Posted on 07/19/2023 2:58:42 PM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 @julie_kelly2
Big question: What criminal charges might Jack Smith bring against Trump related to January 6?
As I've explained in interviews and columns for over a year, DOJs looming indictment against Trump for January 6 poses tremendous legal jeopardy to the former president.
Why?
Because DOJs 2 1/2 year-record of success in prosecuting more than 1,000 individuals for even minimal participation in Jan 6 has established new legal precedents that apply to anyone involved in the Capitol protest. This will include Trump and his co-defendants.
January 6 Jurisprudence
It's important to emphasize how DOJ--DC US Attorney's office in particular--and both the DC district and appellate court have established an entirely separate set of laws for J6ers. Some defense lawyers call this "January 6 Jurisprudence," a dig at the prosecutors and judges who've created this inescapable circle of hell for Americans who protested Joe Biden's election that afternoon.
Quick example: Chief Judge Beryl Howell, public enemy #1 when it comes to the Bill of Rights, in early 2021 authored unique "factors" for judges to consider when deciding whether a Jan 6 defendant should be denied bail and remain in custody until trial.
This is unprecedented--imagine a federal judge creating no-bail rules that applied only to BLM or Antifa or pro-abortion protesters. But Howell's court order allowed judges to treat an individual defendant as part of a "mob" to be punished accordingly.
This egregious sort of precedent is permitted because DOJ and judges routinely refer to the events of January 6 as "unprecedented." Further, they collectively are OFFENDED that Americans traveled to THEIR FIEFDOM to support a president they loathe.
Howell condescendingly marveled in one hearing how the defendant "traveled all the way here from Texas," as if he had no right to visit his nation's capital city
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Meanwhile the killer of Ashli Babbitt continues to waltz free.
I’ve been reading on it and since it doesn’t specifically mention the President and Vice President, it’s unclear if it applies. Even John Roberts has said the POTUS is not an officer of the United States in a case circa 2010 where he said people don’t vote for Officers of the United States they vote for Presidents.
Elsewhere the constitution specifies president and vice president, like for impeachment, but this later amendment excludes them yet mentions electors for president and vice president. I didn’t find any submitted versions with the president or vice president in my cursory look at the 39th Congress legislation.
This doesn’t seem to be language slippage because not much later there’s case law that expresses a president is not an Officer of the United States. Do they hang their hat on the oath taking while ignoring the rest of the clause?
Democrats will not care. These are penumbras and emanations types. Ends justifying any means.
History isn’t on their side that I can see. Jefferson Davis wasn’t tried. Former president John Tyler who joined the confederate congress died before the civil war ended. Even the prior conflict over slates of electors didn’t lead to prosecutions that I’ve seen. The systems of government moved on.
It might make sense a president who engages in rebellion and insurrection might be ineligible but that’s not the text. Trump didn’t bring tanks to the Capitol. His words spoke of peaceful and patriotic protest, a constitutionally protected activity. He offered National Guard to help protect the Capitol ahead of time. He tweeted and made a video calling for peace, respect for law and order and for people to go home.
I don’t care what he said or investigated behind close doors unless he hired a team of assassins. Trump spitballs out loud, it’s his process. Dr Birx pointed that out when defending Trump from the bogus “bleach injection” covid briefing. He was talking about infrared lighting as disinfectant and the SNL bleach version became the “truth” everyone knows.
It’s been reported Jared Kushner testified Trump believed (and still believes I assume) the election was stolen from him. If he sincerely believes it, can he be defrauding others by seeking evidence and justice such as in Georgia? Doesn’t matter if Barr or Pence believed it. If you are accusing Trump, it matters what did Trump believe. Was he acting in bad faith or not?
The ONLY pathway for him to stay president was for Congress to do its part through the challenge process and review allegations of specific issues with key states. It makes no sense for him to want a riot that disrupts the only process that saves his second contiguous term. The riot ONLY benefits his opponents.
I absolutely believe Democrats war-gamed this strategy to their aim of permanently destroying the Republican Party and as soon as the National Guard were rejected, Trump should have had alarm bells going off. Was he worried ordering National Guard there on his own be perceived as an attempted coup?
Those of us following things since 2017 are exhausted mentally by the fog of war from the Russia hoax on through but facts, fundamental fairness, rule of law all matter if we’re going to move forward and build confidence in our election system and justice system.
Cut the distracting up-is-down, right-is-left Orwellian crap. The political class haven’t learned the lesson that their malfeasance and negligence lead to the rise of populism. Some have doubled down on bad behaviors or pretending it didn’t happen.
“We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore” — Network
Fear of the ballot box is an existential threat to democracy, not a former president they don’t want us to be able to choose again. After a four year term, Trump is not an unknown therefore we absolutely should have that right. There should be no self-appointed gatekeepers in our democratic process. These people are trying to assassinate Trump again and again without firing a shot. It’s fascist and unAmerican. These cases look politically motivated.
He may not even be the GOP nominee. No votes are cast. I have issues with Trump but I won’t vote for DeSantis. I’ve seen enough there. I am hoping more choices emerge.
Bogus Charges. That’s what.
Hope you’re right- the way deal will be to discredit Trump any way they can and a remedy that has to work it’s way thru the court system may be too late to matter.
The more you know about the Just us system, the more troubling it is.
**************
Any person who gives validity to our corrupt law system is part of the problem.
bkmk
Beware of “Foot Long” Jack. He’ll slap you with a sub.
Excellent post, both of them đź‘Ť
The crap “justice system” in this country has been weaponized against Americans. Foreign freeloaders now have the upper hand.
Littering, illegal parking, failure to use turn signal, not coming to a complete stop at a Stop Sign, failure to bring in trash cans, allowing dog to roam….
Being that it’s all bunk, he’ll probably drop in murder charges for the 7 Jan heart attacks.
“Because DOJs 2 1/2 year-record of success in prosecuting more than 1,000 individuals”
I predict he will get 4 or 5 charges PER person. So expect 5000 individual indictments and all they need is just ONE to lock him up for the rest of his life. Hyperbole? Not at all. And all the prosecutors will have to say to the jury is, “Look, you can just vote to convict on any one of these or I’m going to keep you all here, sequestered, to hear each individual case.”
While these charges are all bogus, I fear they will keep Trump off the ballot in some states or so tie him up in trials he cannot effectively campaign. Trump might do well to give his endorsement to Vivek, another government outsider, with Vivek’s pledge to relentlessly wipe out the Washington swamp.
Not Constitutional. Would be prevented by the Supreme Court. Even Eugene Debs who was imprisoned for sedition appeared on the 1920 presidential ballot while still in jail.
Nope. That will be nixed by the Supreme Court.
And the Supreme Court will just idly sit by and let this happen? Nope!
Annnnnnd you WIN a Kewpie Doll for providing the CORRECT answer. In fact, any such attempt by the Democrats to rig the election in such a way via the Fourteenth Amendment will be counterproductive.
Could be Civil Barraty. Or Mopery With Intent to Creep. Maybe Impure Thoughts on a Steamboat Landing.
Heady stuff, that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.