DC - Former President Donald Trump indicted, 4 federal counts in 2020 election interference, 1 Aug 2023, Trial 4 Mar 2024 #2

[Elley Mae]

I think he's planting the idea that Jack Smith wouldn't follow procedures unless called out publicly. It's absurd to think that, but whatever.

jmo

Well the secret service erased text messages after they were asked for.

U.S. Secret Service members erased Jan. 5-6 texts after messages were requested, says watchdog

The texts were erased after the DHS inspector general requested electronic communications records from the Secret Service as part of its examination of Jan. 6 events.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[CCJD]

The judge in former President Donald Trump's federal election interference case has paused all upcoming deadlines in the case, after special counsel Jack Smith filed a motion Friday requesting the pause.

MSN

 

[GatorFL]

I think he's planting the idea that Jack Smith wouldn't follow procedures unless called out publicly. It's absurd to think that, but whatever.

jmo

Preserve the records so prosecutorial misconduct can be investigated, IMO.

 

[Niner]

Docket updates:

Doc# Date Filed Description
278 Nov 8, 2024 Unopposed MOTION to Vacate Briefing Schedule by USA as to DONALD J. TRUMP. (Gaston, Molly) (Entered: 11/08/2024) Main Document Motion to Vacate

no # Nov 8, 2024 Order on Motion to Vacate AND Set/Reset Deadlines

np # Nov 8, 2024 MINUTE ORDER as to DONALD J. TRUMP: The Government's 278 Unopposed Motion to Vacate Briefing Schedule is hereby GRANTED. All remaining deadlines in the pretrial schedule are VACATED. By December 2, 2024, the Government shall file a status report indicating its proposed course for this case going forward. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 11/8/2024. (zcll)



link: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67656604/united-states-v-trump/?page=3

 

[GRT]

<modsnip - quoted post was removed>
It looks like they'll end before he takes office.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

It looks like they'll end before he takes office.

Yes, I shouldn't blame Trump for ending the cases against him, it's just (arbitrary) DOJ policy. <modsnip - off topic>

 

[GRT]

Yes, I shouldn't blame Trump for ending the cases against him, it's just (arbitrary) DOJ policy. <modsnip - off topic>

<modsnip - quoted post was snipped>. But, from what I read, it won't be him ending the cases against him. Jack Smith has petitioned the Court to end them. From my understanding, it involves protecting the "will of the people" thing.

At first I thought the cases would just be on hold for four years, but now that I've listened to a few legal experts, if they are "paused," they are actually ended. But, IANAL so I can't say with any real confidence.

However, there may be a couple more impeachments...

 

[TootsieFootsie]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/11/08/trump-capitol-riot-jan-6-jack-smith/0913f564-9dfa-11ef-b90e-a2320192900f_story.html

WASHINGTON — The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s 2020 election interference case canceled any remaining court deadlines Friday while prosecutors assess the “the appropriate course going forward” in light of the Republican's presidential victory.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Cancelling the deadline doesn't sound to me like the case has been dropped.

 

[SouthAussie]

I feel really sorry for Jack Smith. I bet he wishes he never agreed to return from prosecuting war crimes in Europe.
He is an intelligent man who has always (imo) tried to do what is best for justice. Help right the wrongs.

And now Elon Musk is saying that Jack's so-called abuse of the justice system cannot go unpunished, with Jordan and Loudermilk saying to preserve the records (as if they won't be preserved!)

Trump allies push to punish Jack Smith in first test of retribution vow

 

[SouthAussie]

"Legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said that if special counsel Jack Smith were to talk publicly about President-elect Trump’s federal court cases, he “doubt it would go so well for President Trump.”

“What you could do is call him in to testify. And there I would say to the Republicans, be careful what you ask for, because if Jack Smith has a forum to talk about these cases, it’s — I doubt it would go so well for President Trump”

When asked during the interview if Smith could be jailed, Toobin offered reassurances, saying that “as long as the rule of law exists in something like its current form, there is no way you can imprison Jack Smith.” "

Toobin warns GOP against probing Jack Smith: ‘Doubt it would go so well for President Trump’

 

[GRT]

"Legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin said that if special counsel Jack Smith were to talk publicly about President-elect Trump’s federal court cases, he “doubt it would go so well for President Trump.”

“What you could do is call him in to testify. And there I would say to the Republicans, be careful what you ask for, because if Jack Smith has a forum to talk about these cases, it’s — I doubt it would go so well for President Trump”

When asked during the interview if Smith could be jailed, Toobin offered reassurances, saying that “as long as the rule of law exists in something like its current form, there is no way you can imprison Jack Smith.” "

Toobin warns GOP against probing Jack Smith: ‘Doubt it would go so well for President Trump’

If the GOP is smart—and I kind of question the integrity of anyone who seeks higher office—they will not seek retribution against Smith for filing these cases because that sort of thing only escalates.

