| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government Corruption |
| Clarice Feldman: Jack (Smith) Not So Nimble |
| 2023-12-25 |
| [AmericanThinker] It seems clear to me that Jack Smith was appointed for the purpose of besetting Donald J. Trump and finding a means to keep him from running for president again. If I’m right, Smith's many strategies have come to naught this week and it is extremely unlikely that the cases he instituted in the District of Columbia and Florida (meritless as I think they are) will ever be resolved before the election. The case in the District of Columbia is being heard before Judge Tanya Chutkan. She indicated she wants to hear the case this coming March and has been firm about sticking to that. In one of her rulings in that case, she denied Trump’s motion to dismiss on the ground that he had presidential immunity from the crimes with which Smith is charging him respecting his objections to the 2020 election. That issue could have in the ordinary course of things been appealed to the next highest court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Such an appeal would have made it unlikely that the case would return to the District Court for trial and disposition before the election, so, in a Hail Mary move, Smith sought action by the Supreme Court to rule on the issue, bypassing the normal procedure. This week, without dissent or explanation, the Court rejected his request and the matter will be heard by the Court of Appeals. That court is predominantly Democratic and it’s more likely than not that it will sustain Judge Chutkan’s order. But it will take time for it to be heard and disposed of. Bill Shipley, the criminal lawyer who is handling a number of the January 6 cases (”Shipwreckedcrew” is his online moniker), predicts that Judge Karen Henderson on the panel will write an opinion -- whether concurring or dissenting -- and she will not go out of her way to speed up the decision, having already objected to the manner in which oral argument was set. Whenever that opinion is done, Trump has the option of seeking within 45 days a rehearing en banc (that is by the whole court, not just the present three-judge panel). Once the government has responded to that motion, the Court must decide whether to grant it, and that decision will take some time. If it is granted, a date for the rehearing will have to be set, arguments heard, and an opinion written. If the rehearing is denied, Trump has 90 days to seek certiorari -- that is a request to the Supreme Court to hear the case. This Supreme Court term ends in June, which would further delay the matter, probably to the fall of 2024. During all this, Judge Chutkan has no jurisdiction to handle the case. You can see that the March 4 plan for a trial is not in the works. Indeed, the chance of a trial taking place before the election is more than unlikely. Read the rest at the link: Related: Jack Smith: 2023-12-23 Supreme Court rejects Jack Smith's request to fast-track decision on Trump presidential ‘immunity' Jack Smith: 2023-12-14 Kash Patel on Holding Bad Actors Accountable and the Assault on Presidential Privilege Jack Smith: 2023-12-14 BREAKING: Judge Halts January 6 Case Against Trump |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #1 Interesting. Lawfare is derailing the leftist's plans to derail Trump. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2023-12-25 07:53 |