SubRosa wrote: Sun Oct 06, 2024 7:32 pm Does anyone on the LGC other than me watch the podcasts from https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/l ... 1580828595 ?

The best online take ever.

SR

SubRosa wrote: Sun Oct 06, 2024 7:32 pm Does anyone on the LGC other than me watch the podcasts from https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/l ... 1580828595 ?

The best online take ever.

SR

SubRosa wrote: Sun Oct 06, 2024 9:59 pm The only neg on their show is toeing the Dem line on gun control.

Other than that...

Wino wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2024 2:47 pm Received my mail in ballot in today's mail. Completed, added required info, sealed, signed and postage added. Will drop at main PO tomorrow. Will be tracking until it's recorded.

New Jack Smith filing asserts Trump is responsible for Jan. 6 Capitol riots

The judge in former President Trump's federal Jan. 6 case on Thursday evening rejected his lawyers' request to delay the court-ordered release of a redacted appendix of new evidence from special counsel Jack Smith.

Why it matters: Trump's lawyers said delaying the case until after the election would allow them to submit a counter to the appendix that the special counsel's office filed, but U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan denied their request and ordered Smith's dossier be unsealed with redactions on Friday.

Justice Department officials have been evaluating how to wind down the two federal criminal cases against President-elect Donald Trump before he takes office to comply with long-standing department policy that a sitting president can’t be prosecuted, two people familiar with the matter tell NBC News. The latest discussions stand in contrast with the pre-election legal posture of special counsel Jack Smith, who in recent weeks took significant steps in the election interference case against Trump without regard to the electoral calendar. But the sources say DOJ officials have come to grips with the fact that no trial is possible anytime soon in either the Jan. 6 case or the classified documents matter — both of which are mired in legal issues that would likely prompt an appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, even if Trump had lost the election. Now that Trump will become president again, DOJ officials see no room to pursue either criminal case against him — and no point in continuing to litigate them in the weeks before he takes office, the people said.

The sources said it will be up to Smith to decide exactly how to unwind the charges and many questions remain unanswered. Could the prosecutions resume after Trump leaves office or would they be time-barred? What happens to the evidence? What about the two other defendants charged with helping Trump hide classified documents? Will the special counsel write a report, as special counsels usually do? At the same time, Trump’s legal team is weighing its own next steps for how to resolve the outstanding federal cases in his favor now that he is the projected winner of the election. The ultimate goal is to get all the federal and state cases wiped out completely — the strategic call is how best to accomplish that task, according to a person familiar with the discussions. If the Trump side, for example, moved again in court to dismiss the charges in Washington related to election interference, then the Justice Department could use its legal response to explain its position on not moving forward with that case. Trump’s New York criminal case presents different challenges with a felony conviction and sentencing hearing scheduled for Nov. 26. The immediate goal of Trump’s legal team is to get that postponed indefinitely or otherwise dismissed. .

The Georgia election interference case against Trump remains tied up on appeals over ethical issues surrounding the district attorney. “The American people have re-elected President Trump with an overwhelming mandate to Make America Great Again," Trump Campaign Spokesman Steven Chung said in a statement. "It is now abundantly clear that Americans want an immediate end to the weaponization of our justice system, so we can, as President Trump said in his historic speech last night, unify our country and work together for the betterment of our nation." The DOJ’s thinking on Trump’s federal cases flows from a 2000 memo by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which affirmed a Watergate-era conclusion that a prosecution of a sitting president would “unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the presidency.” “In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’” the memo concluded, quoting the earlier conclusion.

The practical reality of Trump’s electoral victory Tuesday is that he is unlikely ever to face legal consequences in relation to the serious federal criminal charges brought against him by career Justice Department prosecutors working with career FBI agents. Some commentators have said the charges were arguably more serious than the conduct in the Watergate scandal that cost Richard Nixon the presidency and left him banished from politics. In the case accusing Trump of conspiring to illegally overturn the 2020 election, he is charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights. In the classified documents case, he is charged with willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, lying to investigators and withholding documents in a federal investigation. “The idea that you could win an election to avoid justice just cuts so deeply against my expectations for our legal system and for our politics too,” said Joyce Vance, a former U.S. attorney and NBC News contributor. “But the voters have spoken, and that’s where we are.” She added that it has never been a foregone conclusion that Trump would be convicted — that would be up to a jury. “What bothers me so deeply is that he’s avoided the quintessential part of American justice — letting a jury decide, based on the evidence.”

