23 Comments

I’m not a lawyer but - “It is unclear whether Twitter will ask the Supreme Court to review the matter. Unfortunately, since the data was produced and the nondisclosure order executed, the issue could be considered “moot” at this point.”

If the Supreme Court did take the case and ruled, the data was obtained illegally and without proper due process, would it not be inadmissible in any proceedings. In addition, the ruling would (may) prevent any future shenanigans.

At this point, we can only hold out hope that true justice prevails.

Expand full comment

These rights-trampling actions to have a big fishing expedition to find something useful with which to tar Trump, will some day be compared to the Palmer Raids of the 1920's and other disgraceful periods in our history.

Expand full comment

If Trump was anything like Bill and Killary, Jack Smith would have *committed suicide* by now...

Expand full comment

At least these four judges thought it prudent to call out Pan (for the record). They know where this will go and they don’t want to be associated with her decision. It is a bit refreshing to know that there are some honest jurists scattered here and there. Thank you Julie for your steadfast focus on all of these twists and turns. Your reporting is informative, concise and timely and very much appreciated.

Expand full comment

Watch the hearings on Judge Pan with Senator Kennedy. She is a zealous advocate and not an impartial judge. I doubt she even knows what a woman is

Expand full comment

Sadly, if they can get away with doing this to a former president-what chance do WE THE PEOPLE have? The constitution isn't a spare roll of Charmin to wipe your ass with!

Expand full comment

Lawless bunch of thugs. Disgraceful.

Expand full comment

What can be done about this hyper- politicized judiciary? It is a rot in our system destroying any trust or confidence in an unbiased judge on the bench.

Expand full comment

Pan , along with Arthur Engoron and Lewis Kaplan on Trump cases in NY, and Tanya Chutkan in DC, are “jurists” who shamelessly display their hatred for Trump daily and need to be sanctioned. Yesterday Kaplan even refused to adjourn the Carroll trial for one day so Trump could attend his mother-in-law’s funeral in Florida without absenting himself from a day’s proceedings on the case in NY. If this refusal of a simple humanitarian request isn’t a naked display of outright hate for one of the litigants before Kaplan, I don’t know what is.

Expand full comment

They don’t care & will do anything it takes to win. Damn the constitution & the country. They are trying to save their asses.

Expand full comment

Julie, Thanks for covering this topic. I've been extremely concerned that Jack Smith was able to obtain all the data associated with Trump's (dormant) Twitter account. It's not a stretch to believe that the names of everyone who interacted with Trump on Twitter will be shared with the FBI's AGAAVE unit (aka anti-MAGA/Trump group). That's a lot of Trump supporters that can expect to be put in the crosshairs of the FBI's AGAAVE unit.

Expand full comment

Jack is a psycho out of tune with the Normals.

Expand full comment

As your early tweet on this noted, Julie, "Lots of bad reporting on DC Circuit opinion filed today."

Outstanding explainer.

Another of your early tweets quotes the last line of the 4 judge "dissent", but you left this out of your Substack:

"Not every 'wolf comes as a wolf.' Perhaps the threat here was hard to spot. Nevertheless, judicial disregard of executive privilege undermines the Presidency, not just the former President being investigated in this case."

The 4 judges understated this badly. While excoriating their fellow judges legalistically / analytically, they really pulled their punches here at the end. The threat is easy to spot - no legal degree required.

Make no mistake, Jack Smith is a wolf, and he arranged his assault through the back door - as he brazenly admitted.

The DC District Court judges (save again a tiny minority like Judge Nichols) and the other 7 Circuit Court of Appeals judges are all sheep. But in this story, the wolf and the sheep are aligned.

Expand full comment

Julie, the way this information is presented has a reasonable degree of forceful art and makes Jack Smith appear, at least in this situation, to have acted like a white colar criminal.

As J6 defendant 503 pending May 6 jury selection on the "boilerplate 4" ("observer" misdemeanors) with Judge Lamberth & Hutton Marshall prosecuting. . .I find Jack Smith's tactics inexcusable and wonder how history will present this (near) executive government actor's conduct. If history is kind to January 6 2021, will Jack Smith end up as a face-card in the deck of 52 actors?

Expand full comment

While Merrick Garland runs the four ring circus to eliminate Trump from the 2024 Presidential Election, he is knowingly destroying the privileges of the Presidency. Even the former President's first amendment rights are being washed away. This is destroying the Presidency and as the left scream that Trump will destroy our democracy, the Biden Administration, the media and leftwing activists, politicians both left and right, are shaking the Constitution to its core right before our eyes. For Smith to obtain Trump's private messages from October 2020 through January 2021 is unconscionable. And in addition to Trump he had all his communications with his supporters as well. Now, the DOJ has extra ammo as he launches investigations into them and has sent the banks marching orders to watch for "MAGA" donations and purchases to show political affiliation.

The public seems to be finally "getting it" when they watch lawsuits with no crimes heaped upon Trump and the public knows every indictment is purely political. They also are becoming aware that Trump is not the only target. The DOJ with the full force of the Biden Administration is trampling on the Constitutional Rights of the First and Fourth Amendments. And, now as time passes we find the prosecutors all colluding with the WH as they themselves are swimming in corruption.

There is hope at the end of the tunnel as most of these cases head to the SCOTUS, an amicus brief by Edwin Meese gives the SCOTUS a path to the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Reading the brief it appears from the papers filed by Meese and others that Jack Smith cannot be Special Counsel since he is a private citizen and must be appointed by the President and the Senate. I would say this would be the death nell to Merrick Garland's bag of tricks, as the rest of the state's indictments climb through the courts to rational judges who find Bragg, James, and Willis guilty of prosecutorial misconduct. And, while they're at it they should immediately remove that NYC Judge Gorgon (or whatever) since he really needs a mental health exam and if he passes send him back to driving a cab.

Expand full comment

So concerning to see the lengths these prosecutors will go to. They continue to harden the resolve to get Trump back in office.

Expand full comment