Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(144,212 posts)
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 02:48 PM Sep 2024

Trump demands Jan. 6 judge 'promptly' throw out Jack Smith's revised indictment for 'stubborn reliance' on Mike Pence

Source: Law & Crime

Sep 20th, 2024, 11:42 am


After blowing past a 5 p.m. deadline on Thursday, the defense for Donald Trump late filed, without the objection of special counsel Jack Smith, documents supporting pending motions on the “scope of the prosecution team” and discovery requests on issues as wide-ranging as the SolarWinds hack of 2020, “FISA abuses,” and whether government “operatives” were present on Jan. 6. The lawyers maintain that the Jan. 6 case should be “promptly” thrown out as a consequence of the Supreme Court immunity decision in Trump v. United States and the special counsel’s “stubborn reliance” on details about Trump’s communications with then Vice President Mike Pence in the superseding indictment.

Trump lawyers and prosecutors recently wrangled in U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s courtroom on how best to proceed with the case that Smith tailored to emphasize the defendant’s alleged private conduct as a candidate to overturn his 2020 election loss. While the judge was clear that she was not at all “concerned” about scheduling deadlines in the lead-up to the “not relevant” 2024 election, Trump attorney John Lauro immediately asserted that protecting the “integrity” of the “upcoming election” was one of several reasons the case should be thrown out.

Among the others? That the “false and exaggerated allegations relating to” Pence render the revised indictment “void ab initio,” a fancy way of saying “doomed from the get-go.”

“This case should be dismissed. Promptly. That is the only just course of action consistent with (1) the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States; (2) the critically important institutional interests that support the Presidential immunity doctrine; and (3) the stubborn reliance by the Special Counsel’s Office on allegations relating to Vice President Pence that are, at least, presumptively immune,” Lauro said. “Dismissal is required to protect the integrity of the Presidency and the upcoming election, as well as the Constitutional rights of President Trump and the American people. There are also ongoing discovery violations in this case that implicate Presidential immunity and other strong defenses, including the Office’s failure to produce exculpatory evidence concerning the flaws with this prosecution and the Office’s false allegations.”

Read more: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/trump-demands-jan-6-judge-promptly-throw-out-jack-smiths-revised-indictment-for-stubborn-reliance-on-mike-pence-seeks-discovery-on-government-operatives/



Full headline: Trump demands Jan. 6 judge ‘promptly’ throw out Jack Smith’s revised indictment for ‘stubborn reliance’ on Mike Pence, seeks discovery on government ‘operatives’

Link to FILING (PDF) - https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149/gov.uscourts.dcd.258149.235.0.pdf
16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Attilatheblond

(4,556 posts)
1. Sounds like his lawyers know he gonna be found guilty
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 02:52 PM
Sep 2024

We will celebrate when Mr You Can't Make Me Obey Any Laws is finally in jail and out of the headlines.

hlthe2b

(106,767 posts)
3. JHC! Does anyone else in this country get to have access to the courts or just this SOB?
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 03:28 PM
Sep 2024

At what point does his abuse of the system have repercussions?

eppur_se_muova

(37,664 posts)
4. "Promptly" ?? NOT a smart way to speak to a judge. Especially when filing after the deadline.
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 03:31 PM
Sep 2024

But please continue, EX-President.

republianmushroom

(18,179 posts)
7. 44 months and counting (includes foot dragging)
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 07:28 PM
Sep 2024

No one is above the law. Maybe state law. chuckle chuckle

Collimator

(1,875 posts)
8. Just reading this one line distresses me. . .
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 07:34 PM
Sep 2024

", , , the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. United States; . . . "

"Trump versus United States"?!

The guy was president and wants to be again. There should never be a sentence written or uttered in which a United States President is ever against the United States in anything.

thenelm1

(912 posts)
10. Spoiled infantile brat demands immediate acquiesce to his demands.
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 08:55 PM
Sep 2024

If the courts had less decorum, the response should be "pound sand." Enough of this arrogant ass already.

Bayard

(24,145 posts)
11. His attorneys can't possibly believe their own bullshit
Fri Sep 20, 2024, 09:58 PM
Sep 2024

How can anyone think that inciting a riot is part of a president's duties?

turbinetree

(25,436 posts)
14. Can his "lawyers and him" since he was in consultation with this can they be help in contempt...............
Sat Sep 21, 2024, 06:01 PM
Sep 2024
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump demands Jan. 6 judg...