Day: January 3, 2024
#News #Times #NewsAndTimes #NT #TNT #Israel #World #USA #POTUS #DOJ #FBI #CIA #DIA #ODNI #Mossad #Putin #Russia #GRU #Ukraine #SouthCaucasus #NewAbwehr #Bloggers
–
Jack Smith Keeps Telegraphing Some Seriously Scandalous Trump Crimes https://t.co/W3AVHYKurg— Michael Novakhov (@mikenov) January 3, 2024
As Special Counsel Jack Smith makes the case that former President Donald Trump shouldn’t have vast immunity to commit crimes, Smith has compiled a very curious list of theoretical misdeeds that seem to telegraph potential bombshells at his upcoming D.C. trial.
Accepting a bribe, ordering an FBI director to fake evidence against a political foe, ordering the military to murder critics, and even selling nuclear secrets to a foreign enemy—these are the particular and peculiar crimes that prosecutors say Trump could get away with if he succeeds in arguing that presidential immunity gives him king-like powers to do as he pleases from the White House.
Again, theoretically, of course.
“In each of these scenarios, the president could assert that he was simply executing the laws; or communicating with the Department of Justice; or discharging his powers as commander-in-chief; or engaging in foreign diplomacy,” prosecutors wrote to appellate judges on Saturday.
Former President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a “Commit to Caucus” event for his supporters in Coralville, Iowa.
They used nearly identical phrasing in a court filing to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan in October.
The billionaire and the special prosecutor are currently battling ahead of a criminal trial in the nation’s capital, tentatively scheduled to begin in March on the eve of Super Tuesday. Trump is desperately trying to delay it, with his lawyers openly complaining that the trial could interrupt his presidential campaign at the height of the state primary elections. Meanwhile, Smith wants to start it as soon as possible, something that would allow GOP voters choosing their top Republican candidate to see federal prosecutors finally lay out their evidence that Trump broke the law by trying to overturn the 2020 election.
But D.C. appellate judges must first consider key issues, including whether Trump can effectively render himself immune from criminal prosecution by justifying everything he did as an official presidential act.
That’s what has Smith’s prosecutors warning that Trump’s delusions of invulnerability pose a danger to the fate of the republic.
“The implications of the defendant’s broad immunity theory are sobering. In his view, a court should treat a President’s criminal conduct as immune from prosecution as long as it takes the form of correspondence with a state official about a matter in which there is a federal interest, a meeting with a member of the executive branch, or a statement on a matter of public concern,” they wrote on Saturday.
Over the weekend, the usual legal commentators who weigh in on MAGA madness zeroed in on Smith’s bizarre examples of specific scandals.
“Interesting choice of hypotheticals…” tweeted the lawyer George Conway, whose ex-wife Kellyanne Conway long served as a Trump political adviser.
“It took quite an imagination,” he later added, sarcastically.
Smith’s prosecution team has been incredibly tight-lipped in the run-up to trial, forcing journalists to rely almost entirely on the steady stream of court documents in the case—but leaving the curious crowd of onlookers reading the tea leaves and trying to make sense of hints and innuendo. Some found it humorous when the D.C. indictment charging the 45th American president ran 45 pages. This time around, the peanut gallery swears Smith is telegraphing his case.
Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti, who co-hosts the It’s Complicated legal podcast, drew his followers’ attention to Smith’s warning that blanket immunity would spare any president “who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy [or] a president who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics.”
Trump’s attorneys have previously shrugged off any notion that these theoretical crimes are rooted in reality. The last time prosecutors floated these ideas, defense lawyers Todd Blanche and John F. Lauro ripped into Smith’s team for even venturing into that zone.
“Ignoring actual lessons from history, the government provides a list of lurid hypotheticals that have never happened—including treason and murder,” they wrote in a Oct. 26 court filing.
They also tried to make a legal distinction between Smith’s examples and whatever Trump actually did, doubling down on their theory that the billionaire was acting in his official capacity when he told Georgia’s top elections official to “find” 11,780 non-existent votes, attempted to employ fake electors, and tried to pressure his vice president to interrupt certification of the election results.
