Judge Foils Jack Smith’s Insane Case Against Trump – Total Reversal!

OPINION:  This article contains commentary which may reflect the author’s opinion

Democrats are displeased with the fact that former President Donald Trump is benefiting from the postponement of his trial, while a federal appeals court is considering the issue of presidential immunity.

More than fifty days have elapsed since the indefinite suspension of Trump’s criminal proceedings in a trial court in Washington, D.C., arising from claims that he tried to manipulate the 2020 election. The resumption of proceedings is contingent upon the resolution of the unresolved issue that casts a shadow over the entire case: whether Trump, by virtue of his presidency, is immune from prosecution. This resolution will likely be determined by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and, maybe, the Supreme Court.

The protracted delays favor Trump, who has consistently pursued a strategy of prolonging his various trials, even if the courts finally dismiss his claims of immunity, an outcome that most legal experts expect. If Trump wins the presidency in November, he could potentially evade the charges in his federal criminal proceedings by requesting the Justice Department to halt the prosecutions or by seeking a pardon.

In order to expedite the federal election case against Trump, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has set the trial date for March 4. Chutkan, however, has explicitly stated her intention to postpone the start date in order to accommodate for each additional day caused by Trump’s immunity request.

“Even if the appeal were resolved this week against Trump, that calculation would put his earliest trial date in late April. But if the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court take additional weeks or months to deliver a final ruling, the opening days of Trump’s trial could be pushed to the summer or fall,” Politico reported.

“If, at that point, Trump retains his grip on the 2024 GOP presidential nomination, he and his allies are certain to exert intense pressure to postpone the trial until after the election. Chutkan, an Obama appointee, could plow forward with a trial anyway — and she’s repeatedly indicated that the campaign calendar has no bearing on her own. But doing so would require Trump to sit in a courtroom for weeks during the heart of the campaign. Trump has already used his crowded legal calendar as a campaign cudgel to raise funds and rally supporters by claiming to be the victim of political prosecutions and lawsuits,” Politico added.

For the time being, a three-judge panel from the D.C. Circuit that listened to arguments regarding immunity on January 8 will continue to establish the timeline for the case. The concentration of significant power among a few number of judges has been facilitated by the presence of obscure internal procedures, seniority, and traditions of collegiality that hinder the ability to make precise predictions.

Based on the arguments presented, numerous legal scholars had expected a prompt ruling from the D.C. Circuit court, potentially within a few days. Nevertheless, the court has remained silent for a duration exceeding three weeks. A ruling is not bound by any temporal limitations.

“The timing of a decision by the panel will indeed be a critical determinant of whether the case can go forward expeditiously,” said Daniel Richman, a Columbia University law professor.

Both sides recognize the crucial importance of timing, given that the 2024 presidential race is currently under progress.

Special Counsel Jack Smith has estimated that the presentation of his case will need nearly two months. It is anticipated that Trump will mount a response, potentially causing a delay of several weeks beyond the original date. This augments the likelihood that Trump will be compelled to allocate the entirety of the Republican National Convention—or maybe Election Day—within a legal setting.

If the Supreme Court agrees to review Trump’s request for immunity but chooses not to hear his appeal right now, the trial might be delayed until after the election. Moreover, if Trump were to succeed, he would most likely bring the case to a conclusion.

Initially, the three-judge D.C. Circuit panel appeared to be making swift progress: they addressed the issue urgently in December and conducted oral arguments a few weeks later, which is an unusually short pace for the often sluggish court.

Consequently, the verdict of the D.C. Circuit might profoundly influence the possibility of Trump being subjected to a criminal prosecution in 2024, which could perhaps lead to imprisonment.

Furthermore, Smith has initiated three additional criminal lawsuits against Trump. One, filed in Florida, accuses him of stockpiling classified information concerning national security at his Mar-a-Lago property after his presidency. Another, filed in Georgia, alleges that Trump conspired to manipulate the 2020 Georgia presidential election. Lastly, a lawsuit in New York, brought by the Manhattan District Attorney, asserts that Trump falsified company records to hide payments made as hush money in relation to an alleged affair with a pornographic actress.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.






Send this to a friend