Smith’s filing on Trump a “Cheap Shot” – per CNN
That’s not a headline I ever expected!
Special Counsel Jack Smith “bent ordinary procedure” to kneecap former President Trump after he failed to try the candidate before the November election, a legal analyst argued in a piece for New York magazine.
In Thursday’s “Jack Smith’s October Cheap Shot” essay, CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig analyzed Smith’s decision to drop a 165-page federal court filing related to the issue of Trump’s immunity from prosecution.
According to Honig, Smith successfully received permission from Judge Tanya Chutkan to file a 180-page-long brief — four times the normal maximum.
“The larger, if less obvious, headline is that Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he’ll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump’s electoral prospects. At this point, there’s simply no defending Smith’s conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis,” Honig wrote.
Not exactly a new allegation, true. But when even CNN is saying it?
In standard criminal procedure and under federal rules, a prosecutor first files an indictment, the defense makes a motion and then the prosecution responds to said motions. However, Honig said Smith turned these rules “on their head” when he asked Chutkan to file without a pending defense motion.
“Trump’s team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith’s request to file first was ‘procedurally irregular’ — moments before she ruled in Smith’s favor, as she’s done at virtually every consequential turn,” Honig continued.
Nothing like impartiality, huh? Smith did complain earlier that Trump’s comments could prejudice a jury (face it, the man is a loose cannon – I suspect the only ones more concerned over what he might say than the prosecution is the defense. So the big question would be “influence a jury which way?”)
Now, Smith is using grand-jury testimony, which often remains hidden at this stage of a case, and has drafted a massive document that “contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination.”
If ya gotta try someone in the court of public opinion, it’s usually because your case is fatally weak and you hope no one will notice.
Honig also claimed that Smith’s conduct violates core Department of Justice principles and policy.
Category: 2024 Election, Crime, Democrats
There should be criminal conspiracy charges brought against Smith and judge Chutkan for election tampering
Well, when you can’t beat them at the ballot box, beat at the jury box. Aren’t you glad that we don’t live in some 3rd world shithole where the corrupt government persecutes their political opponents on Trumped up charges?
Hack, a camel is a wooden floating platform that a ship can dock against when their is no dock to dock against…. the side fenders could have moved so the side of the ship made contact with the bare steel collar hence the hole on the side. This was back in 1964 awhile ago. the gangplank went down to the camel and then we walked over to a stationary platform and climbed up a large stair to a sloping hill and walked up the path lined with German barbed wire pillboxes. You could see the U Boat pens in the distance as we walked. Next thing we see is a French lady comes up to us and asks if we were German Sailors.
I thought that we were already in a 3rd world shit hole when Herr biden and Frau harris took over
Did I miss something? Didn’t federal judge rule a while back that Mr Smith was not a legitimate Special Counsel/Prosecutor as the appointment process had been sidestepped.
Whatever became of that?
It does appear to be a clear violation of the Hatch Act. That’s only wrong when the Rs do it.
Just another case of prosecutorial misconduct for Jack Smith, who has never been appointed as Special Counsel to any investigation (nor confirmed by the Senate).
Jack “My case was overturned unanimously” Smith breaking the rules as a prosecutor? NO!!! This case, the Mara-a-Lago raid and others proved he’s nothing more than the Democrats hit man. He’s a modern day Lavrentiy Beria working for KGB errrr DOJ. No, I had it right, KGB & DOJ under the Dems are interchangeable. They both have your guilt predetermined and work for Marxist, tryant overlords.
CNN is hedging against a Trump win by trying to suck up to him now then claim how impartial they are…bullshit
There will come a reckoning…eventually if not sooner.
“Smith did complain earlier that Trump’s comments could prejudice a jury”
And where oh where, in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, is any given defendant enjoined by default from making comments on matters directly personal and related to him?
The same way that every MSM outlet has been making “extrajudicial comments” over the last 4 years that could (and probably have) also prejudice a jury.
If Jack is worried about Trump’s comments prejudicing a DC jury, maybe he should consider requesting a venue change.
I think he did and it was denied.
Probably just getting tired of this happening.
Jack is getting good at that:
Former Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell conviction overturned by the Supreme Court.
Former Senator John Edwards trial resulted in a hung jury and mistrial.
The attempted prosecution of former Senator Robert Menendez, which collapsed in a mistrial.
The failed federal corruption conviction of NY Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver after the charges were overturned by an appeals court.
And now former President Trump…
I have to say, to fuck up the Mendez prosecution requires a particular brand of stupid that is seldom seen at that level.
Jack is mean that way, probably because he wears a beard.
(…and Doug Emhoff must’ve shaved his off before marrying Kamala because he hasn’t knocked up any more employees or slapped anyone around in public.)
CNN? Wow. How many times this year has Hell frozen over? I lost count.
I haven’t trusted anything from Turner’s Pravda since they left a ‘man’ behind:
Democrats gonna lynch.