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 ...
But we’ve never had a president arrested with 450 years of felonies in the 200 years of Constitutional order. I mean would they punt like they did the Texas case?
If Trump had been there or anywhere close, possibly, but he was not.
A DC jury convicted Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio of obstruction of an official proceeding AND HE WASN'T EVEN IN DC ON JANUARY 6.
That’s the route they’re taking, the 14th amendment, section 3. He can be taken off the ballots in key states.
************
I doubt it.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment has been used twice since 1869. Once around the time of WW1 and the case was lost on appeal and in 2021 when some crackpot judge removed a New Mexico County Commissioner from office.
They tried the same crap with Trump’s tax returns, if he didn’t release them they would keep him off the ballot. Eventually the idiots lost in court.
Trump will be the Republican nominee and will be on the ballot in all 50 states.
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.