Special Counsel Jack Smith is now seeking to leapfrog the appellate court and ask for a ruling from the Supreme Court on Trump's immunity claims. The only reason for this petition is to seek to guarantee a trial of Trump (and possible conviction) before the election...
...The matter is currently before the D.C. Circuit which is viewed as a favorable court for Smith. However, Smith is trying to avoid any delay in the March trial date, set to begin the day before Super Tuesday...
...The Supreme Court may not view a trial of Trump during the campaign to be as motivating or urgent as does Smith. This is a novel legal argument that the Court would ordinarily prefer to hear the views from the appellate judges.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Reports indicate that Hunter went to Capitol Hill but refused to sit for the deposition. Instead he held a presser. If true, it is a remarkably bad decision and virtually begs for a contempt sanction...
...Hunter could have appeared and invoked his right to remain silent. Instead, he just pulled a Steve Bannon and it will now pressure AG Merrick Garland to show the same speed in pursuing a prosecution. jonathanturley.org/2023/02/10/bid…
...While this subpoena came before a formal impeachment vote, it is still a subpoena from a congressional committee. It is still an act of contempt of Congress in my view.
CBS' Nancy Cordes just asked John Kirby if the Administration would cut off the use of "technology" involving Musk companies due to controversial statements and reduction of censorship on X. So CBS believes that whole companies should now be cancelled by association?
...Cordes noted that the Administration has already criticized Musk but wanted to know why national security and other programs are still relying on companies associated with Musk. It is the same type of blacklisting that many of us have condemned for years on social media...
...It is disheartening to see the media continue to push for bans and blacklisting. Musk became a public enemy when he allowed the public to see the full censorship efforts at Twitter -- something no other social media company has done. jonathanturley.org/2022/11/30/was…
Attorney General Garland just refused to answer if he has had any conversations with U.S. Attorney David Weiss. He is claiming that even confirming such conversations would abridge confidential communications.
...There is no question that he can answer whether such conversations occurred. When Bill Barr testified as Attorney General he confirmed subjects even in communications with the President while declining details on conversations. c-span.org/video/?473384-…
...Garland said that "no one had the authority to turn him down" in other U.S. Attorneys refusing to bring tax cases against Hunter Biden. He said that they could however refuse to "partner with him." The suggestion was that Weiss could still have brought the cases in those districts...
Months ago, I wrote about the move of the Biden legal team to adopt a scorched earth strategy attacking witnesses and critics. This has included suing the computer shop owner who gave the FBI the laptop and now includes a lawsuit against the IRS itself...jonathanturley.org/2023/02/24/the…
...The current lawsuit alleges violations of Hunter Biden's privacy by whistleblowers who revealed details about his alleged influence peddling and special treatment. However, this testimony was elicited by Congress as part of a corruption investigation...
...He also includes public statements: “This assault on Mr. Biden’s rights involved the public disclosure of his confidential tax information during more than 20 nationally televised and non-congressionally sanctioned interviews and numerous public statements."...
The New York Post is out with my column on the Smith motion to gag Trump. The motion is far from "narrowly tailored" when you consider the broad scope and ambiguous language...nypost.com/2023/09/16/jac…
...Gag orders have become commonplace in federal trials, particularly high-profile cases. This is, however, no typical case. Smith pushed for a trial before the election and the court shoehorned the trial into a crowded calendar just before Super Tuesday ...
...This jury pool will be inundated with such commentary on both sides and Trump’s prior comments on the case will be replayed continually in print, radio, and television outlets. It will gag a candidate on a major issue before the public...
Jack Smith waited for late Friday to file a sweeping motion seeking to gag Trump in referencing witnesses and attorneys in the case. While calling it "narrowly tailored," it would effectively bar Trump from discussing the case in the midst of a presidential campaign...
...The order would prohibit Trump from making statements "regarding the identity, testimony, or credibility of prospective witnesses" and "statements about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors that are disparaging and inflammatory, or intimidating."
...So after fighting to try Trump in the middle of the presidential election, Smith is seeking to curtail him from discussing one of the most important issues in the campaign. No one would argue with a bar on disparaging witnesses. However, some of the witnesses and parties are political figures...