Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(146,181 posts)
35. Do you remember this -
Fri Jan 17, 2025, 02:28 PM
Jan 17
Judge says several Trump aides, including former chief of staff, must testify to Jan. 6 grand jury


Get To Know the Six Likely Co-Conspirators in Trump’s Jan. 6 Indictment

By Paige Anderholm

August 9, 2023


Former President Donald Trump’s most recent indictment includes six unnamed co-conspirators, who were “enlisted…to assist him in his criminal efforts to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election and retain power.”

Based on the details provided in the indictment, the co-conspirators listed as attorneys are presumed to be: (1) Rudy Giuliani, (2) John Eastman, (3) Sidney Powell, (4) Jeffrey Clark and (5) Kenneth Chesebro. The sixth is more speculative than the others, but details in the indictment suggest it may be political operative Boris Epshteyn.

Experts believe that their names were kept out of last week’s indictment to avoid scheduling conflicts and time delays that come with multiple co-defendants. It also may be a tactic to encourage cooperation from the co-conspirators in exchange for avoiding their own charges. Or, it could be that special counsel Jack Smith’s office believes that while they have enough evidence to prove Trump is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, they may not have evidence to sustain convictions for the other six. It is speculated that if separate indictments for the co-conspirators are to be returned, it will happen in the coming days ahead of the scheduling hearing in the case that is set for Aug. 28.

(snip)

^^^the above was done by Marc Elias's group "Democracy Docket" but you are more than welcome to throw them under the bus

Smith operated using the KISS principle with the assumption that "superseding indictments" could easily come to add the others.

Don't worry though... "figurehead Garland" will soon be out of your hair.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Sure... Think. Again. Jan 17 #1
"garland himself has already stated cannon has no authority over those cases right now" BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #2
The case discussed in this article ... Think. Again. Jan 17 #3
I just quoted you and but here is the rest of what you wrote BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #4
That's a whole lot of spaghetti sliding off the wall, Bum HereForTheParty Jan 17 #5
There are 2 others who were charged in that case BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #8
Did I hit a nerve? HereForTheParty Jan 17 #10
I prefer to provide FACTS BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #13
Garland should have dropped the charges on Nauta and Deoliver (or whatever this criminal's name is) choie Jan 17 #37
Yes, that reply does seem like a lot of diversion and obfuscation... Think. Again. Jan 17 #9
Yes, we know that garland didn't appoint Smith until... Think. Again. Jan 17 #6
But here is the problem with this continued argument BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #11
One more time and then I gotta go... Think. Again. Jan 17 #12
And one more time BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #14
those cases are not in her court. Think. Again. Jan 17 #15
You keep saying "cases" BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #17
Obviously I'm referring to... Think. Again. Jan 17 #18
No it's not "obvious" BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #19
The defendants who are appealing... Think. Again. Jan 17 #21
You are STILL not reading nor comprehending (perhaps on purpose) BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #22
Correct, the cases against the co-defendants were not dropped... Think. Again. Jan 17 #23
There are no "cases" against BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #24
Yes, she is having a hearing over... Think. Again. Jan 17 #25
So should a Bailiff go into her Courtroom, haul her out in handcuffs, and lock her up for judicial misconduct BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #27
She SHOULD have recused herself before any of these cases started. Think. Again. Jan 17 #29
That's IRRELEVANT BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #31
huh, thanks for your input. Think. Again. Jan 17 #33
There is no case for immunity. He wasn't in office then. Unless they are able travelingthrulife Jan 17 #7
Why not just give the report to President Biden and let him release it. republianmushroom Jan 17 #16
Well interestingly enough, Biden just deemed the ERA "ratified" BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #20
DOJ should just release everything now and not worry about being stopped by TCF later Attilatheblond Jan 17 #26
Just 3auld6phart Jan 17 #28
Not afraid, complicit. Think. Again. Jan 17 #30
They are under a COURT ORDER BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #32
I thought I was done with Garland, but I can't sit back. gab13by13 Jan 17 #34
Do you remember this - BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #35
You are missing my point, gab13by13 Jan 17 #36
"You are missing my point," BumRushDaShow Jan 17 #38
Ha ha ha , today is friday kacekwl Jan 17 #39
President Biden kacekwl Jan 17 #40
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»DOJ pushing to keep Trump...»Reply #35