A 96% success rate for an appellate division is not a thing that any US Attorney's Office would take pride in. That means that roughly 1 in 20 convictions was reversed on appeal.

Yes, I am a former AUSA acting with imperious disdain towards a local DAs office.

Expand full comment

Meanwhile, as Ken knows and some others know, though #BlueAnon doesn't like to talk about it, people sit for months, sometimes years, occasionally to the point of death, in Fani Willis' Fulton County jail because they can't make bail.

Expand full comment

Dangit, Ken. You harshed my buzz. But like I’ve said before, that’s what makes you so valuable, and would make me accurate, were I to have any friends who wanted my opinion.

Expand full comment

When I saw the headline, my first thought was “they did the RICO!” And I’ve never missed your Twitter feed more 💔

Expand full comment

The article is very helpful in making a distinction between overt Acts evidencing the conspiracy, and criminal Acts committed within the conspiracy. It makes a solid case that the indictment would have promoted public understanding if it had clearly distinguished between those two things. At the very least, it helped me understand it but there are at least 299 million other Americans who need more information.

Expand full comment

Speaking as a former chess player, one of the things you learn is that when you're ahead and basically have a won end game, simplify - do not complicate. And when behind, make things complicated in hopes that your opponent will make a mistake.

Seems to me that Willis had a clear win if she kept it simple, but by filing an exceedingly complicated indictment she opens the door to Trump's primary litigation strategy: delay, appeal, appeal the appeal, enter a motion for whatever will drag things out the longest etc. And as Ken points out, there are both good-faith and bad-faith objections that can be raised, with the problem being that some of the bad-faith objections will still be judicable and serve to delay the process.

I'm highly skeptical that this case will get to a verdict in Trump's lifetime. Granted, some of the defendants will cop a plea, and if that was the strategy it will likely be successful. But I doubt that is the point of the exercise.

Expand full comment

Seems you’re taking points off for style?

I’d give her full marks however for actually indicating the (nearly) full cast of characters that tried to pull the coup.

No one else (except maybe MI AG) has done that. Certainly not Jack Smith/DOJ.

(At least not yet, but at the pace DOJ is going with the prosecution of the political leaders of the coup, I’m not exactly holding my breath...)

Expand full comment

This is a great piece for many reasons. One of the reasons it is great is that it underscores an important rule, namely:

*To have a legitimate opinion about any legal matter, you must first know something about the law.*

I fear that the importance of this rule is not sufficiently appreciated in 2023.

Expand full comment

I get the criticism of Willis, her pleadings, and what you suggest are gratuitous hits on Trump. First, REALLY?? He was trying to overthrow the government. Secondly, many of the remarks cited help the finders of fact determine intent. They may be 1st amendment protected but if they help explain the predicate act of threatening a public official.

Finally mixing up overt acts with criminal allegations, make over all scheme better understood. You want the jury to understand the scheme

Expand full comment

should be fair enough to call it GRICO (since it certainly ain't FRICO).

but your video clip was, of course, priceless.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Ken, for the clarification. Of course(?), I haven’t seen any *good faith* claim that X’ing, speaking, posting, whatever is now illegal. Still; this post is a real public service. Thanks again.

Expand full comment
Aug 17·edited Aug 17

> Fulton County [D.A.] Fani Willis —

> notoriously fearless, particularly of cameras

I am strongly reminded of a quote from Jim Comey's book, concerning Rudy Giuliani: "The most dangerous place in Manhattan was between Giuliani and a microphone." (Paraphrased.) I hope the allure of publicity doesn't lead D.A. Willis to the same downfall in the end.

Expand full comment

The beauty of a democracy is we get to HAVE THIS CONVERSATION AT ALL!


That her style is a HAMMER & not a chisel is OK BY ME! Because the only thing those of us who aren’t blind want to see is the DESTRUCTION OF THE ENTIRE NETWORK OF THE CONSPIRACY AGAINST AND THE ATTEMPTED OVERTHROW OF OUR DEMOCRACY

Simple language is important to help citizens UNDERSTAND, but lay people may still not get the separation.

And old judge used to kindly come and give a training to newbies who wrote affidavits for his court.

And we understand clearly the story she told.

Love 💕 You

Expand full comment

Great piece, Ken. I too felt like the DC indictment was a lot tighter, laying out the difference between "these things fed the conspiracy" and "these things *were*" the conspiracy. Maybe it should never be the RICO.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the clear explanation. It's not short, but I've learned that most legal explanations can be good or short, but not both.

Expand full comment

Unless a bunch of people confess, and Fani Willis drops a bunch of charges, there is no way this trial starts in March 2024, right? The seating arrangement for 19 defendants alone might take a few days. After Jenna Ellis's experience, no one will want to sit next to Giuliani. Maybe they'll get that Tardis from Scott Pruitt to greenhouse him.

Maybe she meant March 2025.

Thanks Ken, for a clear example of an overt act.

Expand full comment