But in distinguishing between Smith’s examples and Trump’s actions, defense lawyers also cornered themselves—making clear that if Trump actually did any of Smith’s “lurid” hypotheticals, there’s no way his official position would save him.
“Some or all of these hypotheticals, depending on the facts, would likely involve purely private conduct, rendering them irrelevant here,” they wrote.
The fate of the trial is now in the hands of Judges J. Michelle Childs, Karen LeCraft Henderson, and Florence Y. Pan. The judges haven’t heard oral arguments yet, but they gave some indication on Tuesday that they plan to explore whether they might just kick the case right back to the trial judge—or force Smith off the case entirely.
In an extremely brief order on Tuesday, the judges advised that “counsel be prepared to address” what they called “discrete issues” raised in court filings by third parties. So far, that only includes an argument made by the government watchdog nonprofit American Oversight that Trump’s supposed immunity isn’t even an appellate issue before the trial takes place—and an argument by conservative legal scholars that claims “no statute creates a Special Counsel with the jurisdiction and authority Smith wields.”
Smith’s prosecutors and Trump’s defense team are scheduled to argue in court next Tuesday.
My Opinion: Truth is not determined by the Public Opinion Polls which shift and change direction like a summer wind, and are influenced by the various manipulations. Truth is determined by facts, analysis, and Laws, and it is above the “FBI frenzy” or no “frenzy”, which itself is a matter of opinion.
Published Jan 03, 2024 07:54 Updated Jan 03, 2024 09:10
Benzinga – by Shanthi Rexaline, Benzinga Editor.
The inaugural phase of the 2024 presidential election begins with the Iowa Republican Caucus on Jan. 15. Despite the looming threat of debarment, the momentum is notably shifting in favor of Donald Trump, as indicated by a recent poll released on Monday.
What Happened: A Washington Post-University of Maryland poll identified a decline in the percentage of individuals attributing responsibility to Trump for the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riots, relative to December 2021.
Approximately 53% of respondents indicated that the former president was either a great deal or a good amount responsible for the riot, in contrast to 60% in 2021. Conducted online and via phone from Dec. 14-18, 2023, the poll engaged 1,024 adults.
A noteworthy trend emerged, indicating a reduced perception of violence among the Jan. 6 protestors compared to 2021. The Post’s report highlighted evolving views in follow-up interviews, where some now believed the riot was instigated by law enforcement to quell political dissent.
A voter from Ohio, Colleen Michaels, captured the sentiment: “There were so many people that felt the election was rigged. It was not right for them to break in like that, but they were fed up and frustrated, and they were whipped into a frenzy by the FBI and others.”
However, only 33% believed Trump was innocent of criminal conspiracy charges related to defrauding the U.S., contrasting with 56% who considered him guilty. While 57% believed the Department of Justice was holding Trump accountable under the law like any other individual, 41% perceived unfair targeting.
The proportion of respondents endorsing President Joe Biden‘s legitimate election decreased from 69% in 2021 to 62% presently, leading to a rise in those deeming Biden’s election as illegitimate, from 29% to 36%. Addressing a separate question, 33% asserted widespread evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 elections, up from 30% in 2021, with the proportion claiming solid evidence dropping from 68% to 63%.
The significance lies in the efforts by liberals and activists in various states to debar Trump from the 2024 presidential ballot, invoking Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Simultaneously, Trump seeks relief under presidential immunity.
Despite facing civil and criminal cases, Trump holds a commanding position in the GOP primary race with 61.3% support, as per a composite score compiled from multiple polls by polling analytic firm FiveThirtyEight. In contrast, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis lags significantly with only 11.3% voter support.
Read Next: How To Invest In Startups
Image made via photos on Shutterstock
© 2024 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.
(3 Jan 2024) Here’s the latest for Wednesday January 3rd: Trump appeals decision that knocked him off Maine ballot; Official says US believes Hamas militants used Gaza’s biggest hospital; Russian missiles strike Ukraine; Crews in Japan search for earthquake survivors.
Subscribe for more Breaking News: http://smarturl.it/AssociatedPress
Website: https://apnews.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AP
Facebook: https://facebook.com/APNews
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/APNews/
This video may be available for archive licensing via https://newsroom.ap.org/home