Is it time for Jack Smith to throw in the towel on prosecuting Trump?

[Social Media]

 

In the realm of American justice, the pursuit of accountability often intersects with the intricate dance of politics, creating a complex web of legal maneuvers, public perception, and the quest for truth. Nowhere is this dynamic more palpable than in the ongoing saga surrounding former President Donald Trump and the numerous felony charges looming over him in multiple jurisdictions.

 

At the heart of the matter lies a fundamental principle: the notion that no individual, regardless of their stature or former position, is above the law. It's a principle that underpins the very fabric of the American legal system, affirming that justice must be blind, impartial, and steadfast in its pursuit of truth.

 

Yet, as Special Counsel Jack Smith grapples with the daunting task of prosecuting Trump, he finds himself navigating a labyrinth of legal obstacles, political hurdles, and the ever-ticking clock of public opinion.

 

With a staggering 91 felony counts hanging over Trump's head, the urgency to bring him to trial is palpable. However, the path to justice is anything but straightforward. From the complexities of scheduling trial dates to the strategic maneuvers of Trump's defense team, every step forward seems to be met with a myriad of challenges and setbacks.

 

The recent refusal of the Supreme Court to expedite proceedings only adds to the mounting frustration, leaving many to wonder if justice delayed will ultimately equate to justice denied.

 

In the midst of this legal quagmire, the specter of politics looms large. The fallout from Trump's impeachment trial, coupled with the looming specter of the upcoming election, casts a long shadow over the proceedings. With political allegiances and partisan divides running deep, the pursuit of justice becomes entangled in a web of competing interests and conflicting agendas.

 

Even as pundits and legal analysts weigh in on the matter, offering their own perspectives and prognostications, the ultimate fate of Trump's legal woes remains uncertain. From calls to "throw in the towel" to impassioned pleas for accountability, the debate rages on, with no clear consensus in sight.

 

In the face of such uncertainty, Smith finds himself at a crossroads. Faced with mounting challenges and dwindling prospects for a timely trial, he must grapple with the daunting task of balancing legal obligations with political realities.

 

Yet, amidst the chaos and uncertainty, there remains a glimmer of hope. While the wheels of justice may turn slowly, they are not immune to the relentless pursuit of truth. Whether through the courts or the court of public opinion, the quest for accountability marches on, driven by an unwavering commitment to uphold the principles upon which this nation was founded.

 

In the end, the pursuit of justice is not just a legal obligation—it is a moral imperative. And while the road ahead may be fraught with challenges and obstacles, one thing remains clear: the pursuit of truth knows no bounds, and justice will ultimately prevail, no matter how long the journey may be.

 

06.03.24

Source

 

 

 

[Danderman123]

Jack Smith isn't going anywhere unless he is fired.

 

The most probable outcome is that Trump is tried and convicted - next year, when nobody cares.

[novacova]

Another frik’n mindless leftist joke of an article. Garland has no authority to appoint special counsel off the street, of which requires all federal offices “not otherwise provided for” in the Constitution to be established by law, he either knows this and is abusing his power, or he's the stupidest lawer ever. Yet there is no statute establishing the Office of Special Counsel within the U.S. Department of Justice. Neither is there a statute allowing the attorney general to appoint an inferior officer special counsel with the powers given to Smith. And inferior officers, in any event, must be controlled by a superior officer, but Garland doesn’t have that power over Smith under DOJ regulations. The appointments clause makes clear that the “default mode” of appointment for all officers is presidential nomination, Senate confirmation and presidential appointment, though Garland could appoint Smith as an assistant. In any case, this is just another shenanigan poop show the left is putting on to appease constituents and the easily impressed naïve gullibles that will be quashed by SCOTUS.  

[Tug]

1 hour ago, Danderman123 said:

Jack Smith isn't going anywhere unless he is fired.

 

The most probable outcome is that Trump is tried and convicted - next year, when nobody cares.

Hopefully this year but I’m afraid you are correct jack smith has a job to do an important one at that he’s not going anywhere except to court 

[Chomper Higgot]

Not unless it’s time to give up on the rule of law.

 

The article fits right into the ‘Oh no Trump’s going to get away with it all’ genre, that panics Trump’s detractors and fluffs his fans.

 

Selling well to both sides of the political divide. A chief editor’s dream pitch.

[JonnyF]

He shouldn't throw in the towel. He should keep going.

