Odds the Supreme Court will review one of four counts pending against Trump--with implications for another--just spiked. What does this mean for the special counsel and looming trial date?
The Supreme Court should use this opportunity to make clear that it recognizes that J6 prosecution is an abuse of the legal system for partisan purposes and is part of a broader abusive legal assault on Trump. The Court should then shut down Jack Smith and make clear that everyone involved in this abuse should be held accountable. The Court should not pretend that there is any legal merit or good faith in these indictments. Instead, they should focus on the violation of Trump’s constitutional rights and the plain as day election interference.
I agree but fear they won't. Just as they abdicated their duties after 2020 election, the majority of justices do not want to wade into any political fray that will benefit Trump or his supporters. It's really tragic to watch the one bulwark against this legal/judicial tyranny basically collapse when we need it most.
If a local police officer uses his authority to arrest people he does not like for made up reasons, you would hope that that officer would be fired. You certainly wouldn’t want the system to charge innocent people with crimes based on made up complaints and force them to defend themselves. That’s what is happening to Trump and the J6 defendants. He’s being charged with made up crimes prosecutors abusing their authority. It’s not even a close call. Yet, instead of firing the prosecutors , we are told that Trump is facing serious charges and we hear discussions on the strengths and weaknesses of these abusive claims. If the Supreme Court fails to step up, it will institutionalize abuse of the legal system as a political tactic.
Unfortunately, it will likely be a one way street. No one is going to raid Biden’s home, or Clinton’s or Obama’s. The courts will never allow the government to prosecute mass numbers of leftist rioters, let alone hold them in pre-trial detention or charge them with novel crimes or apply terror enhancements.
Dec 12, 2023·edited Dec 12, 2023Liked by Julie Kelly
The Court should also make clear that harassment of Presidential candidates by local partisan prosecutors, courts and juries runs afoul of the intent of the Constitution. Let the people choose the President.
SCOTUS should also focus on the violation of the right of American voters to select a candidate of their own choosing.
The Dems. moreover , desperately need Biden to run effectively unopposed (as the tyrant that he is), so they are doing their utmost to assure Trump gets nominated and that at least one of his four criminal trials ends in his incarceration, timed perfectly for late summer or early fall when it will be difficult if not impossible for Trump to remain a viable candidate and it will be no less difficult for the GOP to come up with an alternative candidate.
Welcome to eternal one-party : please God that SCOTUS recognizes the Dems’ diabolical plan and squashes it by throttling all the lawfare suits against Trump and sanctioning all the prosecutors who brought them.
I agree. The Dem’s plan is blatantly obvious. However, so was the Russia collusion hoax, the laptop, the rigging of the election and the so-called “insurrection”.
One thing I didn't include in the piece but researched this morning--after setting a fast track trial schedule, Chutkan slow walked her order in response to Trump's immunity motion. She waited almost 2 months before issuing her unprecedented order that she KNOWS will end up at SCOTUS. Chutkan sucked up 1/3 of the pretrial schedule by doing nothing.
Of course, you are both correct. The Secretary of State of West Virginia running for governor is very close when he dares to speak that the CIA, Zuckerberg, et al interfered in the 2020 election. However, when Republican voters, along with some percentage of unaffiliated voters, put Trump in office, the current Republican Party leaders are simply traitors to the republic. Let us start with the minority leader of the United States Senate.
Much like Robert Mueller, the most powerful man in Washington. But unlike Mueller, who was merely a figurehead, Smith is an established Democratic mercenary with no regard for the Constitution, separation of powers, due process, or the political health of the country. He'll burn it all down to get the scalps Biden and Dems want.
Due to the holidays, the next conference will be held on January 5. If the court agrees to take the case, an announcement could be made on Monday, January 8—ironically, the three-year anniversary of the official start of the Department of Justice’s criminal investigation into the Capitol protest and one day before jury selection officially begins for Trump’s D.C. trial.
Someone call the Karma Police!
"This is 6-6-6, what is the nature of your emergency?"
Very simply, Julie, as the saying goes...from your lips to God's ears. Let see what the Supreme's can do to thwart the Special Counsel and that Marxist-wearing-a-black-robe who preside over this incredible Soviet-Show-Trial.
