My Cart



Consciousness of GUILT & Trump

Donate to Mad Dog

Posted on August 14 2018


Trump Acting Guilty or Innocent?

One thing I think, we should be closely examining is Trump’s behavior and prolific social media “messaging”. I’m not certain messaging is the appropriate word, I’d actually argue that Donald Trump has and continues to engage in actual Russian Active Measures and he uses his twitter account like a Russian Asset spreading disinformation and manipulates his base, the mainstream media writ large and intentionally gas lights the rest of us. Furthermore I think what’s often overlooked but incredibly critical to dissect Trump and his behavior; 1) concentration of “messaging” (how many times during a period of time) and; 2)coupled with context and content 


Hoax = 32 times

Trump tweets by the numbers, based on searches of Trump’s twitter archive, this May 2017 tweet appears to be the very first time he refers to the Trump/Russia Investigation as a “hoax”, in total Trump has tweeted the word “hoax” in relation to the Special Counsel’s Investigation a total of 32 times. You can run a twitter archive search to double check my numbers, it won’t offend me. Trump Twitter Archive, link found here



Witch Hunt = 112 Times

Since January 2017 Donald Trump has tweeted the phrase “witch hunt” in the context of the Trump/Russia Investigation a staggering 112 times. The first known occurrence of “witch hunt “ in the context of the Counterintelligence Investigation into Russia/Trump, in true Trump fashion, in all caps occurred January 10, 2017 at 8:19PM (Eastern Time). Again you can double check my numbers by running the same search I did on Trump’s twitter archive, found here.



The “witch hunt” phrase/messaging went dormant from January 11 thru March 30, 2017 when an out of the blue (insane) tweet on from Trump:



Collusion = 43 times

I think it’s imperative that in viewing the scope and totality of Trump’s weaponization of his Social Media accounts, that should be the lens in which the media and American people view his tweets. The very first tweet to include the phrase “no collusion”, see below. Trump has tweeted the phrase “no collusion” some 43 times, again you can double check my work by searching Trump’s twitter archive, found here.




Mueller = 31 times

What I found interesting is the very first time Trump tweeted about Special Counsel Mueller. By name was on March 18, 2018 and the high concentration of the 30 times he’s tweeted specifically about Mueller March 2018 to Present some 30 times. Again you can double check my data by running a search of Donald Trump’s twitter archive, link found here.



Russia = 266 times

 From January 12, 2016 to present Trump has tweeted about Russia and the investigation some 266 times. What I found odd is if you look at Trump’s entire Twitter Archive from 2009 to 2015 collectively Trump only tweeted about Russia 89 times with a large portion of those tweets concentrated in 2013 around the time he was promoting his Miss Universe pageant. Which means purely statistically data nearly two thirds of the 358 total tweets about Russia occurred in late 2016 to present. Although this particular October 2015 tweet caught my attention now that we know Russia did in fact use the Black Lives Matter issue to further divide America. So I found Trump’s tweet invoking BLM, interesting:



No Collusion = 98 times

What I also found interesting about Trump’s No Collusion tweets are the dates and concentration of his “no collusion” because we all know there’s no codified federal crime for collusion. The reality is it’s not collusion, it is conspiracy.  Again notice the date of the tweet below...


Rhetorically speaking can you genuinely say Trump has acted like he’s innocent? More broadly when you look at the public record of Trump’s comments during speeches, press conferences, various TV interviews and then lay those comments over his “written” prior statements, a rational human being, exercising critical thinking, can easily conclude:

Trump’s actions point to GUILT


Black’s Law Dictionary defines: doctrine

 ...”rule, principle, theory, or tenet of the law; as, the doctrine of merger, the doctrine of relation, etc. Doctrinal interpretation”


There’s also a colloquialism known as: Consciousness of Guilt

such evidence may include actions the defendant took to “cover up” his alleged crime. Flight, when unexplained, may indicate consciousness of guilt if the facts and the circumstances support it.

A person's false statements as to (his/her) whereabouts at the time of the offense may tend to show a consciousness of guilt.


In non-legalese it’s essentially arguing that a person is acting in a guilty manner, where based on the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, coupled with the Rules of Evidence, a prosecutor can introduce a defendants “prior statements”. Moreover the term Consciousness of Guilt also touches on a person’s state of mind...


Mens rea, a person's mental awareness of the fact that his or her conduct is criminal, is the mental element..

Actus reus, is the act itself, is the physical element

One of the best examples of  Consciousness of Guilt can be found in by the Law Yale School paper, which is a reproduction of the University of Pennsylvania Law review.  It’s from 1929 but certainly a worthwhile read, link found here


Consciousness of guilt is another state of mind that raises a new set of legal and psychological problems. Wigmore dramati- cally states its significance when he says: "As an axe leaves its mark in the speechless tree, so an evil deed leaves its mark in the evil doer's consciousness." 

