Saturday, September 28, 2024

Smith Files Evidence in Election Subversion Case

Special counsel Jack Smith has filed a detailed compilation of evidence he's assembled to support charges that former President Donald Trump broke federal law in his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

More

Comments

Fat Smelvis should swing for J6.

#1 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2024-09-26 10:20 PM

... Smith's office confirmed Thursday afternoon that prosecutors sent U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan the information in advance of a 5 p.m. deadline she set. ...

Yeah, now we wait to see her decision on that evidence.

For starters, what of that evidence will be made public?


#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-09-26 10:21 PM

LAMP

"For starters, what of that evidence will be made public?"

None I would hope.

Why give the defense a leg up if he doesn't have to?

#3 | Posted by Twinpac at 2024-09-29 02:35 AM

@#3 ... Why give the defense a leg up if he doesn't have to? ...

While I will admit up front that I am not a lawyer and ... I do not have a clue about the legal procedures involved here, I will say this...

If evidence is not made public, that does not mean that the defense in the case cannot see that evidence.

Indeed, that is how I would hope our Justice system works, that the defense has access to any and all evidence presented by the prosecution.


#4 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-09-29 02:51 AM

Election interference.

#5 | Posted by visitor_ at 2024-09-29 11:06 AM

Election interference.
#5 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Exactly!! That's exactly what it was. And that's why Trumpy has been indicted.

And if Trumpy had NOT got himself involved in interfering with the election he would never have been charged and Smith would not be filing the evidence of that interference.

Good to see you are paying attention for once.

#6 | Posted by donnerboy at 2024-09-29 11:13 AM

LAMP

For a non-lawyer, you're pretty sharp. By law, the defense is entitled to see the evidence (even exculpatory) against their client. But releasing a transcript to the public, unless so ordered by the judge, would give both sides an opportunity to ignite a "trial by public opinion" so as to influence a jury pool.

I'd expect a reasonable, non-Trump appointed judge, would take the seriousness of the charges under consideration before releasing a transcript to the public, for just that reason.

A transcript is red meat to the MSM. I'm sure you've seen it before.

Again, depending on what's at stake and the judge's point of view, it's usually better to let the facts come out in court rather than interpretation by the guests on a talk show. And that goes for both the prosecution and the defense.

#7 | Posted by Twinpac at 2024-09-29 11:48 PM

"LAMP

For a non-lawyer, you're pretty sharp."

I'd say Lamp is pretty dull. But not in an intelligence type of way. When it comes to most lefties, I think they gravitate toward a shiv to stab us deplorable center-righties. Lamp is more prone to use a rusty spoon and make it more like a Komodo Dragon bite.

#8 | Posted by BellRinger at 2024-09-30 12:01 AM

Seems there's some misapprehension about what going on. This is the necessary result of the asinine SC immunity decision. The decision requires the trial court consider extensive detailed evidence about the Buffoon and associates conduct to determine what is and what is not immune conduct. Short of live witnesses the next best evidence is transcripts and investigative notes. Since court proceedings are public such filings are public subject to some redactions for privacy and security reasons.

It has nothing, again nothing, to do with trial in the media or providing an advantage. It's about how the SC requires immunity to be evaluated.

For what it's worth, I generally agree with the SC's bottom line conclusions about immunity but the procedural mechanism it created is asinine. The trial and appellate court's had already generally adhered to the bottom line conclusions using normal motion practice. The Court should have simply declined the interlocutory appeal and dealt with it in the the normal course after judgement, if necessary.

#9 | Posted by et_al at 2024-09-30 12:25 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Musk Suddenly Realizes He Has No Clue How to Govern (30 comments)

Trump's Coming House Headaches (23 comments)

Lousiana Bars Health Dept. from Promoting Vaccines (14 comments)

Abbott Buys Billboards Threatening Migrants (13 comments)

Musk Raises Alarms by Endorsing What's Known as 'German neo-Nazi party' (13 comments)

German Christmas Market Attack (12 comments)

Clearance Thomas Received More Lavish Gifts from Harlan Crow (11 comments)

Matt Gaetz Report to Be Released on Monday (10 comments)

U.S. Sees Rise in Life Expectancy (9 comments)

Newspaper: Absent Sitting Congress Woman Found in Dementia Care Facility (8 comments)