President-elect Donald Trump's criminal conviction lives on, at least for another week. A New York judge on Tuesday deferred making an immediate decision on whether presidential immunity should have prevented jurors from seeing certain evidence at Trump's trial this spring — and if the verdict should be tossed. Justice Juan Merchan said he will rule next week on whether a July Supreme Court ruling granting Trump presidential immunity for official acts precludes a jury from finding him guilty after a criminal trial this spring. Merchan did not directly address sentencing, which had been scheduled for Nov. 26. A prosecutor for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg emailed Merchan Sunday night, saying Trump asked for a pause "based on the impact on this proceeding from the results of the Presidential election."

"The People agree that these are unprecedented circumstances," wrote the prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, who added there's a need to balance the interests of "a jury verdict of guilt following trial that has the presumption of regularity; and the Office of the President." Trump lawyer Emil Bove followed up in his own email to Merchan, writing that a "stay, and dismissal, are necessary to avoid unconstitutional impediments to President Trump's ability to govern." The long-awaited ruling, on whether evidence shown at trial should have been shielded from jurors, due to presidential immunity, could have profound consequences for the case.

Trump's legal team, which is led by Todd Blanche, seized on the landmark ruling, demanding Trump's conviction be set aside, and his sentencing canceled. They argued jurors should never have heard testimony related to Trump's communications with former White House communications director Hope Hicks, or his former executive assistant and director of White House Operations Madeleine Westerhout. Prosecutors argued in response that the Supreme Court ruling didn't apply to evidence shown at trial. They also said the material protested by Trump's lawyers were "a sliver of the mountains" of evidence the jury considered.

Special counsel Jack Smith and his team plan to resign before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, a source familiar with the matter said. Smith’s office has been evaluating the best path for winding down its work on the two outstanding federal criminal cases against Trump, as the Justice Department’s longstanding position is that it cannot charge a sitting president with a crime. The New York Times first reported Smith will step down. The looming question in the weeks ahead is whether Smith's final report, detailing his charging decisions, will be made public before Inauguration Day. The special counsel's office is required under Justice Department regulations to provide a confidential report to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who can choose to make it public. In late October, Trump said in a radio interview that he would immediately fire Smith as special counsel if re-elected. “It’s so easy — I would fire him within two seconds,” Trump said, adding that he got “immunity at the Supreme Court." The next attorney general could decide not to release Smith's final report as well.

Before Trump’s re-election last week, Smith and his team had continued moving forward in their election interference case against Trump. After Trump’s victory, however, a federal judge overseeing the case agreed to give the special counsel’s office until Dec. 2 to decide how to proceed. The Justice Department indicted Trump last year for his efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. But Smith's case was hampered early on by appeals from Trump's legal team and then in July of this year by the Supreme Court's ruling that he has immunity for some acts he took as president. In August, Smith's team re-tooled the indictment — stripping it of certain evidence the high court said was off limits and a federal grand jury returned a superseding indictment in the case.

The Justice Department had also charged Trump in Florida with allegedly hoarding classified documents after he left office and then refusing to give them back. But a federal judge dismissed the case in July, saying Smith's appointment was illegal. That case remains on appeal. When the former president was first indicted, Smith said he would move quickly to trial, but Trump's legal team successfully sought to delay in both cases while then-candidate Trump routinely lambasted Smith at his rallies and online. The election-interference case in Washington was narrowly focused on Trump, but an open question remains as to whether any unnamed co-conspirators referenced in the indictments face future legal jeopardy.

There’s no Justice Department norm for alleged criminal conspirators to avoid being prosecuted because they are connected to an incoming president, or because that future president is likely to pardon them.

