Two Witnesses the DoJ Wants to See Cooperating Share One Thing. And That's a Problem.

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

Tweet text:

Jay Kuo
@nycjayjay
·
Follow
The NYT dropped a piece yesterday about the witnesses whom the DoJ wants to develop in the NARA-Lago case. But it neglected to report on one of the most important questions, probably because of the source used for the story. I explain in today’s piece.

statuskuo.substack.com
Two Witnesses the DoJ Wants to See Cooperating Share One Thing. And That’s a Problem.
The New York Times had a piece out last night that generally reported what we already know, namely that Trump aides are under pressure to testify against him in the NARA-Lago documents case. So why...
7:35 AM · Oct 25, 2022

*snip*

Filling in the Gaps

The aides who were the subject of the story include Walt Nauta, whom I wrote about earlier and whose name I urged we all remember, and Kash Patel, a former staffer for Rep. Devin Nunes who was promoted quickly through the Trump White House.

Nauta was something of a personal valet to Trump tasked with duties that included fetching him his Diet Coke. He was also one of the people whom Trump instructed to move documents to his residence from the storage room at Mar-a-Lago after receiving a grand jury subpoena for them—a rather obvious way to avoid turning the squirreled documents over, but also a rather obvious case of obstruction.

Nauta’s story has changed as investigators interviewed him over time. His initial statement apparently conflicted with videotape evidence of him moving boxes at Mar-a-Lago. He eventually told investigators that Trump directed him to move the boxes, but apparently that’s not what he first said to investigators. This flip-flop makes him a less-than-ideal witness for the prosecution because liars can be readily impeached on cross-examination. (Think: “Did you only change your testimony after the FBI pressured you to? Did you lie to them then, or are you lying now?”) On the other hand, if Nauta simply tells the truth—that he felt pressure to lie for the former president but couldn’t maintain the lie in the face of the videotape evidence—that might still resonate with the jury.

Patel was a relatively green staffer appointed as Chief of Staff to the Acting Secretary of Defense in the waning days of the Trump presidency and then as a representative for the former president to the National Archives and Records Administration (the NARA in NARA-lago). Patel is the fellow who insisted on national television that he personally witnessed Trump declassifying documents and that Trump had a standing order to declassify anything that went to his residence. But when Patel was brought before the grand jury earlier this month and presumably was asked about that remarkable claim, he pled the Fifth in response to many questions, unwilling to say under oath what he claimed publicly, according to the Times reporting.

*snip*

[UTUSN]

1. K&R

[gratuitous]

2. Eyewitness testimony in a criminal case is always iffy

Let's face it; there aren't any altar boys working for the former guy. Prosecutors have to get testimony from somewhere, and a witness who lied to begin with can be rehabilitated by a skillful prosecutor. Done properly, the defense may be reduced to arguing that some flunky was the real brains of the operation.