Tuesday, November 26, 2024

Jack Smith Files to Drop Jan. 6 Charges Against Trump

Special counsel Jack Smith has filed a motion to drop all four felony charges against President-elect Donald Trump in connection with his effort to overturn his 2020 presidential election in the lead-up to the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the U.S Capitol.

Posted by lfthndthrds at 07:31 PM | 18 COMMENTS | permalink

More

Comments

"Special counsel Jack Smith moves to drop Trump election case citing 'categorical' DOJ policy

Smith said the government stands "fully behind" the case.

Special counsel Jack Smith has moved to dismiss his federal election interference case against President-elect Donald Trump due to a long-standing Justice Department policy that bars the prosecution of a sitting president, not because of the merits of the charges."

abcnews.go.com

'

Charges are meritorious, DoJ policy not do much.

And Slimebag Trumpers who prefer a King over the Law?

No redeeming value at all.

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 01:56 PM

And Slimebag Trumpers who prefer a King over the Law?

No redeeming value at all.

Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 01:56 PM | Reply

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#2 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-25 02:02 PM

And Slimebag Trumpers who prefer a King over the Law?

No redeeming value at all.

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 01:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

So now Trump made the policy? Go get you another laxative o r maybe a glass of prune juice, you're full of it.

#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2024-11-25 02:26 PM

- So now Trump made the policy?

No one said that but you.... but then, what you say is mostly ignorant ----.

Perhaps it stems from poor reading comprehension. Or perhaps it's that 3rd grade education failing you again.

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 02:51 PM

"I love the poorly educated!"
Donald Trump

Makes sense, one need to only read any post from our deplorable MAGA contributors to hear Trump's words ring true.

#5 | Posted by ClownShack at 2024-11-25 03:08 PM

No one said that but you.... but then, what you say is mostly ignorant ----.

Perhaps it stems from poor reading comprehension. Or perhaps it's that 3rd grade education failing you again.

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 02:51 PM | Reply | Flag

So Jack Smith dropping charges is somehow Trumps fault. dUh aNd hE's a kInG!!!!!

#6 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2024-11-25 03:22 PM

#6

lmao... STILL doesn't get it.

Has never gotten it and will never get it.

'It' being any actual point breezing over his head.

#7 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 03:51 PM

Tragic day for America. Not surprised however. The Constitution and the rule of law is only for the little people. What a disgrace.

#8 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2024-11-25 04:49 PM

lmao... STILL doesn't get it.

Has never gotten it and will never get it.

'It' being any actual point breezing over his head.

#7 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 03:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

No one cares about your rotten opinions. Go get your afternoon puddin' cup.

#9 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2024-11-25 05:09 PM

Facts aren't opinions... but hey, that distinction IS a hurdle for most Trumpers.

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 06:42 PM

Op-eds and parody's have never stopped the left from posting threads as facts on the DR.

#11 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2024-11-25 06:47 PM

Op-eds and parodies posted here are almost always obviously such.

More obvious to some than others.... obviously.

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-25 06:56 PM

#12 Not to the fools that post them as factual news threads. More obvious to some than others.... obviously. True that.

#13 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2024-11-25 07:33 PM

Jack Smith just dismissed his BS Jan 6 lawfare against Trump. So much winning. Total exoneration of all lawfare by a jury of 77 million good, honest Americans.

So much winning.

#14 | Posted by visitor_ at 2024-11-26 10:03 AM

@#14 ... Jack Smith just dismissed his BS Jan 6 lawfare against Trump. ...

Did he?

For starters, dismiss, not drop.

Judge agrees to dismiss Donald Trump's 2020 election interference case
www.nbcnews.com

... Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday filed motions to drop all federal charges against President-elect Donald Trump regarding his mishandling of classified documents and his effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election in the lead-up to the deadly Jan. 6 attack on the U.S Capitol.

Hours later, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan granted Smith's motion to dismiss the Jan. 6-related indictment, formally bringing to an end the case that alleged Trump unlawfully conspired to overturn his 2020 loss to President Joe Biden. ...


But that's not the whole story here ...

imo, a better view...

Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
www.law.com

... "Dismissal without prejudice is ... consistent with the Government's understanding that the immunity afforded to a sitting President is temporary, expiring when they leave office," U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan wrote. ...



#15 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-11-26 08:21 PM

OK, I am not a lawyer, I admit that right up front.

My interpretation of "without prejudice" as compared to "with prejudice" is...

If a Judge dismisses a case with prejudice, the Judge is effectively telling the prosecutor that he has nothing to stand on. The case is over. Double jeopardy applies, so it cannot be re-tried.

On the other hand, if a Judge dismisses a case without prejudice, that means that the Judge is not against the case to eventually go forward because the evidence is compelling. Double-jeopardy does not apply.

So, in my [non-legal] opinion, the question becomes ... is this case dead, or could it be resurrected after Pres-elect Trump leaves the Oval office?

At this point, I have not a clue to the answer.

Hey Et_Al, if you're reading this, how much of a fool have I made of myself in this comment?


#16 | Posted by LampLighter at 2024-11-26 08:29 PM

...or could it be resurrected after Pres-elect Trump leaves the Oval office?

In my opinion, legally, yes. But he'll be dead, so kind of a moot point.

#17 | Posted by REDIAL at 2024-11-26 08:40 PM

Imo, there appears to be no need for a government that functions so long as anti-legal policy and SCOTUS rules supreme.

Such failure makes me question how much longer it will be until an executive emperor is installed.

Biden really deserves to live through this.

#18 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2024-11-28 02:59 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Why Does Musk Want USAID 'to Die'? (60 comments)

A Coup Is In Progress In America (51 comments)

White House Preparing Executive Order to Abolish the Dept of Education (47 comments)

Trump Administration Releases California Dam Water Without State Approval (31 comments)

Trump's Diversity War: Agencies React by Scrubbing US History and Culture (31 comments)

Bitcoin will Eventually be Zero, Economist Predicts (30 comments)

FCC Demands CBS Release Unedited Harris Interview (26 comments)

Trump says he Ordered Airstrikes on Islamic State in Somalia (26 comments)

Democratic Senator to Block Trump Nominees over USAID Shutdown (25 comments)

Data from Air Accident Show Conflicting Altitude Readings (24 comments)