 

This is gold for Trump, gold I tell you. More ammunition for him to rally his supporters behind the notion that his political opponents are terrified of facing him at the ballot box and this trying to strangle him via the courts. I mean seriously, 91 felony counts. Talk about overkill. If there were a dozen you could maybe conclude that it wasn't politcally motivated but 91? I guess the Amercian left aren't big on subtlety and disguise. 

 

That, along with Bidens continued and very obvious cognitive decline should make November a very good month for Trump. 

[LosLobo]

Triathlon ironman Jack Smith is still in the race......

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

31 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He shouldn't throw in the towel. He should keep going.

 

This is gold for Trump, gold I tell you. More ammunition for him to rally his supporters behind the notion that his political opponents are terrified of facing him at the ballot box and this trying to strangle him via the courts. I mean seriously, 91 felony counts. Talk about overkill. If there were a dozen you could maybe conclude that it wasn't politcally motivated but 91? I guess the Amercian left aren't big on subtlety and disguise. 

 

That, along with Bidens continued and very obvious cognitive decline should make November a very good month for Trump. 

91 felony counts handed down by Grand Juries.

 

They each refer to felonies for which the Grand juries, not Jack Smith, found credible evidence of felonies to be placed before open courts of law.

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

91 felony counts handed down by Grand Juries.

 

They each refer to felonies for which the Grand juries, not Jack Smith, found credible evidence of felonies to be placed before open courts of law.

 

Please point out where I said Jack Smith found the credible evidence.

 

[Eric Loh]

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

In the end, the pursuit of justice is not just a legal obligation—it is a moral imperative. And while the road ahead may be fraught with challenges and obstacles, one thing remains clear: the pursuit of truth knows no bounds, and justice will ultimately prevail, no matter how long the journey may be.

Well said. 

[Chomper Higgot]

28 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Please point out where I said Jack Smith found the credible evidence.

 

The point I made obviously went right over your head.

 

It is Grand Juries that handed down the 91 felony indictments, not some ‘political decision’. 
 

Get yourself a copy of the U.S. Constitution and refer to the Fifth Amendment.

You’ll find Jack Smith gets a few mentions in the OP, he’s a Prosecutor, not a political operative with dark and mysterious control over Grand Jury deliberations.

 

[jerrymahoney]

42 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Well said.

Maybe well said but it didn't come from the SOURCE as linked.

[Danderman123]

4 hours ago, novacova said:

Another frik’n mindless leftist joke of an article. Garland has no authority to appoint special counsel off the street, of which requires all federal offices “not otherwise provided for” in the Constitution to be established by law, he either knows this and is abusing his power, or he's the stupidest lawer ever. Yet there is no statute establishing the Office of Special Counsel within the U.S. Department of Justice. Neither is there a statute allowing the attorney general to appoint an inferior officer special counsel with the powers given to Smith. 

The people sending you talking points have lied to you. 

 

Of course, Special Counsels are legislatively approved:

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/600.1

 

So, your long winded post was a big fail.

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, jerrymahoney said:

Maybe well said but it didn't come from the SOURCE as linked.

Message was well intended for all law abiding people and those subscribing to the noble phrase "Justice delayed is justice denied". 

[jerrymahoney]

28 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Message was well intended for all law abiding people and those subscribing to the noble phrase "Justice delayed is justice denied". 

The words "fundamental principle" in the OP do not appear in the linked SOURCE.

 

From the linked SOURCE in the OP but not in the OP:

 

Our justice system is dedicated to the principle that no one is above the law, not even the president of the United States, much less a former president. Everyone should have his day in court, particularly the prosecutor in a criminal case. But there is no law that says that a criminal defendant must be tried at any particular time.

[BigStar]

2 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It is Grand Juries that handed down the 91 felony indictments, not some ‘political decision’. 

 

Oh, the naivety. Grand juries in DC and NY packed with politically motivated "jurors." In 1985, Sol Wachtler, then the chief justice of New York's Supreme Court said, “Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.”

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Oh, the naivety. Grand juries in DC and NY packed with politically motivated "jurors." In 1985, Sol Wachtler, then the chief justice of New York's Supreme Court said, “Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.”

And that’s evidence Grand Jurors being ‘politically motivated’ how?

[illisdean]

If Trumps legal team petitions the court questioning Jack Smiths legitimacy, it could be all over for him.

 

Fisher v United States if petitioners prevail in the April arguments, will also end the bogus J6 KKK violation persecution. 