CDFingers wrote: Tue Nov 12, 2024 2:49 pm We may now surmise why dictators get executed when overthrown.

CDF

A Georgia appeals court on Monday canceled until further notice oral arguments on an effort by President-elect Donald Trump and other co-defendants to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from the criminal election interference prosecution against them. The Georgia Court of Appeals acted on its own in canceling the arguments scheduled for Dec. 5. The court did not explain its reason for the move. Three other criminal cases against Trump have been put in limbo since the Republican won the presidential election nearly two weeks ago.

Trump and the other defendants are charged in state court in Atlanta with crimes related to their attempt to undo his 2020 election loss in Georgia to President Joe Biden. Earlier this year, the judge in the case, Scott McAfee, allowed DA Willis to remain on the case despite revelations that she had had a romantic relationship with a top prosecutor assigned to the case. Trump and other defendants had appealed that ruling, and the Court of Appeals in June halted proceedings in the case pending the outcome of that effort.

A New York state judge in Manhattan last week delayed until Tuesday ruling on whether to toss out guilty verdicts against Trump in his criminal hush money case there. The Manhattan DA’s office had asked the judge for the delay, citing the need to evaluate how Trump’s electoral win affects the case, where he is awaiting sentencing.

New York prosecutors suggested in a Tuesday court filing that they are open to postponing sentencing in President-elect Trump's hush money case, even if it waits until his second presidential term ends in 2029. The filing is the latest effort by prosecutors to keep the case against Trump going after Judge Juan Merchan postponed a Nov. 26 sentencing in the case following Trump's re-election. Trump's lawyers had encouraged Merchan to throw the case out "to facilitate the orderly transition of executive power." The legal team has also requested a new trial for Trump, and a decision on that is still pending.

If Merchan dismisses the case, it would be a huge win for Trump, the first president convicted of a felony, who has evaded potential imprisonment by securing a second presidential term. He was indicted in three other cases, all of which have been on ice or undercut for months.
In the filing, prosecutors acknowledged that "consideration must be given" to pausing the case until Trump's second term ends. Prosecutors also stated that they "are mindful of the demands and obligations of the presidency" and recognize that Trump's White House return presents "unprecedented legal questions." However, they said they are opposed to efforts to dismiss the case altogether, as Trump's legal team has urged Merchan to do.

Steven Cheung, a spokesperson for Trump, said Tuesday the "lawless case is now stayed," applauding a "total and definitive victory for President Trump." However, no decision has been made on the next steps regarding the case. Trump's victory in the 2024 election, along with the Supreme Court's ruling over the summer that presidents have immunity for "official acts" while in office, upended the future of the criminal cases against him. In May, Trump was convicted on 34 counts in New York for falsifying business records in connection with a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels over an alleged sexual encounter. He has denied all wrongdoing.

The judge overseeing President-elect Trump's New York criminal hush money trial on Friday indefinitely postponed his sentencing, multiple outlets reported. It's a major win for Trump, who appears poised to avoid serious punishment for the 34 felony counts he was convicted of in May. Judge Juan Merchan on Friday also granted Trump's legal team's request to file a motion to dismiss the case entirely. That motion is due by Dec. 2 and the prosecution's response is due by Dec. 9, Merchan said.

"All of the sham lawfare attacks against President Trump are now destroyed and we are focused on Making America Great Again," Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement. Prosecutors earlier this week suggested that they would be open to postponing Trump's sentencing even if it waits until his second presidential term ends in 2029. The filing demonstrated their effort to keep their case against Trump alive after Merchan initially postponed the sentencing. The delay aligns with Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's requested schedule, the Hill reported. Trump's team requested a timeline that would have moved the dismissal deadline closer to his inauguration.

Trump was convicted in May on 34 felony counts for falsifying business records in connection with a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels over an alleged sexual encounter. His 2024 presidential victory and the Supreme Court's summer ruling on presidential immunity for "official acts" upended the future of the criminal cases against him. He was indicted in three other cases, all of which have been delayed or derailed.