Now that Special Counsel Smith’s magnum opus, election interference filing is in the public record, I can provide more detail on how the 165 page filing violated Trump’s constitutional rights under the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. In this thread I’ll focus on the hundreds of references to opinion testimony that at trial would likely be inadmissible for lack of foundation, based on what little Smith has provided to prove up the opinion testimony. Yet Smith asks the judge- and the voting public, including prospective jurors- to accept such inadmissible opinion testimony as the gospel truth. That is not how the 5th Amendment requirement of due process and the 6th Amendment right to confront and cross examine witnesses against you, and the 6th Amendment right to a jury trial before a fair and impartial jury, are designed to work.
Throughout Smith’s filing, he refers to evidence in the form of opinions by various witnesses who claim to have reported to Trump and/or people working for him or conspiring with him, that there was no fraud or illegality in the election sufficient to change the result. In very general terms, there were descriptions of witnesses telling Trump, in sum and substance, “There was no fraud.”
Sep 7 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
@JeffClarkUS is spot on here in identifying serious 5th Amendment due process issues with Jack Smith’s upside down proposal, adopted by Judge Chutkan, that the prosecution be allowed to file a comprehensive public “brief” as to Trump’s guilt and the absence of immunity in the height of election season.
In addition to the blatant political purpose of Smith’s proposed “brief,” there are serious 5th Amendment due process problems as well as denial of the 6th Amendment right to confront witnesses in a criminal case. Smith proposes to recast the indictment by laying out in the public record 1) the details of his office’s plan as to what evidence to present at trial to prove Trump’s guilt, 2) his evidence showing there is no immunity because the conduct involved private and not official acts of the former president; and 3) as to any official acts, Smith’s evidence to rebut the presumption of immunity.
May 20 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
Judge Merchan is severely limiting the defense expert’s discussion of how the FEC works, including definitions of terms like “campaign contributions,” and such concepts as dual use expenses exempted from the law. Right now the jury has heard enough to assume the worst for Trump:
The judge refuses to say how he will instruct the jury on the FEC. As it stands now the jury probably assumes the FEC was violated and that Trump has no defense, because it’s obvious sex with a porn star might affect the number of Trump’s votes. But that’s not the law.
May 13 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
@shipwreckedcrew has the basic outline of what a good cross examination of Cohen will likely look like. I would add that an effective cross can be used to tell your side of the story, if you’ve got the right witness to do it with. Cohen might be that witness.
Yesterday I posted a long thread on the sleight of hand pulled by D.A. Bragg in NY to conceal the fact that his theory of the case against Trump is, in effect, a prosecution of federal crimes that by law preempt and supersede the state laws Bragg says he is using.
This fact becomes more and more obvious as the trial progresses, beginning with the opening statement to the jury. The prosecution told the jury that this case involved a conspiracy and a coverup. What crimes were the object of the conspiracy? Federal election finance crimes.
Apr 26 • 21 tweets • 3 min read
This is a THREAD on the sleight of hand, shell and pea game AG Bragg is playing in his case against Trump in NY. The object of this confidence game is to hide that Bragg is prosecuting a crime he has no authority over and that the court has no jurisdiction to hear.
To understand what’s going on, let’s start with the indictment. Trump is charged with violating NY Penal Law 175.10, providing, “A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, ..
Apr 6 • 13 tweets • 3 min read
Excellent analysis of the implications of the DC Bar’s attempt to disbar former DOJ official, Jeff Clark. I’d like to weigh in on the concepts of fraud vs irregularities in the election, a subject addressed at length during the hearing.
The DOJ took the position in 2020 that they only would investigate criminal fraud and civil rights violations in connection with the election. So when Clark drafted a letter from the Department to Ga legislators, Clark went beyond the DOJ’s role by including irregularities.
Feb 25 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Regardless of how one views Smirnov’s credibility ( he made it all up in 2020 or, as @walkafyre notes, he has a bad memory), it’s undeniable the FBI does not look good here. The first 1023 was in 2017, in the financial crimes investigation of Zlochevsky that was opened Jan 2016.
The official FBI version b/f the indictment was nobody thought to ask for three years about Smirnov’s throw away line about Hunter being on the Burisma board. What? How can that be irrelevant to an investigation of Burisma’s owner committing theft and money laundering? Nobody ask
Feb 13 • 13 tweets • 3 min read
For those who followed the defamation lawsuit by Michael Mann against journalist Mark Steyn, and the $1 million punitive damage award against Steyn, should read this expert report by climate scientist Judith Curry: judithcurry.com/2024/02/08/jcs…
Ms Curry, @curryja , was allowed to testify for Steyn, but the court excluded her expert report and the opinions it contained: the hockey stick graph was misleading and constituted scientific misconduct because it cherry-picked data, inverted data, and concealed underlying data.
Dec 19, 2023 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
I’m not surprised by the decision based on what I heard listening to the argument on Friday. I am surprised about the short thrift the court gave to the federal role in presidential elections.
