Harry Litman: 'Mark Meadows Removal Decision Spells Trouble. FOR DONALD TRUMP!'

Source:Harry Litman- left to right: Defendant Don & Defendant Mark. Also known as the Chief & Deputy Chief of the Keystone Kops of American politics.

"The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision to reject Mark Meadows's bid to have his case moved to federal court hints at a potential outcome in Trump's effort to have his case tossed out on grounds of presidential immunity. Opinion... 

From Harry Litman

“Meadows cannot point to any authority for influencing state officials with allegations of election fraud,” Pryor wrote. “At bottom, whatever the chief of staff’s role with respect to state election administration, that role does not include altering valid election results in favor of a particular candidate.”

“Meadows cannot have it both ways,” Pryor wrote. “He cannot shelter behind testimony about the breadth of his official responsibilities, while disclaiming his admissions that he understood electioneering activity to be out of bounds. That he repeatedly denied having any role in, or speaking on behalf of, the Trump campaign, reflects his recognition that such activities were forbidden to him as chief of staff.”

From POLITICO

"​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​The Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, limits certain political activities of federal employees, as well as some state, D.C., and local government employees who work in connection with federally funded programs. ​The law’s purposes are to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation.​​​​ ​" 

From the U.S. Office of Special Counsel 

From I wrote about the Mark Meadows case on The New Democrat back in August:

"George Conway already explained in this video (that's linked on this post) about the Hatch Act. If Meadows is making a free speech argument by saying that he was advocating for the President of the United States in Georgia, when he was trying to convince the Secretary of State to overturn the election there and declare President Trump the winner, he would be in violation of the Hatch Act, which is a Federal felony. 

Under Federal law, Federal officials, who are not elected officials, meaning they don't serve in Congress or are not President or Vice President, are barred from weighing in on and contributing to political campaigns and elections. Legally, they're supposed to be above politics. So which felony does Mr. Meadows want to plead guilty to: the Federal Hatch Act, or the Georgia RICO ACT?" 

From what I wrote on the Mark Meadows case on The New Democrat back in September: 

"It’s clear that what Mark Meadows was doing post-2020 election day, after President Donald Trump had already lost to Joe Biden, (and that’s according to the 50 United States, including Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan) he was working on behalf of his de-facto client Donald J. Trump, to overturn that presidential election and just automatically declare President Trump the winner of that state. Even though it was clear that the President lost that election by 12,000 votes. Mr. Meadows wasn’t acting as White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, on behalf of the U.S. Federal Government, which is why he lost today." 

What I wrote yesterday on The New Democrat about the Mark Meadows decision: 

"The term slam dunk, especially since the days of the Iraq War back in the early 2000s, gets thrown around a lot. Sort of like the football in the modern NFL, (to use a modern sports reference) but slam sunk is appropriate in the Mark Meadows case and I'll explain why. 

I guess it's legal to be both a campaign official and a U.S. Government official at the same time. (But you might want to consult a lawyer on that) You just can't do both jobs at the same time. 

There's no statue or law in the U.S. Government that allows for one of their government official to interfere in democratic elections, especially to try to benefit one particular candidate or another. Which is what then White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows was trying to do back in late 2020 in Georgia, to get that presidential election thrown out and just automatically declare Donald Trump the winner of the Georgia election. 

Mark Meadows wasn't acting as White House Chief of Staff when he was trying to get Georgia state officials to reverse the election there and just automatically declare President Trump the winner there. He was acting on behalf of his de-facto client Donald Trump, as a campaign employee for the Donald Trump presidential campaign. Which is why he lost back in October and lost yesterday and will keep losing, as long as keeps fighting the charges against him."

I would ask what were Mark Meadows and company thinking when they went through this whole overturn the 2020 presidential election scheme, just because their candidate Donald Trump lost. But it's obvious they weren't thinking at all. 

I mean to try to corrupt state elections officials, that you don't even know, at lost not well, who are literally in the business to supervise state elections, like in Georgia, but Arizona, and other states as well, thinking that of course they would do that for them, is not thinking at all. It's like being in debt for over a million dollars, when you only make 30 thousand-dollars a year, thinking that you can pay off your debt by winning the lottery or robbing a string of convenient stores, or something. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.