"The reliance is not upon the testimonial credit of a person, but upon psychologic forces closely analogous to the forces of external nature." (Emphasis added) 


The Penn Law review goes on to argue that a person’s actions can be reflective of their state of mind. Not belabor this point, but yes Consciousness of Guilt can speak to a defendant’s state of mind. But typically you also need an “act or action” to buttress the “acted in a criminal or corrupt manner” that is if you intent to attack the reasonable doubt factor, which is paramount when a jury begins its deliberations, or at least it should be.

“To counsel for thedefense the evidence of consciousness of guilt seemed likely to have such tremendous effect on the jury, that he ran the risk ofradical prejudice in order to get before them other reasons for the behavior offered to prove that consciousness”

...”Silence under accusation shows guilt, unless under the circumstances a reply was not to be expected.Lying, goingresisting arrest, and nervousness all reveal a sense armed, of guilt.”


I could be wrong, yet examining the various cases buttressed with the Conciousness of Guilt Doctrine, you can easily see a pattern emerge such as, but not limited to;

  • intentionally giving false statements,
  • providing contradictory statements (meaning you may say X last month but then you decided it’s Y and then deny you’ve ever stated X),
  • threats and/or bribery of witnesses,
  • an unexplained and overt odd obsession about details,
  • your “story” continually changes and evolves over a protracted length of time
  • taking extraordinary steps to cover up the original crime
  • concealing or destroying evidence of the crime


Granted Conciousness of Guilt is an actual legal doctrine, listed below are a few notable cases:

Mattox v. State of Mississippi (1962) in Mattox the Mississippi Supreme Court noted, link to case summary found here.

“probative value as an incriminating circumstance inconsistent with [the defendant’s] innocence and as tending to show a consciousness of guilt and that his cause lacked honesty and truth.”


See Ortiz-Sandavol v Gomez, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 1996 Ruling found here:

Agreeing with the California trial and appellate courts, the district court found that the evidence rebutted self defense and was probative of Ortiz-Sandoval's consciousness of guilt of first degree murder.   Ortiz-Sandoval argues that he did not present a self defense theory and that post arrest threats are not probative of premeditation. These arguments lack merit.


The aforementioned case also cited in Begay v USA, see link here. More broadly evidence of “Conciousness of Guilt”:

evidence of an accused’s consciousness of guilt is admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).12 Rule 404(b) expressly allows the use of evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts for purposes of proving things other than character or propensity to commit crime (such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident).

under rule 404(b) does not expressly list consciousness of guilt as a permissible purpose for introducing evidence of other crimes or acts, the list of factors articulated within the language of the rule is illustrative rather than exclusive. Accordingly, other crimes, wrongs, or acts are admissible for other purposes—such as demonstrating consciousness of guilt. 


As Congressman Ted Lieu correctly noted numerous times, each tweet or words from Donald Trump of real time Conciousness of Guilt. Because everything Trump has uttered in interviews and/or tweets would in fact be covered under the “prior statements”



The question really is in its most simplistic form: has Trump or his close surrogates (like his son) acted like an innocent person would?  I think a reasonable case can be made that absolutely NOT.

Every Tweet. Every Speech. Every Action. Every non-Action...screams Conciousness of Guilt as in Trump conducts himself in a manner of someone who’s guilty or has significant crimes that he and others are actively trying to cover up.


Tweets threatening witnesses:



The longer this investigation goes, the more we find out that Trump et al have lied to the American people countless times about the Trump Campaign and contacts with Russia. Remember how Trump and Trump Jr said “no we have had zero contacts with Russia or Russians” only to find out (the irony) emial records show why YES the Trump Campaign met with several Russians in June of 2016 at Trump Tower. 



My final point is, at what point will the Trump Camp just come clean? I don’t know why the Media continues to allow the Trump Administration to get away with lying. It’s truly as if Trump is right:

”I could shoot someone on fifth avenue and I wouldn’t lose a single vote”  

What I do know to be true is Trump et al act like they are guilty, if Trump was innocent why would he constantly engaging in these type of “evidentiary statements”? Does he really think that he can fast talk his way out of what he’s done? Maybe it’s time to go back to linguistical basics, understand what gas lighting and subversive Active Measures are. Because from my vantage point our “so called” president is engaging in a protracted and abusive verbal attack every goddamn day. 




 My bottom line is Trump is not acting like an innocent person. Because he’s not, so resist the urge to believe what’s coming from Trump and his White House, they have less credibility that Paul Manafort.

-Spicy Out

While you're here, throw us a bone.

Mad Dog is thrilled to have Spicy in our PAC(k). We are proud to provide a space for her tireless, hard hitting, in-depth investigations. But we can’t do it without you.

Our numbers are growing. Our voices are being heard. Our campaigns are making a difference. Help us, and Spicy, continue to fight the good fight. Consider a donation to help support the work of Mad Dog PAC today.