I am not hopeful. The fact the court punted on the 1512c2 matter while immediately responding to Smith's demands does little to bring me confidence the court will do the right thing.
We can only hope that SCOTUS takes this issue. The dictates of our Constitution must be clarified in order for fair justice in this country. What is happening to the former President and most of the j6 defendants is abhorrent and contrary to the rule of law. This witch hunting by the judicial and justice department needs to end. I have faith in all of the conservative justices and I even think the more liberal ones understand how critical this particular ruling will be for the freedom of all citizens. We simply cannot let this kind of corruption continue.
I wish I shared your optimism--after watching the court repeatedly deny 2020 election lawsuits despite compelling evidence, it's hard to imagine the justices will do anything but jab Trump again.
It will come to Kavanaugh and ACB, and unfortunately, that is scary. Neither seems willing to upset the Kalorama cocktail party circuit. We also cannot underestimate the impact the threats to both them and their families have on their psyche. That is, after all, the payoff the Dems want from allowing the protests outside their homes.
Having worked with lawyers from top tier firms my whole career (I’m not a lawyer) it’s rare to find any who are not detached from working class mindset. They work and socialize among the top 1%. Same schools, parties, restaurants etc. I know the “law is the law” but to think people that spend their entire lives in that world are not impacted defies human nature. For BK and ACB it’s even harder b/c they have young(ish) kids who socialize with the kids of the other DC elite. Pissing off that parent network isn’t easy either. Reinforces how rare Thomas and Alito are.
Now here's a dumb thought (because I wonder if my thought has any relevance at all)...How about some court rule on whether Chutkan should have recused herself from the outset of these court proceedings due to her relationship with Mr. Hunter Biden and their mutual legal affiliation?
We can only hope that SCOTUS puts Smith in his place! Perhaps Smith is also testing his disgusting abuse of power against a President to see if he'd get shot down by the SCOTUS which he should be used to. In his case against Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia the court voted unanimously to overturn Smith's conviction of McDonnell. McDonnell, though, went through 3 years of hell at the hands of this total whack job, Jack Smith. SCOTUS must stand for the powers of the President or our country will be in shambles. We better pray for a win on this twisted legal case where we all know it is a political drive by with no basis in law.
This is what I talked to Mark Levin about last night. How can the highest court give any credibility to a known partisan hack with a dubious prosecutorial record, to put it kindly? He should have been laughed off the docket but instead, the court immediately acquiesced. Not an encouraging sign.
Our representatives in congress aren't screaming at the rafters (except about Ukraine). The citizens are unwilling to pick up the pitchforks. If someone is going to save the day it's going to have to be the Supreme court. Are the last line heroes up to the task? You feel they might just be, but wonder, why all the theatre in the meantime?
I read the writ of certiorari and noticed the SC is repeatedly underscoring the need of the public to have a speedy trial, (in fact several speedy trials!) He quotes the 6th Amendment, but mistakenly states the need for a speedy trial belongs to the public. The right belongs to the Defendant. The burden of proof resting on the Government’s deliberations, beyond a reasonable doubt would strongly suggest that a speedy trial would work against the Defendant’s rights in a complicated case that includes parsing criminal intent, protected speech, constitutional rights of the executive. Additionally, the Courts are treading on Election Integrity issues. The last thing the Public needs is a speedy trial. (Except leftists, who are hoping for judgment before 11/24.)
What always makes me laugh is that Smith repeatedly insists the public has an interest and right to a speedy trial--but opposes any live video/audio feed from the courtroom.
You responded to my question about Chutkan not having to recuse herself by saying that SHE made the decision to not do that. For some reason, that flummoxes me to no end. I don't get why S/HE has the last word on this subject mainly because (as we hear so often from the Democrat contingent of schizophrenic talking heads) "nobody is above the law"!
That disingenuous tyrannical and beyond categorizing and highly biased person can not be the only person s/he answers to in this country...herself! There must be an overseeing body of people or person(s) who has/have the authority or right to review the judgments that Chutkan makes IF they are up for question as to their validity. It cannot just be an appellate body can it?
Of course, the jurisdiction is so obviously jaded and biased because of it's location, it's likely that this would be a replay of the Michael Sussmann case that came back as an acquittal because that decision was made even before voir dire was played out for the perspective jurors (which, I believe at least one juror admitted to).