 

 

 

https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/20/special-counsel-jack-smmiths-appointment-is-unconstitutional/

 

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

 

 

[illisdean]

The deep state and its commie Hitler style tactics  to stop Trump are failing and Jack Smiths's days are numbered as well. Trump is well accepted by the majority of the voters as more successful than Biden's dumpster fire failed presidency. The proof is in the polls, especially on immigration and economy. The two most critical issues facing voters and Biden has failed miserably on both, and they know now Trump had the economy and border/immigration well managed! These bogus political persecutions of Trump are failing and only a matter of time until they are written off for the political warfare savagery they are. If Trump is an insurrectionist then charge him for that  instead of making up some crimes/violations taken form the KKK Act of 1871....laudable attempt at persecution and total humiliation of Biden's corrupt DOJ on the world stage. All things Biden equate with FAILURE. It's coming to an end soon.

[gargamon]

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

This is gold for Trump, gold I tell you. More ammunition for him to rally his supporters behind the notion that his political opponents are terrified of facing him at the ballot box

Who cares what the Trump supporters think? They're voting for Trump regardless. Trump's problem is that the number of his supporters is not getting any larger. 

[JonnyF]

9 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Who cares what the Trump supporters think? They're voting for Trump regardless. Trump's problem is that the number of his supporters is not getting any larger. 

 

Well Trump is already leading in the polls, so it would appear that it is Biden who needs to grow his support base if he has any chance of winning. 

[gargamon]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Well Trump is already leading in the polls, so it would appear that it is Biden who needs to grow his support base if he has any chance of winning. 

With Nikki dropping out (soon) there's lots of people that aren't ardent Trump followers to accomplish that. 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

Well Trump is already leading in the polls, so it would appear that it is Biden who needs to grow his support base if he has any chance of winning. 

Polls schmolls. 

 

 

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, gargamon said:

With Nikki dropping out (soon) there's lots of people that aren't ardent Trump followers to accomplish that. 

I hope she stays in till the bitter end.

[Dolf]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

I hope she stays in till the bitter end.

Trump will win easily. Biden is 37% and that is only the rusted on losers that won't admit he lost his marbles.

[Tug]

35 minutes ago, Dolf said:

Trump will win easily. Biden is 37% and that is only the rusted on losers that won't admit he lost his marbles.

Do you even listen to what trump says?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, illisdean said:

If Trumps legal team petitions the court questioning Jack Smiths legitimacy, it could be all over for him.

 

Fisher v United States if petitioners prevail in the April arguments, will also end the bogus J6 KKK violation persecution. 

 

 

 

https://reason.com/volokh/2023/12/20/special-counsel-jack-smmiths-appointment-is-unconstitutional/

 

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

 

 

Trump fan reaches for points of view published by rightwing thintank. 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, illisdean said:

The deep state and its commie Hitler style tactics  to stop Trump are failing and Jack Smiths's days are numbered as well. Trump is well accepted by the majority of the voters as more successful than Biden's dumpster fire failed presidency. The proof is in the polls, especially on immigration and economy. The two most critical issues facing voters and Biden has failed miserably on both, and they know now Trump had the economy and border/immigration well managed! These bogus political persecutions of Trump are failing and only a matter of time until they are written off for the political warfare savagery they are. If Trump is an insurrectionist then charge him for that  instead of making up some crimes/violations taken form the KKK Act of 1871....laudable attempt at persecution and total humiliation of Biden's corrupt DOJ on the world stage. All things Biden equate with FAILURE. It's coming to an end soon.

Hitler shows up already.

[Danderman123]

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Well Trump is already leading in the polls, so it would appear that it is Biden who needs to grow his support base if he has any chance of winning. 

It is a certainty that when Trump falls behind in the polls, you will be claiming that the polls are fake.

 

Then, when Ttump loses the election by the same margin predicted by the polls, you will claim that the election was fake.

[bendejo]

Maybe Team Orange will arrange for the sedition case to be transferred to a more DT friendly place, like Moscow or Budapest.

If he fails to attain the WH yet again this time around the appeals will still be in play in 2027 when he's running for 2028. 

I'm expecting a load of chaos at the GOP convention this year, including audible death threats and possibly actual gun violence; not like Chicago '68 where the action was in the streets, but inside the convention hall itself.  My guess is attendees will be allowed to bring in guns because all MAGA people are Constitutional scholars conversant in 2nd Amendment rights.  Will be wild.

 

"Eric, keep the jet prepped and ready!"