I haven't seen any indication from Smith that suggests he will disappear the evidence. It always struck me that he believed in what he was doing.

Even though the cases will be over, CNN's legal analyst thinks Smith will provide a Special Report sometime before Trump takes office. Maybe that's what these veiled threats are about--trying to influence the report? JMOO Just a wild guess on my part.

 

[SouthAussie]

Law professor Claire Finkelstein - University of Pennsylvania - thinks that Jack Smith's ideal scenario (in both federal cases) would be to stay the proceedings. That way the cases can then get picked up again in 2029, if they wish to do so at that time.

Also, if trump fires Jack Smith and moves to dismiss the charges, Judge Chutkan could dismiss them without prejudice. Meaning that prosecutors could pick up this case again once trump leaves office.

Paraphrased from ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/11/10/trump-trials-tracker-latest-news/

 

[ilovewings]

I feel really sorry for Jack Smith. I bet he wishes he never agreed to return from prosecuting war crimes in Europe.
He is an intelligent man who has always (imo) tried to do what is best for justice. Help right the wrongs.

And now Elon Musk is saying that Jack's so-called abuse of the justice system cannot go unpunished, with Jordan and Loudermilk saying to preserve the records (as if they won't be preserved!)

Trump allies push to punish Jack Smith in first test of retribution vow

I feel so badly for Jack Smith who was just doing his job--- I would imagine he knows what is coming and is preparing accordingly by obtaining counsel to defend him from bogus allegations. Wishing that he stays safe.

 

[SouthAussie]

This Washington Post associate editor (Ruth Marcus) says that Jack Smith is expected to resign before the inauguration.

She also says that there are long standing rules in place that protect prosecutors against having to be held civilly or criminally liable for decisions about what charges to bring and against whom.

She says the notion of Jack Smith or his team being held criminally liable is ludicrous. The indictments were obtained before two duly constituted federal grand juries. And the cases were supervised by federal judges.

Also, that there is no evidence that Jack departed from justice guidelines, nor that he violated the law.

He is just doing what a lawyer does.

As Jack Smith winds up his cases, Team Trump cranks up the retribution

 

[Lilibet]

She also says that there are long standing rules in place that protect prosecutors against having to be held civilly or criminally liable for decisions about what charges to bring and against whom.

There may be long-standing rules, but that doesn’t mean they’ll be followed by the new AG. Jack may not end up being criminally or civilly liable, but they’ll put him through a legal nightmare before backing off.

JMCO (Just my cynical opinion)

 

[ilovewings]

There may be long-standing rules, but that doesn’t mean they’ll be followed by the new AG. Jack may not end up being criminally or civilly liable, but they’ll put him through a legal nightmare before backing off.

JMCO (Just my cynical opinion)

They are going to put him thru he--- even though he is probably legally protected

 

[SouthAussie]

"Investigations carried out by Congress ... can be a double-edged sword for Republicans. A probe in this case will involve testimony about and the disclosure of that evidence Jordan and Loudermilk want preserved. Such a proceeding may not be what Trump wants, given that it puts a renewed focus on acts that resulted in dozens of criminal charges against him, both federal and state.” - Shan Wu, a legal analyst and former federal prosecutor

Why Democrats might like the Republicans’ war against Jack Smith

The more Republicans go after special counsel Jack Smith, the greater the focus on Donald Trump’s many alleged felonies.

www.msnbc.com

 

[LeeAnnB]

 

[SouthAussie]

"Former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner argues that Smith should “force Donald Trump’s hand” by indicting his co-conspirators, who do not have presidential immunity.

Ty Cobb, who served as White House counsel to Trump in his first administration and now is a critic of his former boss, has explained that “they’re listed as conspirators, not unindicted co-conspirators . . . which is a significant thing because it suggests they will be indicted unless they work out some arrangement with the government.”

The co-conspirators are believed to include Rudy Giuliani ... John Eastman ... Sidney Powell ... Jeffrey Clark .... Kenneth Chesebro ...

Indicting those folks would keep the prosecution flame alive on the theory that the January 6th case is serious business, and that voters have no power to wipe out federal criminal law altogether, even when it comes to Trump.

This option would send a message that Smith stands behind the integrity of the process and the importance of the case for our democracy—and that if the indictment is going to go down, Trump must be the one to do it, by issuing pardons and shutting down the prosecutions."

Jack Smith’s Hard Choices