Post

https://twitter.com/schwartzbCNBC/status/1162454325261717504

More from @julie_kelly2

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

@julie_kelly2

Sep 17

Getting up to speed on this batshit crazy lawsuit @nataliegwinters posted earlier today.

A Michigan "welfare rights" organization, 3 black Michigan voters, and NAACP filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump and RNC in WASHINGTON DC in Nov 2020 claiming Trump/RNC violated the Voting Rights Act and Ku Klux Klan act by attempting to uncover election fraud.

Of course the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in Trump-hating DC federal court. It was initially given to Judge Emmet Sullivan--he went on senior status so it was transferred to Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, in Feb 2023.

Then MAGICALLY--at the same time she was handling Jack Smith's J6 indictment and addressing unprecedented questions of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution--the case was reassigned to Judge Tanya Chutkan.

The courts claimed Reyes had a "conflict" but it took Reyes 8 months to mention it?

Sounds legit

Sullivan refused to toss the case out of DC.

The lawsuit is rife with allegations that are now covered by presidential immunity per SCOTUS. But that isn't stopping the defendants or Judge Chutkan from advancing the case.

When the issue of presidential immunity was raised during a Nov 2023 hearing on the lawsuit, Chutkan said the immunity matter would be "at least resolved in the lower courts shortly."

She issued her order denying immunity one week later.

Of course she was overturned by SCOTUS on July 1; Chief Justice Roberts criticized Chutkan for her hasty handling of the unprecedented issue.

She knew at this point she planned to deny Trump's immunity claims from criminal prosecution thereby greenlighting (at least temporarily) the civil suit.

So after SCOTUS opinion on immunity, the Michigan plaintiffs came back to court asking Chutkan to allow them to file a THIRD amended complaint.

They essentially want Chutkan to approve any efforts by Trump campaign and/or RNC to LAWFULLY investigate voting fraud.

Chutkan has not ruled on a Jan 2023 motion by Trump to dismiss the case.

Read 4 tweets

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

@julie_kelly2

Sep 15

John Roberts, no flamethrower, privately expressed to the other justices his disgust with DC lower courts rulings on presidential immunity.

He also criticized their decisions in his immunity order.

Judges Tanya Chutkan, Florence Pan, Michelle Childs, and Karen Henderson should be forced to resign for their sloppy work in an effort to rush DOJ’s J6 case against Trump before the election

Too bad Chief Justice Roberts wasn’t in Chutkan’s courtroom on Sept 5 so he could see that she DGAF what he said in the immunity opinion.

Total defiance and arrogance on display rather than any contrition

open.substack.com/pub/juliekelly…

Judge Flo Pan should be impeached. Not only did she come up with the absurd “Seal Team Six” hypothetical, she also authored 2 rulings upholding 1512c2 in Jan 6 prosecution also overturned by SCOTUS In Fischer

open.substack.com/pub/juliekelly…

Read 4 tweets

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

@julie_kelly2

Sep 5

Hearing in Jack Smith's J6 indictment against Donald Trump just ended.

It is a travesty cameras are now allowed in federal courtrooms so the American people can see what an unprepared, intemperate, smug, and condescending judge Tanya Chutkan is. The public would be outraged at her highly partisan and aggressive handling of this unprecedented case.

Chutkan, reversed by the Supreme Court and criticized by the chief justice for rushing her immunity order, came out swinging this morning.

Not only is she clearly agitated by SCOTUS immunity ruling, it is unclear whether she even read it.

On a number of occasions, she argued with John Lauro, Trump's defense attorney, about the elements of the opinion. "That's not how I read it," she said when misinterpreting what the opinion said.

At one point, during a discussion about mandatory appeal based on any other immunity decision she makes, Chutkan opined that "there will be a reversal (on her future immunity order) no matter what I do."

That is a dangerous sign. What Chutkan suggested is she will recklessly handle pending immunity questions related to Trump's comms with VP Pence because she feels SCOTUS will overturn her once again.

At issue is SCOTUS determining those comms with Pence are "presumptively immune." Chutkan said she didn't read it that way. (That's what it said.)

A ruling that Trump-Pence comms are protected under immunity would torpedo the entire indictment. Smith already had to cut 9 pages of original indictment bc Trump's comms with DOJ were conclusively immune.

