Posted on 08/03/2023 9:15:34 PM PDT by Kevin in California
If you’re saying he supported Clinton after Trump won the nomination or was neutral in the general you need medication. The kind that treats hallucinations.
President Trump may be able to make the argument that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction to hear the case directly.
Article III Section 2:
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;—between Citizens of different States;—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.Since the Democrats have absolute control over the departments of the United States and are using those departments to harass President Trump in advance of the upcoming election, Trump can make the case that the United States is a party to his case of abuse of power and whatever other legal terminology expresses the concern.
-PJ
Not ripe. Lots of histrionics and short on the law will not get your ticket punched to appear before the Supreme Court.
In a case like this where a former Pres is running in the current election, it’s the urgency due to election interference. The SC wouldn’t be trying the case, they don’t due that, they could intervene by delaying the case auntil after the election given the circumstances. The whole thing is election interference and Trump has the Kegan right to run and not be hamstrung by these cases which are clearly designed to derail his campaign.
It’s to postpone the case so he can freely run for office without election interference which is what this is. Trump has the right to run. Delaying the case is what will be asked for.
Kegan right?
“Levin was always just in it for the money.”
I’ve had that feeling for a long time, too.
Sorry— that word was supposed to be “legal”. Spellcheck is not my friend.
washingtonexaminer.com
Presiding Judge Tanya Chutkan in Trump Case donated thousands to Obama
by Gabe Kaminsky, Investigative Reporter, August 01, 2023 11:32 PM
The judge assigned Tuesday to handle special counsel Jack Smith’s 2020 election case against former President Donald Trump poured thousands of dollars into Barack Obama’s campaign coffers, records show.
Trump faced an indictment at the hands of a federal grand jury in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday on four new charges related to his alleged efforts to challenge the results of the 2020 presidential election and incite the Jan. 6 riot on Capitol Hill in 2021.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who will handle the case, was an Obama appointee in 2014 and contributed roughly $4,300 to his presidential campaign and victory fund combined between 2008 and 2012, according to campaign finance disclosures reviewed by the Washington Examiner.
Chutkan’s donations were made while she worked at Boies Schiller Flexner, a major law firm with over a dozen offices across the United States. She also gave $250 in 2008 to the campaign for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), though the Federal Election Commission database doesn’t list her backing any federal candidates after September 2012.
The Obama ties are sure to propel Republicans to allege further that the indictment and case are doomed as politically motivated, as the GOP continues to further the idea that the Department of Justice and intelligence agencies have been weaponized against disfavored speech among conservatives. Trump was ordered to appear for his arraignment on Tuesday in Washington district court and is expected to plead not guilty to the four charges.
He is accused of conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights, according to the indictment.
Trump said in a statement Tuesday that the charges were “nothing more than the latest corrupt chapter in the continued pathetic attempt by the Biden Crime Family and their weaponized Department of Justice to interfere with the 2024 Presidential Election.”
John Lauro, an attorney for Trump, referred to the indictment as “an attack on free speech and political advocacy.”
Chutkan has been involved in another Trump-related case and denied a request from the former president in 2021 seeking to block the National Archives and Records Administration from providing records on the Capitol riot to the since-defunct House select committee probing the events of that day.
“Plaintiff does not acknowledge the deference owed to the incumbent President’s judgment. His position that he may override the express will of the executive branch appears to be premised on the notion that his executive power ‘exists in perpetuity,’” Chutkan wrote in her prior opinion.
Take advice from this neocon forever war fan at your own advice.
Levin is part of the enemy camp. Any advice he gives Trump is a set up.
Are you President Trump? Or just his Mini-Me?
Movie producer Samuel Bronston had gone bankrupt and was asked under oath in court by a lawyer for one of his creditors a series of questions about the many bank accounts the company has had in Europe.
One of them concerned whether he has had an account in Switzerland. “The company had an account in Zürich for six months”, he replied, and answered all other questions concerning Swiss bank accounts in the negative.
Later, it was discovered that he had indeed had a very active personal bank account in Geneva during the years he had been producing films in Europe.
Bronston was convicted of perjury by federal prosecutors who argued that his answer, while truthful in and of itself, was intended to mislead or evade.
After the appeals court upheld the conviction, Bronston v. United States reached the Supreme Court, which overturned the conviction on January 10, 1973.
RULING AIDED CLINTON-—Its ruling, that literally truthful yet technically misleading answers cannot be prosecuted as perjury, has formed an important part of jurisprudence on the matter ever since, even being invoked by President Bill Clinton’s attorneys when he was charged with perjury during his impeachment.
I agree! Both would be great!
The Dems, lawyers and judges all know it is not legal. They will let the charade play out with a guilty verdict, that is all they want. After that it will be overturned a few years later.
Trump wins in 2024, he needs Mark Levin as head of DOJ.
They didn’t say that you just made it up to swat away
They didn’t say that
you just made it up to swat away
Levin only went sweet on trump after he had no choice
He was a Cruz guy
And he at least used to be all rah rah GOPe and enjoyed painting an inaccurate but easy picture for his audience of occasional simpletons
His anti Trump vitriol was hugh as in rabid
Worse than little Ben is now
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.