The Supreme Court should use this opportunity to make clear that it recognizes that J6 prosecution is an abuse of the legal system for partisan purposes and is part of a broader abusive legal assault on Trump. The Court should then shut down Jack Smith and make clear that everyone involved in this abuse should be held accountable. The Court should not pretend that there is any legal merit or good faith in these indictments. Instead, they should focus on the violation of Trump’s constitutional rights and the plain as day election interference.
I agree but fear they won't. Just as they abdicated their duties after 2020 election, the majority of justices do not want to wade into any political fray that will benefit Trump or his supporters. It's really tragic to watch the one bulwark against this legal/judicial tyranny basically collapse when we need it most.
If a local police officer uses his authority to arrest people he does not like for made up reasons, you would hope that that officer would be fired. You certainly wouldn’t want the system to charge innocent people with crimes based on made up complaints and force them to defend themselves. That’s what is happening to Trump and the J6 defendants. He’s being charged with made up crimes prosecutors abusing their authority. It’s not even a close call. Yet, instead of firing the prosecutors , we are told that Trump is facing serious charges and we hear discussions on the strengths and weaknesses of these abusive claims. If the Supreme Court fails to step up, it will institutionalize abuse of the legal system as a political tactic.
Unfortunately, it will likely be a one way street. No one is going to raid Biden’s home, or Clinton’s or Obama’s. The courts will never allow the government to prosecute mass numbers of leftist rioters, let alone hold them in pre-trial detention or charge them with novel crimes or apply terror enhancements.
The Court should also make clear that harassment of Presidential candidates by local partisan prosecutors, courts and juries runs afoul of the intent of the Constitution. Let the people choose the President.
Exactly.
SCOTUS should also focus on the violation of the right of American voters to select a candidate of their own choosing.
The Dems. moreover , desperately need Biden to run effectively unopposed (as the tyrant that he is), so they are doing their utmost to assure Trump gets nominated and that at least one of his four criminal trials ends in his incarceration, timed perfectly for late summer or early fall when it will be difficult if not impossible for Trump to remain a viable candidate and it will be no less difficult for the GOP to come up with an alternative candidate.
Welcome to eternal one-party : please God that SCOTUS recognizes the Dems’ diabolical plan and squashes it by throttling all the lawfare suits against Trump and sanctioning all the prosecutors who brought them.
I agree. The Dem’s plan is blatantly obvious. However, so was the Russia collusion hoax, the laptop, the rigging of the election and the so-called “insurrection”.
So they wait two years to file charges, and now suddenly everything is a huge rush.
One thing I didn't include in the piece but researched this morning--after setting a fast track trial schedule, Chutkan slow walked her order in response to Trump's immunity motion. She waited almost 2 months before issuing her unprecedented order that she KNOWS will end up at SCOTUS. Chutkan sucked up 1/3 of the pretrial schedule by doing nothing.
Talk about the right to a speedy trial.
I despise the cowardice and “passive-aggressive complicity" of the GOP wing of the UniParty.
Funding this never ending “persecution” has been CRIMINAL.
They haven't cut a dime.
Of course, you are both correct. The Secretary of State of West Virginia running for governor is very close when he dares to speak that the CIA, Zuckerberg, et al interfered in the 2020 election. However, when Republican voters, along with some percentage of unaffiliated voters, put Trump in office, the current Republican Party leaders are simply traitors to the republic. Let us start with the minority leader of the United States Senate.
God help us.
Jack Smith is a disgrace
Much like Robert Mueller, the most powerful man in Washington. But unlike Mueller, who was merely a figurehead, Smith is an established Democratic mercenary with no regard for the Constitution, separation of powers, due process, or the political health of the country. He'll burn it all down to get the scalps Biden and Dems want.
Due to the holidays, the next conference will be held on January 5. If the court agrees to take the case, an announcement could be made on Monday, January 8—ironically, the three-year anniversary of the official start of the Department of Justice’s criminal investigation into the Capitol protest and one day before jury selection officially begins for Trump’s D.C. trial.
Someone call the Karma Police!
"This is 6-6-6, what is the nature of your emergency?"
Very simply, Julie, as the saying goes...from your lips to God's ears. Let see what the Supreme's can do to thwart the Special Counsel and that Marxist-wearing-a-black-robe who preside over this incredible Soviet-Show-Trial.
