Never forget…
“[Trump is] the only President in American history to try to stay in office after losing. And to do that, he propagated claims that the election was false, even as his top advisers told him that he had lost.”
43 Likes
On p22, Smith makes a point that has been bugging me since I saw his “QED” on page 7:
that a defendant is not entitled through an indictment or a bill of particulars to a “preview” of the “government’s evidence or theory of the case”
It’s clear just from Smith’s rebuttal that TRUMP’s motions throw several standalone arguments at the wall to see what sticks. I guess I think that’s what’s going on here, more than an attempt to delay (which Team Trump probably assumes will fail).
Smith’s rebuttal doesn’t seem to be previewing any secret evidence, but it does lay out what appears to be the real arguments against each of the BS lines that Trumpworld has been refining in the public discussion around his crimes.
I imagine Smith figures it really can’t hurt, since he’s got TRUMP dead-to-rights.
20 Likes
“But the defendant stands alone in American history for his alleged crimes,” Smith shot back in the filing. “No other president has engaged in conspiracy and obstruction to overturn valid election results and illegitimately retain power.”
Smith is ensuring that regardless of Trump somehow skating, the record states plainly and with the weight necessary for history. The documents will be there for an eternity excluding burning down the planet.
21 Likes
Special Counsel Jack Smith hit back at Donald Trump’s attempt to have the Jan. 6 case against him dismissed in a stark Monday reply, characterizing the former president as committing crimes without parallel in American history.
… … … …
Nice that Smith noticed and said something.
Now … is tfg in jail yet?
(HT to @tena)
Remember the docs trump refused to return even after a subpoena? Remember the image of classified doc on the floor of his Mar-a-Lago office? How about the daily brief and classified (empty) folder cover on public display in the bar of trump tower? That last was a sorta “in yer face” by trump at the FBI.
Theft
Obstruction
Breaking the Espionage Act
3 felonies backed by hard evidence yet Judge Cannon delays and delays.
13 Likes
You can count on that happening, for sure. Maybe PDQ if DJT loses again and again and again and again and again (one loss for each pending court case). His supporters may very well go scorched earth.
2 Likes
Good – now he knows how 81 million Americans feel like.
6 Likes
Or crawl back under their rocks. put his fat ass in prison
11 Likes
We all certainly hope you are right Darrtown.
5 Likes
What a terrific image. Bravo! The tell-tale of this is that every time Donald doesn’t get what he wants he throws a shit-fit, just like a spoiled toddler.
5 Likes
May he have a rip snortin’ case of shingles in very sensitive places and may it last a very long time.
11 Likes
Smith really gets it. Trump is a menace to Democracy and the rule of law, and Smith is laying out all the reasons why.
26 Likes
This case is a civil one. So the worst would be the complete loss of his New York companies and a large fine. Could be $250 million. May it be out of his personal pocket.
Make it so!!!
20 Likes
Even if you like Trump, in fairness, his crimes were conducted in real time, and they bragged about them and have said they would do it again. At the VERY LEAST he should be in jail at least TWICE as long as Martha Stewart for doing something much more private and less serious to the country.
21 Likes
4 Likes
Nah, the defense gets to put their own case on first. They reportedly said today they expect to finish up by Dec. 15.
12 Likes
This is a sociopath. Ask anyone unlucky enough to have married one of these walking pieces of shit and you’ll be aghast at just how purely evil these assholes are.
14 Likes
A nice little dig at very stable genius and legal scholar TRUMP in a footnote (p41; citation omitted; bold mine):
At this stage of the proceedings, what might have “inspired” the defendant’s actions is irrelevant. The issue of the defendant’s intent is a matter for trial, and whether his intent was informed by any historical examples would require, at the very least, evidence that the defendant was aware of them.
23 Likes
On page 43 of the Response Motion is slap down on Trump’s First Amendment argument:
Any speech that the defendant used to carry out the conspiracy, fraud, and obstruction crimes charged in the indictment is categorically excluded from the protections of the First Amendment. The “long established criminal proscription[] . . . against conspiracy. . . criminalize[s] speech” that is “undeserving of First Amendment protection.” United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285, 298 (2008). Speech used to carry out “agreements and conspiracies deemed injurious to society” is quintessential speech integral to criminal conduct. Giboney, 336 U.S. at 502. “Speech intended to bring about a particular unlawful act has no social value; therefore, it is unprotected.” United States v. Hansen, 599 U.S. 762, 783 (2023); see id. (concluding that if a proscription against solicitation or aiding-and-abetting “reaches any speech, it stretches no further than speech integral to unlawful conduct”).
22 Likes
Perhaps the reason Smith didn’t charge TRUMP with insurrection is because he anticipated a double-jeopardy defense. TRUMP floated it anyway, and here is part of Smith’s rebuttal (p48 - 49):
And even if the [Double Jeopardy] Clause did apply, the criminal prosecution in this case does not charge the same offense as was at issue in the defendant’s impeachment trial in February 2021.
…
The indictment did not charge the defendant with an incitement offense. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 2383 (criminal prohibition for inciting, assisting, or engaging in any “rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States”).
generate the illusion of a crisis
That’s TRUMP’s MO right there.
11 Likes
Got to get those billing hours in.