Wow! The inestimable, brilliant and dogged @ClimateAudit has unearthed further proof of fraud underlying the original “hockey stick” depiction of where the climate was headed if mankind didn’t curtail burning of fossil fuels. It turns out that critical tree line data were hidden
climateaudit.org/2023/12/12/dis…
Nov 15, 2023 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
In her RICO case against Trump and others in Fulton County, Ga., DA Fani Willis asks the court to revoke bail of the only black defendant, Harrison Floyd. His crime? Tweeting about the credibility of the case and witnesses against him. documentcloud.org/documents/2416…
The DA claims that specifically listing by Twitter address certain defendants in the Tweets - Sidney Powell and Jenna Ellis- and certain witnesses, Floyd directly or indirectly communicated with them to intimidate or to discuss the facts, in violation of the conditions of release
Sep 26, 2023 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
NY AG Latitia James, who made it a campaign promise to get Trump, has won a major part of her case. The judge held that because Trump and his organization overvalued assets in loan applications, ALL Trump companies- including those not in the suit- will go into receivership:
So theDem game plan comes into focus. First, load up on criminal charges around the country, forcing Trump to spend, spend, and spend some more to defend. At the same time put his assets- all of them- into receivership. Including this google.com/gasearch?q=Tru…
Sep 8, 2023 • 4 tweets • 1 min read
The federal court has denied Mark Meadows removal of the Ga RICO case against him. His case was a close one, but footnote 33 of the opinion and surrounding text convinces me that Jeff Clark’s removal should be granted. Read opinion here: documentcloud.org/documents/2394…
Meadows’ argument he was operating under the Constitution’s Take Care clause was weakened by the absence of any federal law outline the executive branch’s authority over state-run elections. Clark’s case is stronger.
Sep 6, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
The hearing in Fulton County court in the Trump RICO prosecution just wrapped up. The judge denied motions by Sidney Powell and Kenneth Chesebro to sever each case from the other. Those defendants will be tried together beginning October 23.
The State told the judge that for the RICO case against all defendants, the State plans to call about 150 witnesses. Their estimate is they will take four months. The judge observed that with all 19 defendants being tried at the same time, he expected the trial to run at 8 months
Sep 2, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
@ProfMJCleveland @shipwreckedcrew Fani Willis should not get away with using her very, very poorly pled RICO conspiracy charges to make an end run around federal officer immunity. The indictment doesn’t describe an enterprise, doesn’t describe when and how Meadows joined a conspiracy to violate RICO.
@ProfMJCleveland @shipwreckedcrew But the indictment does describe various over acts by Meadows to further the aims of the conspiracy. In her filing in federal court, however, Fani asks the court to ignore those allegations and to focus instead on the allegation that he joined a conspiracy. Others did the acts.
Aug 31, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
Based on the court’s finding the DA Willis was conflicted from investigating one of the alternate electors, she should be disqualified from the entire case. The indictment accuses all defendants of having engaged in a RICO enterprise and conspiracy to alter the election.
Since she was conflicted from investigating and indicting one of the alleged conspirators, she is disqualified as to all. The one she let go because of the conflict is now a material witness in the case. I don’t see how she can justify not stepping aside- including her office.
Aug 29, 2023 • 8 tweets • 2 min read
I see the renowned Gadsden “Don’t Tread on Me” rattlesnake flag is in the news. Let’s remove all doubt about what that flag meant to our Founding Fathers. Here is Benjamin Franklin discussing its symbolism:
Was I wrong, Sir, in thinking this a strong picture of the temper and conduct of America? The poison of her teeth is the necessary means of digesting her food, and at the same time is certain destruction to her enemies.”
Aug 14, 2023 • 5 tweets • 1 min read
@ProfMJCleveland has a tread about the blow-up of the Hunter Biden plea agreement. It’s interesting that Weiss’s team added ellipses ( which mean the words inside the ellipses aren’t in the quoted language), to add the concept that the agreements were merely drafts. Misleading?
@ProfMJCleveland is hot on the trail of some shady dealings by Hunter Biden’s legal team, in league with federal prosecutors, in crafting a narrative of how Hunter “earned” the millions he didn’t pay taxes on. And they presented this PR, fraudulent spin to the court:
There are more glaring examples of this PR spin crossing the line into false statements. We’re talking about Exhibit 1 to the Plea Agreement, which purports to be an objective recitation of the facts in the case- including a description of how much money H “earned” and how.
Jul 28, 2023 • 7 tweets • 2 min read
I’m my long thread yesterday I tried to describe what all was missing from the stipulated statement of facts in the Hunter Biden Plea Agreement - a narrative that was supposed to encompass all possible crimes that Hunter was being given immunity for.
In this podcast @AndrewCMcCarthy picks up on this point and explains the implications of the DOJ and Hunter’s defense team having done their deal this way. He makes some great points in this podcast. I recommend everyone listen:
