Trump Trial
- Thread starter GURPS
- Start date
Is the Trump Appeal still going on? I figured it would be open/shut.
Leftists Decried Comey For Flagging Hillary’s Emails. Now They Love Tanya Chutkan’s Election Interference
“If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute — or appear to be — election interference,” Chutkan wrote. “The court will therefore continue to keep political considerations out of its decision-making, rather than incorporating them as Defendant requests.”
The unsealing comes just weeks after Chutkan unsealed Smith’s 165-page brief, which alleges Trump used “false claims of election fraud to disrupt the electoral process” in 2020. Smith argues that Trump’s “refuse[al] to say whether he would accept the election results” of 2020 (which saw unelected leaders usurp the authority of state legislatures and unilaterally change election procedure) and Trump’s expressing concern about potential fraud are grounds for prosecution and jail time.
Chutkan’s unleashing of Smith’s 11th-hour brief and her subsequent unsealing of “evidence” have been brushed aside by the left — even though Chutkan’s mention of “political consequences” is an admission her decision amounts to election interference — because they’re useful fodder.
ABC News pretended that Chutkan’s decision to unseal the “evidence” was her effort to push “back on Trump’s argument that the release was politically motivated to influence the 2024 presidential election.”
“Chutkan faulted Trump’s lawyers for peddling what she called political arguments rather than engaging with the relevant factors to justify sealing the evidence in the case,” ABC News reported.
Meanwhile, Newsweek used the unsealing to write a piece about a “mountain” of “evidence” against Trump — even though The Washington Post, for example, called the unsealing “unrevelatory.”
But such blatantly obvious attempts to sway the public’s perception of one of the candidates constitutes election interference — at least according to the standard used in 2016.
Then-FBI Director James Comey announced in October of 2016 that the agency would be investigating Hillary Clinton’s emails. The announcement set off years of blaming Comey for causing Clinton to lose the race.
They just couldn’t stand it anymore and had to say it out loud, to make sure Trump got the message. Yesterday, Politico ran an ugly story headlined, “A Modest Proposal - A Deal to Stop Trump From Trying to Overturn the Election.” You already knew this was why they prosecuted him six ways from Sunday, but now they’ve spelled it out in painstaking detail.
Juleanna Glover, who penned the op-ed, owns a DC-based “public affairs advisory firm” that allegedly helps Republican candidates. She’s not helping Republicans much now though.
Instead, Juleanna has pitched us a deal: What if the federal and state prosecutors running rings around the Trump lawsuits circus all agreed to drop their charges if Trump will just say he lost the 2024 race? Just say the words.
Juleanna compared the potential deal to Judge Merchan’s gag order. She pointed out that Trump actually complied with the gag order — shocking far-left partisans who believe President Trump is mentally and ethically incapable of waiting for a crosswalk signal, much less controlling what he says.
Intentionally or unintentionally, Juleanna gave away the whole sordid game. Her proposal is not new. The lawsuits were always about coercing Trump to say he lost. That’s how political lawfare works. If Trump had dropped out, the lawfare would have magically vanished. Biden would have generously pardoned him, to avoid humiliating and dividing the nation.
But, it’s too late now, Juleanna. Too late.
☕️ TRUMP’S OCTOBER SURPRISE ☙ Friday, October 25, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
BRICS Summit ends; signs of life in Canada; scientific self-censorship; dems' deal for President Trump to quit; market trends; Trump's earth-shaking October Surprise changes everything; more.
www.coffeeandcovid.com
PJay
Well-Known Member
"JUST IN: The Department of Justice and Jack Smith immediately end their cases against Donald Trump. The DOJ cited their policy that presidents can't be prosecuted however it was assumed they would work up until the "last day." "What's interesting here is that the DOJ is moving to end them even before he takes office, citing the longstanding DOJ policy that sitting presidents can't be prosecuted." "And there were some thought that maybe special counsel Jack Smith was going to sprint through the finish line, was going to work up until the last day, force Trump to fire him, wait till a new Attorney General was appointed." "But that does not appear to be the thinking inside the department. The thinking is that these cases can't go forward."
LightRoasted
If I may ...
For your consideration ...
They now clearly see the writing on the wall. They are now in job protection mode. Though I doubt it will help anyone at the DOJ.
They now clearly see the writing on the wall. They are now in job protection mode. Though I doubt it will help anyone at the DOJ.
That building and the FBI both need to be fumigated.
Clear out anything higher, GS 11 and start over.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Why stop at GS-11?
Sneakers
Just sneakin' around....
'Cause he's a GS-10?
j/k.
I was never tempted to go from contract to fed.
Here I can limit my exposure to the stupid.
BOP
Well-Known Member
Georgia appeals court cancels arguments in Trump election case until further notice
A Georgia appeals court on Monday canceled until further notice oral arguments on an effort by President-elect Donald Trump and other co-defendants to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the criminal election interference prosecution against them.
The Georgia Court of Appeals acted on its own in canceling the arguments scheduled for Dec. 5. The court did not explain its reason for the move.
Three other criminal cases against Trump have been put in limbo since the Republican won the presidential election nearly two weeks ago.
Trump and the other defendants are charged in state court in Atlanta with crimes related to their attempt to undo his 2020 election loss in Georgia to President Joe Biden.
