Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues The Legal Forum Jack Smith, Special Counsel

I wanted to start a thread to discuss the various goings-on in the Special Counsel arena.

Background: On Nov. 16, AG Garland appointed Jack Smith Special Counsel to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection and the theft of government property found at Mar-A-Lago. In New Special Counsel, a Prosecutor Schooled in Corruption Cases (NYT, subscription) "Mr. Smith appears as prepared for the task as anyone could be, those who know him say: He has been prosecuting criminal cases, including politically charged corruption investigations involving public officials, for nearly 30 years."

Since then, he has occasionally made headlines for his actions, rather than pronouncement. His team has sent subpoenas to election officials in states Trump disputed; won dismissal of the special master in the document probe; and has now sought contempt proceedings against Trump and his lawyers in the obstruction inquiry.

I think he's on the right path, and is moving quickly.

It's interesting that the federal judge in DC refused to find Trump et al in contempt for ignoring that subpoena. She isn't a Trump supporter like Judge Cannon. She was telling the Justice Department to indict Trump now, instead of playing games to get more evidence. The subpoena was to get a Master of Records to sign a statement (under penalty of perjury) that all stolen records have been returned. But DOJ knows exactly what classified records Trump checked out and which he has not returned. None of Trumps lawyers are willing to sign as Master of Records since Haba got burned by Trump, so they probably thought "Let's get Trump to sign it, and take the fall for perjury."

But the judge thinks the witness box would be the proper place to just ask Trump if all the records have been returned. Then when he says yes, they can introduce their "not returned list" and prove he just committed perjury. Or he pleads the fifth or poor memory, and their list proves he has violated the Espionage Act.

It doesn't matter. Mr. Trump will still slip his slimy ass through with no real punishment (jail time), just as he's done his entire life.

I don't think so. I think his flabby tit is going to be in a ringer.

100% agree.

There are so many legal issues headed into courts, and in some places where juries are unsympathetic. If even one of the criminal counts sticks, some of those are bad enough to send him to prison for the rest of his life. Which might not be very long it looks like. Can you imagine Trump being confined in such a way that he can't grift anybody? He might even kill himself under those conditions.

I think the more interesting thing now is what Smith does with the 34 members of congress who conspired with Trump. Amendment 14 says they are disqualified from ever running or holding office. Does he uphold that constitutional amendment? Seems to me to be the kind of guy who would. The result will shock the hell out of some people, but I think it would send an important message to all future politicians: Attempt a coup, and you are finished.

This is also an interesting read and full of information. Probably not what a single one of you want to hear. What's possible doesn't mean it will or even may happen.

Even if Jan. 6 referrals turn into criminal charges – or convictions – Trump will still be able to run in 2024 and serve as president if elected

https://www.yahoo.com/news/even-jan-6-referrals-turn-211118070.html

Utter fantasy! She's ignoring Title 18 US Code 2383 Rebellion or insurrection, which disqualifies anyone who took part or gave aid or comfort to insurrectionists from holding ANY office. So there is already an actual federal law that makes the 14th amendment provisions a crime. But maybe her loophole is she specifically mentioned the congress' referred crimes. Those are merely suggestions to the DOJ. Smith is going to charge Trump with the crimes they have evidence for, and I'm pretty sure he's going to include Title 18 US Code 2383 just to put an end to this BS.

I think her premise has as much validity as John Eastman's drivel about having "alternate electors". But of course as a Democrat, I would love Trump to run in 2024: That would split the Republican vote enough to give Democrats enough members in congress to impeach Supreme Court justices for perjury.

And you think he will be elected?
(or do you hope he will?)
Will his Secret Service cadre have to serve time with him as well?

No, I don’t think Trump stands a snowball’s chance in Hades of being reelected. Independents dislike him too much and will never vote for him. 2022 proved independents won’t vote for Trump’s chosen candidates either. What the article did was point out the constitutional aspect of this case. I don’t think the Republican Party will even nominate him. Too many election loses 3 loses in a row. MAGA republicans are now down to 36% of the GOP. Although 49% of Republicans want Trump to run again in 2024. But if given the choice between DeSantis and Trump, 48% of republicans say DeSantis to 40% say Trump. Trump is fading even among Republicans.

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/by8wjw1hur/econTabReport.pdf

Interesting among all adults only 27% want Trump to run again in 2024, 56% do not. But Trump’s numbers are almost identical to Biden’s, 26% of all adults want Biden to run again in 2024, 54% do not. Time for fresh, young faces to emerge from both parties.

I post what I do because I think everyone should be aware of all of America’s perspective, not just the Democratic Party’s perspective. After all, those who affiliate, identify, the base if you will with the Democratic Party make up just 30% of the total electorate. There’s 70% of America left out there that usually gets totally ignored by one party or the other.