Further, those immunized conversations not only are barred from being cited in an indictment, the protected comms cannot be used in any stage of the investigation or prosecution.

Chutkan, as she has said consistently since this case landed on her docket, emotionally emphasized that the presidential election will not affect her scheduling order, which she will file later today.

"I understand there is an election" soon, Chutkan said.

"It is not relevant. This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule. It is nothing I will consider."

But her own words and actions contradict that assertion. She attempted to rush the proceedings as soon as the SCOTUS mandate returned to her court--so much so that even Jack Smith had to ask to delay her status report and hearing deadline.

Further, she is contemplating taking what even she describes as an "irregular" procedure which is allow Jack Smith to file an "opening brief" to outline why he believes the existing indictment is not covered by SCOTUS immunity ruling.

Lauro strenuously objected to taking such an unusual step. Such a brief, Lauro argued, would be "enormously prejudicial" and noted Smith already filed a superseding indictment and it is the defense's turn to respond.

Chutkan shot back that the defense would have plenty of time to respond to such a brief, which Smith's prosecutor Tom Windom said could be submitted in about 3 weeks.

This is PRECISELY the sort of shoddy, hasty work that landed Chutkan in trouble at SCOTUS.

Read 5 tweets

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

@julie_kelly2

Sep 4

Headed to DC courthouse shortly to cover resentencing of Thomas Robertson, a VA police officer convicted of 1512c2 and other offenses.

After Fischer, DOJ dropped 1512c2--but as I have reported for months and detailed last night, DOJ and DC courts are thumbing their nose at SCOTUS, which overturned how DOJ and DC courts applied 1512c2.

Robertson was sentenced to 87 months in prison with 1512c2 driving most of the sentence.

Even though federal sentencing guidelines estimate his new sentence based on existing convictions should be 24-30 months--he has already been in prison for 3+ years incl under pretrial detention--DOJ wants him to serve the full 87 months.

DOJ sticking it to SCOTUS:

Keep in mind--the wife of DC US Atty Matthew Graves is CEO of a radical leftwing nonprofit in DC that is part of a broad coalition working with Democrats to delegitimize the Supreme Court and remove Justice Thomas:

Here Graves (again) argues the circumstances of J6 were so unprecedented and awful that previous applications of the law and/or sentencing guidance should be ignored:

DOJ and DC courts also working around DC appellate court ruling that reversed 2 common sentencing enhancements on 1512c2. Appellate court ruled that DOJ misapplied interfering in "administration of justice" enhancement 2J1.2(b)(2) because Congress does not "administer justice" esp proceedings on Jan 6.

So DOJ and DC courts are saying--fine, we will apply the administration of justice enhancements to allegations the defendant interfered with the criminal investigation into their actions on Jan 6--and apply the enhancement to other charges after 1512c2 is dropped.

Absolutely lawless DC legal and court system:

Read 4 tweets

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

@julie_kelly2

Aug 31

Reading through report filed last night in Donald Trump's J6 case in DC.

Jack Smith wants to file a brief to explain why remaining elements in new indictment do not fall under immunity per SCOTUS. Trump's lawyers argue there is no basis for filing such a brief.

The timeline proposed by Trump's lawyers gives a view into how nearly impossible it will be for Smith to preserve this case. SCOTUS decisions in both immunity question and Fischer will further gut this already thin reed of an indictment:

As I explained here, Smith had to cut 9 pages from 1st indictment and drop Jeff Clark as a co-conspirator based on SCOTUS determination that Trump's interactions with DOJ safely fell within core presidential power covered by immunity

declassified.live/p/jack-smiths-…

Read 4 tweets

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

@julie_kelly2

Aug 27

BREAKING: Jack Smith has filed a superseding indictment in Trump’s J6 case. Same charges, I’m assuming he deleted elements SCOTUS rules were immune from prosecution

It appears Smith removed @JeffClarkUS as a co conspirator.

SCOTUS determined Trump’s interactions with his own DOJ clearly represented “official acts” and protected by presidential immunity

Where does Jeff Clark go to get his reputation back?

@JeffClarkUS Jack Smith also had to present his case to a new grand jury in DC. SCOTUS further ruled immunized conduct could not be used during any phase of the investigation/prosecution including GJ proceedings.

Of course it’s a layup getting an indictment against a Republican in DC.

Read 5 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @julie_kelly2

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!