The Trump Effect is crashing into the Trump Lawfare. Yesterday, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution somberly ran a sorrowful story headlined, “Appeals court cancels hearing in Georgia election interference case against Donald Trump.” Since the election, it seems to Democrats they keep plunging through layers of Dante’s Inferno, and just when they think they’ve hit the hellish bottom, the rocky floor gives way, and they collapse into the next, hotter, even more infernal plane. Anyway, it’s more good news for President Trump.
As though we were spiritual pilgrims, let’s review the nine levels of Trump-prosecution hell. The top two layers are the two federal cases, which are being specially prosecuted by Jack Smith, an odious little demon who Supreme Court Justice Thomas opined was illegally appointed. The captive media has reported both of Smith’s cases must be closed or dismissed before Trump takes office, pursuant to a DOJ policy precluding prosecution of the department’s own boss (the President).
Passing deeper, into the third circle, where greedy, conflicted judges are tormented for eternity, we discover wispy-haired, antique Judge Engoran, who soaked Trump for a then-unpayable, historic $500 million fine — for writing the wrong value on his loan application, even though the bank testified it didn’t care. After Judge Engoran scheduled a hearing to liquidate Trump’s New York properties, Trump took his social media company public, to raise the cash to pay the massive bond. (No billionaires bailed Trump out; it happened during the long, dark night of the grim Second Act.)
Anyway, just over a month ago, the New York Court of Appeals held oral arguments on Trump’s appeal of the massive verdict, and most of the appellate judges seemed stiffly skeptical of the record-setting fine, and of the state’s creative interpretation of the law. Most observers, regardless of politics, expect Trump’s fine to be miniaturized if not completely overturned.
Moving deeper still, we discover Judge Juan Merchan, whose New York jury convicted President Trump of hiring an accountant who wrote “legal fees” on checks paid to Trump’s lawyer. Judge Merchan has twice rescheduled Trump’s sentencing hearing, now facing the hideous prospect of sentencing a sitting President to jail — which simply won’t work — or even worse, not sentencing him to jail.
The law NY used has never before resulted in a jail sentence. Trump has never been convicted of any crime, so he’s a first offender. Any jail sentence would be unwarranted. It seems doubtful to me that even a sentence of community service could stick, given the federalism issues.
Today, Judge Merchan is expected to rule on Trump’s lawyers’ motion to dismiss to case under the Supreme Court’s new presidential immunity test. My guess is that immunity does not apply since the alleged facts involving adult actresses and private lawyers don’t lend themselves to characterization as “official acts.” But I have not read the briefs.
Anyway, the Democrats are clinging to hope that Judge Merchan may come up with some creative way to corner Trump and maybe even derail his presidency. Newsweek, two days ago:
At last, we reach Democrat Hades’ lowest and most terrifying level, where the most vile and uncouth prosecutors burn eternally, consumed by scandalous flames of shame and disgrace. Although the Fulton County, Georgia RICO case carries the most serious charges, and therefore the most realistic prospect for prison, Democrats do not want to talk about it. It’s just too awful. They can’t even.
Although every Trump prosecution features shocking and bizarre legal characters obviously unsuitable to prosecute a case of undersized fish retention, must less manage the first presidential prosecution in history, no character is more shocking or bizarre to prosecute a President than Fulton County’s hapless district attorney, Fani Willis. Fani Willis, the plump county prosecutor who took orders from Biden’s White House and used the case as her personal bank account, generously spread Fulton County money around to her pals, and hired unqualified married men to work under her at the DA’s office, if you know what I mean.
Trump’s appeal sprang from the trial judge’s denial of his motion to remove Fani Willis and her office as the case’s prosecutors, basically since she’s a hopeless train wreck. If removed, the case would be reassigned to a different Georgia county, and would almost certainly be immediately dismissed. So, returning at last to the Journal-Constitution’s sad story, yesterday, the appeals court, without any prompting issued a one-sentence order canceling the already-scheduled oral arguments without explanation.
If this were one of my cases, I would interpret the highly unusual cancelation of oral arguments as a very encouraging sign. Appeals courts routinely allow oral argument even in clear-cut cases, out of respect to the parties and their lawyers, even if they have no need to ask the lawyers any questions. Appeals courts only deny oral argument when the outcome is so obvious that oral arguments would certainly be useless, so obvious it would just embarass one side or the other.
To set oral arguments and then cancel is extremely rare. So the clear message here is: we have already decided and we don’t need to ask the lawyers anything.
Obviously, we cannot know for sure. But since criminal defendants are usually given priority in appeals, and since this criminal defendant is an elected President, he would normally (even if unfairly) receive heightened priority. The appellate judges would almost certainly go through the motions of oral argument if only to demonstrate their lack of bias.
So here’s my guess: the appellate court could be preparing to throw out the entire case, perhaps on a theory of federal pre-emption, because states are not allowed to prosecute sitting federal officials. Or something like that.
One of my mentors always used to say that appellate judges have a dusty old toolbag filled with ancient “doctrines” and “principles” — tools — going back thousands of years of common law. Whenever an appeals court needs to do something extreme, or unexpected, they just magically whip out and dust off whatever archaic tool or doctrine they need to achieve the necessary, and voilá!
All the Trump cases are rapidly unraveling. But we will never forget them.
☕️ ACE CARD ☙ Tuesday, November 19, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Two meaty issues dominate the essential news: the rapidly disappearing threat of Democrat lawfare and the astonishing rope-a-dope with which Trump is corralling the Senate.
www.coffeeandcovid.com