Home » Jack Smith pulls an Emily Litella regarding the Trump J6 case (plus, Dershowitz on the anti-Trump prosecutors)

Comments

Jack Smith pulls an Emily Litella regarding the Trump J6 case (plus, Dershowitz on the anti-Trump prosecutors) — 19 Comments

  1. Yes, Fani and her boar of a boyfriend should be prosecuted to the fullest extent. And they should be disbarred.

  2. All these Jan6 Court cases were Kangaroo Courts. They won’t go anywhere after the new AG gets seated. And I do hope those making Kangaroo Court cases get paid back.
    The government shouldn’t be able to bankrupt people until they admit BS crimes to get away from the government.

  3. Jack Smith seeks to dismiss the cases against Trump – by Techno Fog ‘They’re over.

    … What happens now? The cases will be dismissed, though Trump’s attorneys will likely request that they be dismissed with prejudice (meaning they can’t be filed again). It’s doubtful that Judge Chutkan in D.C. does Trump any favors.

    If the cases are dismissed without prejudice, what happens with the Statute of Limitations? That question, which would be argued if the cases are re-filed, may never be resolved.

    Special Counsel Smith has forced Trump’s hand, requiring he pardon himself to spare the potential of prosecutions in 2029. There is no guarantee the Government would restart the cases after Trump’s term – Trump would be 82 years old, and he wouldn’t be the political threat that he was when these cases were filed – but you never know.

    Better that Trump pardons himself and saves the trouble. On November 5, 2024, the people gave Trump that right.

  4. Not sure that Jack Smith should be let off the hook here.

    He committed perjury during his prosecution to indict Trump (WRT the MAL documents/panty raid, IIRC) and, when pressed, even had to admit it(!!). (What if he hadn’t been pressed?)

    If lying to the Court in such a high-profile case isn’t Contempt of Court and/or grounds for disbarment then what is??

  5. This is basically the same move as Bragg’s, who postponed Trump’s sentencing till after his presidential term is over, thereby leaving that sword over his head and also preventing him from appealing the verdict.

  6. Case was dismissed without prejudice. I think it’s highly unlikely it will be re-filed in 2029, since its sole purpose was to prevent Trumps’s re-election in 2024.

  7. …Except that there’s no term limits to “Biden”’s vindictiveness…
    …so it ain’t over till it’s over.

    (And you just gotta love the evil implication that TRUMP IS TRULY GUILTY…except for the “unfortunate” technicality of the American People seeing “Biden”’s serial frame ups for what they were/are and electing Trump in spite of—or should that be BECAUSE OF—all the lies, smears and slanders directed at him.)

  8. I continue to think the 4 judges who approved illegal spying on Trump should be impeached. Also Hillary should be indicted. And Comey destroyed evidence.

    It might need a law to extend the statute of limitations for govt. crimes to be 15 or 18 years.

    But I sadly think it’s just my Justice fantasy that ain’t gonna happen.

    Tho Trump starting lots of stuff at once means the max outrage is inevitably dispersed.

  9. One of those was justice roberts who oversees the fisa court but now lets enjoy the win, the pikes will come later

    Maybe he can crawl back to the hague so he can go back to the current sham against netanyahu

    The acme rocket packs crashed into the side of the mountain

  10. Some of those folks do, indeed, belong in jail.

    But, I’ll consider it something of justice in that Trump won!

    Some on the left are crying like banshees, seeking out their therapists, shaving their heads, and other stupid self-pitying acts.

    But, Trump still won! Yea!

    I wasn’t able in afford a house until Trump got into the white house the first time; and now my retirement is coming soon. I’m happier than the proverbial “pig in mud.”

  11. I’m not a vengeance guy, but at least some examples must be made.
    __________________________

    … pour encourager les autres.

    –Voltaire, “Candide” (1759)
    __________________________

    In order to encourage the others.

  12. @ huxley > “In order to encourage the others.”

    I thought the idea was to DIScourage them.

    Taft in her PJM post: “We all know one hard and fast rule: that which is rewarded is repeated. If we don’t punish to the fullest extent of the law, the lawfare and IC scams run against Donald Trump, his representatives, his lawyers, and people who support him, they will happen again. This cancer has to be rooted out to stop its corruptive spread.”

  13. Huxley,
    Voltaire? I thought it was Napoleon?

    Right you are. Written in regards to the execution of Admiral John Byng.

  14. I guess I missed a zig or a zag along the way. I thought it was generally acknowledged in fact, if not yet in law, that Smith was illegally appointed. If that is true, then he was operating under false pretenses, and everything that he did to Trump was illegal; and should be open to prosecution. That could apply to Garland as well, since he would presumably know that he was illegally empowering Smith.

  15. pretty much, he was not independent, he was not special, he was conflicted three ways from sunday, as if procurator matt graves he has been ethically a horror show, in the mcdonnell case among others on this continent, in the prosecution of one of those kosovar warlords, that were the cause celebre there, as milosevic was the bete noire

    I’m sure he’s not a guy I would invite to dinner, but thats not the point of state craft, the UCK of which the warlord was part was connected to Al Queda and other elements,

  16. If they don’t get charged others will follow their path. The Deep State and Marxists won’t quit.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>