posted October 03, 2024 08:49 PM            

quote:

---

Why is it [Jack Smith's motion] a completely lawless way to proceed?

First of all, it’s violated - this is Jack Smith’s new 165 pager, it’s violated President Trump’s procedural right - once Jack Smith filed a superseding indictment - to move to dismiss that indictment. We’re not going to see that document from President Trump now until November 7th. Hopefully, the election will be wrapped up by then. But it’s clear that basically we’re dealing with the fact that Jack Smith gets to launch his October surprise, dirty up President Trump, and that flips the ordinary order, which is under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12, President Trump should have gotten to move first after Jack Smith filed his superseding indictment. He’s been stripped of that right by Judge Chutkan. So that’s a procedural violation.

---

posted October 03, 2024 08:51 PM            

quote:

---

But there are also constitutional violations. All of the key amendments, and there are three of them, that protects the rights of criminal defendants are being violated here.

First, the Fourth Amendment. Clearly, some of the purported evidence or statements in this 165 pager involved information that they developed through warrants. None of that information should really be entered into the public record until and unless President Trump gets the opportunity to challenge that evidence in a suppression hearing because the evidence might have been developed unlawfully. And we know that various giant warrants that were issued or warrants that were issued in violation of President Trump’s executive and other privileges were issued. And so all of that should have been hashed out first. This manner of proceeding by Judge Chutkan is just steamrolling over the Fourth Amendment rights.

---

posted October 03, 2024 08:52 PM            

quote:

---

Then, there’s the Fifth Amendment and the Fifth Amendment guarantees due process. I’ve already mentioned how President Trump’s due process rights in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure have been violated. But also President Trump, none of this evidence should come in. A lot of it is opinion evidence. A lot of it is various advisors of President Trump saying that they thought that he lost the election. But that’s opinion information, right? And it’s not the kind of thing that is free from President Trump and his lawyers challenging in order to try to keep that information out. So those due process rights are being violated as well.

---

posted October 03, 2024 09:02 PM            

quote:

---

And then, there’s the Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right of criminal defendants to confront their accusers, and not just to confront at any time but to confront at meaningful times. If all of this information that’s coming in from grand juries or warrants or from other interviews that the FBI conducted is being all slammed together in one hodge podge of a document, President Trump can’t push back on any of that with the people right in front of him and right in front of his trial lawyers to guarantee that the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause rights are protected. So you have three of the biggest provisions of the Bill of Rights, three out of the 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights being violated by this process. It’s really amazing.

---

posted October 03, 2024 09:20 PM            

quote:

---

And then there are also violations of the Trump v. U.S. immunity decision on July 1st. We have the fact that I don’t see how much of any of this evidence comes in under the Evidentiary Exclusionary Rule that was created in the Trump v. U.S. case to recognize that you need to protect the internal deliberations of the Justice Department. So, that’s also being violated.

Jack Smith has purported to say well he has to redact information about who these witnesses are but redactions are very transparent. You can slice through them and media has already begun that process. I’ve begun that process personally. So that was all just a smokescreen. It’s a smokescreen designed to make it seem as if it were legally plausible to release this 165 pager in the final month of the election and it’s not.

---

posted October 03, 2024 10:25 PM            

quote:

---

...that nowhere in the signature attribution of the filing itself, is the U.S. Dept of Justice identified as the institution granting Jack Smith legal authorization for the prosecution. As Jeff Clark notes, “it raises the question of whether use of any Justice Department organ to go after a former President of the United States is constitutional and could comport with the Supreme Court’s July 1, 2024, immunity decision in Trump v. United States.”

---

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2024/10/03/jack-smith-files-165-page-re-re-revised-indictment-weaving-a-lawfare-story-for-media-consumption/#more-264743

posted October 04, 2024 01:40 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dhyana:
[b]Jack Smith's Weak, Watered-Down Election Interference Gambit

http://www.declassified.live/p/jack-smiths-weak-watered-down-election [/B]

---

So you were claiming this, why?

posted October 04, 2024 01:43 AM            

He had a meltdown after the new evidence was released.

posted October 04, 2024 09:59 AM            

quote:

---

I am seeing so many attacks on democracy that eclipse January 6th.

---

posted October 04, 2024 01:00 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dhyana:
Interesting note by Clark:

...that nowhere in the signature attribution of the filing itself, is the U.S. Dept of Justice identified as the institution granting Jack Smith legal authorization for the prosecution. As Jeff Clark notes, 妬t raises the question of whether use of any Justice Department organ to go after a former President of the United States is constitutional and could comport with the Supreme Court痴 July 1, 2024, immunity decision in Trump v. United States.

---