Posted on 12/29/2023 5:35:18 PM PST by MtnClimber
Persecutor Jack Smith is rightly worried. Even with a Trump Hanging Judge, and an all-but-certain DC hanging jury, things aren’t going his way. He’s moving Trump be denied the right to bring up anything about January 6 in a January 6 trial—none of this silly right-to-mount-a-defense nonsense--and that Trump generally be entirely muzzled about pretty much everything else. Hey, you can put innocent Americans in pre-trial detention for years, so why not? But his biggest problem is Presidential Immunity. Smith would have us believe Trump doesn’t have any of that ephemeral, never-before-imagined power. At American Greatness, Paul Ingrassia explains why Smith is wrong:
Showcasing their [the media’s] ignorance of both the Constitution and history, the mainstream media has framed [presidential immunity] as something of a novel innovation for President Trump’s lawyers, who are advocating for “broad immunity,” implying that no other presidential officeholder has ever made that claim. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Americans who remember their study of the Constitution from high school may recall the Constitution establishes a single POTUS, in whom all executive power is invested:
This construction is reinforced by the Federalist Papers, which stipulate that “energy in the executive” is “the leading character in the definition of good government” (Federalist 70). Further down in that same article, Hamilton asserts that “the executive power is more easily confined when it is one.” In other words, the Founding Fathers called for an “energetic”—that is, a strong and vigorous—president. An energetic executive might only exist with (what the media terms) “broad” immunity; otherwise, it would prove itself impotent in the face of a national crisis.
Sadly, that essential fact of the Constitution may not be taught in contemporary history classes, where deconstruction and reinvention of history seems to be the norm...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Jack Smith is used to losing unanimously in the Supreme Court. Somehow he does not seem embarrassed about the prospect of another time.
I don’t see a single court in this country,including SCOTUS,having the wisdom,integrity or courage to do the right thing here.
“Sentence first–verdict afterward.”
Since a president can be impeached for a crime committed while in office, I very much doubt Trump would have presidential immunity for acts that aren’t 100% official.
There is no valid January 6th case that can be made against Trump from what I’ve read. If the Democrats had a valid case, it would have been made during the second impeachment trial.
Jackboot Smith believes that he IS the law. I pray that he is sadly mistaken.
As for the Florida documents trial, Article II, Section 2 says the President “may require the opinion, in writing...”
This was obviously so a President could ensure he would not get “stabbed in the back” later if something went wrong. Obviously, a President might need to retain such writings if he wanted to hold public office again.
“Somehow he does not seem embarrassed about the prospect of another time.”
For Jack, the process is the punishment, Jack envisions a speedy and unobstructed trial via the oh-so compliant Judge Chutkan, and to get that conviction quickly, via and oh-so left leaning jury pool.
Once he gets his show-conviction, the damage is done, (in his mind), Trump loses the election before winning his appeal.
No Trump presidency, huge amounts spent in legal fees and courtroom clown shows permeating the election-cycle news cycle while Biden slobbers, child-sniffs and scuttles in for a 2nd term.
That’s the vision and goal Jack operates under. Dude is a world class punk.
If only he were granted his prosecutorial powers a couple years earlier!
As for the NY valuation case, Trump was obviously supplying optimistic upside values much like stock analysts in New York City and other places offer up.
Trump would not buy a $100 million building to sell it for $100 million. He might buy it to sell for say $150 million after putting say $20 million in wise improvements in. When buying property, Trump would be looking to get maximum returns per million dollars invested.
Jack Smith needs to be brought up on some serious charges when all this is done.
Jack Smith is an “Enemy Combatant” and should be treated accordingly when President Trump is re-elected.
“I don’t see a single court in this country,including SCOTUS,having the wisdom,integrity or courage to do the right thing here.”
Democrats are looking to remove obstacles to their corrupt form of Communism.
Trump is standing in their way. If Trump is taken out some people in a white marble building of the 1930s on Capitol Hill will be next.
>> Since a president can be impeached for a crime committed while in office, I very much doubt Trump would have presidential immunity for acts that aren’t 100% official.
This Federalist article is the best writing I have come across on the subject. Mr. Scharf reasons persuasively that President Trump very well does have immunity.
Will Scharf is no lightweight pundit, either. Here’s his bio at the end of the article:
“Will Scharf is a former federal prosecutor, who also worked on the confirmations of Supreme Court Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. He is currently a Republican candidate for Missouri Attorney General.”
See what you think. Arguments such as Scharf’s make Jack Smith nervous.
FRegards
The Department of Justice is not worthy of the name.
Perhaps the National Prosecution Bureau would be more appropriate.
.
Strzok did so many treasonous things.
He went to foreign countries to get dirt and surveil the President of the USA.
Both parties protected him and his girlfriend - and everyone in DC believes he’s still being paid under the black budget.
They go to these lengths to protect these guys so the new team knows they’re totally protected.
Strzok’s wife was appointed to ultra-coveted position in Enforcement by Biden.
“Jack Smith needs to be brought up on some serious charges when all this is done.”
That is truly what Jack Smith fears; The return of Trump’s presidency.
Be afraid Jack, be very afraid.
“Nixon v. Fitzgerald”
That decision was to prevent sitting presidents from getting bogged down by thousands of lawsuits.
By the time a January 6th lawsuit went to court, Trump would have been out of office.
I believe the courts have allowed Capitol Police officer lawsuits against Trump.
A federal criminal prosecution should have a higher legal priority than mere civil lawsuits.
Ford pardoned Nixon over Watergate.
“As a result of certain acts or omissions occurring before his resignation from the Office of President, Richard Nixon has become liable to possible indictment and trial for offenses against the United States.”
“I, GERALD R. FORD, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 20, 1969 through August 9,1974.”
https://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov/library/speeches/740061.asp
Screw Smith. Just another two-bit, Watergate-style puddle of puke.
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.