, 71 counts, also dealing with carroll trial at the same time, had the legal issues while he was president. how could he possibly not have had the best team on retainer constantly. what did he think jack smith was doing all these months? what did he think all of these witnesses going in to testify was about? you think they were sharing recipes? no. they were building a case. so it is really befuddling to hear that this team is surprised that donald trump is surprised and that they wer...

Proceeding charge. what do you think this might mean, barb? >> my guess is the target letter identifies the statutes of investigation without describing a whole lot of detail. and so the statute is 18 united states code section 1512, and as you mention theres an awful lot of stuff packed into that statute, and the title of it is tampering with a witness. so it could be that maybe donald trump or others suggested to a witness they not tell the truth or something like that, but it strikes me as fa...

Do not know what particular sections of each statute the doj is looking at. so that means this tampering with a witness charge, that could be exactly what it sounds like, witness tampering. it could be a charge about how trumps legal team allegedly tried to influence the testimony of witnesses like former white house aide cassidy hutchinson, but it could also be the same obstruction of an official proceeding section that the doj has used over and over again to prosecute january 6th defendants, t...

In two different courts in new york city today in refusing to ultra quest for a new trial in the civil case with e. jean carroll the judge said, mr. trump raped her. those are the judges exact words, in clarifying with the evidence in the case actually proved to the jury. we will have more on that in this hour with law professor michele goodwin. also in manhattan today, a federal judge denied the donald trumps attempts to move manhattan district attorney alvin braggs criminal prosecution of dona...

Than how it is commonly defined by some dictionaries and statutes. he wrote, the finding that ms. carroll failed to prove that she was raped within the meaning of the new york penal law does not mean that she failed to prove that mr. trump raped her, as many people commonly understand the word rape. indeed, as the evidence at the trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that mr. trump, in fact, did exactly that. this filing comes as trump faces a second defamation lawsuit from carroll o...

Statute, corruptly obstructing an official proceeding, basically getting in the way of congress as it setout to certify the 2020 election by staging insurrection. all of this is relevant because today the three federal statutes listed in that target letter special counsel jack smith sent to former president trump, those statutes were described to nbc news by two attorneys with direct knowledge of the document. "the wall street journal," rolling stone, a bunch of places essentially have the same ...

"the new york times" mara gay. the bulwarks charlie sykes. and chuck rosenberg. we are learning more about the serious, new charges the former president could potentially face. two attorneys with direct knowledge of the matter tell nbc news that in a target letter sent to trump this week, special counsel jack smith mentioned three federal statutes. deprivation of rights under color of law, conspiracy to defraud the united states, and witness tampering. its worth noting, although new charges agai...