I am not hopeful. The fact the court punted on the 1512c2 matter while immediately responding to Smith's demands does little to bring me confidence the court will do the right thing.
We can only hope that SCOTUS takes this issue. The dictates of our Constitution must be clarified in order for fair justice in this country. What is happening to the former President and most of the j6 defendants is abhorrent and contrary to the rule of law. This witch hunting by the judicial and justice department needs to end. I have faith in all of the conservative justices and I even think the more liberal ones understand how critical this particular ruling will be for the freedom of all citizens. We simply cannot let this kind of corruption continue.
I wish I shared your optimism--after watching the court repeatedly deny 2020 election lawsuits despite compelling evidence, it's hard to imagine the justices will do anything but jab Trump again.
Elizabeth you’re very optimistic to think that the liberal justices “understand how critical this particular ruling will be...”
It will come to Kavanaugh and ACB, and unfortunately, that is scary. Neither seems willing to upset the Kalorama cocktail party circuit. We also cannot underestimate the impact the threats to both them and their families have on their psyche. That is, after all, the payoff the Dems want from allowing the protests outside their homes.
They have both been a disappointment to say the least. Kavanaugh will do anything to keep the media off his tail and ACB is just weak.
Having worked with lawyers from top tier firms my whole career (I’m not a lawyer) it’s rare to find any who are not detached from working class mindset. They work and socialize among the top 1%. Same schools, parties, restaurants etc. I know the “law is the law” but to think people that spend their entire lives in that world are not impacted defies human nature. For BK and ACB it’s even harder b/c they have young(ish) kids who socialize with the kids of the other DC elite. Pissing off that parent network isn’t easy either. Reinforces how rare Thomas and Alito are.
Now here's a dumb thought (because I wonder if my thought has any relevance at all)...How about some court rule on whether Chutkan should have recused herself from the outset of these court proceedings due to her relationship with Mr. Hunter Biden and their mutual legal affiliation?
She denied Trump's motion to recuse. Apparently she has the last word.
We can only hope that SCOTUS puts Smith in his place! Perhaps Smith is also testing his disgusting abuse of power against a President to see if he'd get shot down by the SCOTUS which he should be used to. In his case against Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia the court voted unanimously to overturn Smith's conviction of McDonnell. McDonnell, though, went through 3 years of hell at the hands of this total whack job, Jack Smith. SCOTUS must stand for the powers of the President or our country will be in shambles. We better pray for a win on this twisted legal case where we all know it is a political drive by with no basis in law.
This is what I talked to Mark Levin about last night. How can the highest court give any credibility to a known partisan hack with a dubious prosecutorial record, to put it kindly? He should have been laughed off the docket but instead, the court immediately acquiesced. Not an encouraging sign.
Your article is BRILLIANT!
Too kind, thank you!
Our representatives in congress aren't screaming at the rafters (except about Ukraine). The citizens are unwilling to pick up the pitchforks. If someone is going to save the day it's going to have to be the Supreme court. Are the last line heroes up to the task? You feel they might just be, but wonder, why all the theatre in the meantime?
I pray they are but fear they are not.
I read the writ of certiorari and noticed the SC is repeatedly underscoring the need of the public to have a speedy trial, (in fact several speedy trials!) He quotes the 6th Amendment, but mistakenly states the need for a speedy trial belongs to the public. The right belongs to the Defendant. The burden of proof resting on the Government’s deliberations, beyond a reasonable doubt would strongly suggest that a speedy trial would work against the Defendant’s rights in a complicated case that includes parsing criminal intent, protected speech, constitutional rights of the executive. Additionally, the Courts are treading on Election Integrity issues. The last thing the Public needs is a speedy trial. (Except leftists, who are hoping for judgment before 11/24.)
What always makes me laugh is that Smith repeatedly insists the public has an interest and right to a speedy trial--but opposes any live video/audio feed from the courtroom.
Hmm... missed that, Julie. That’s why we need your stack.
Julie,
You responded to my question about Chutkan not having to recuse herself by saying that SHE made the decision to not do that. For some reason, that flummoxes me to no end. I don't get why S/HE has the last word on this subject mainly because (as we hear so often from the Democrat contingent of schizophrenic talking heads) "nobody is above the law"!
That disingenuous tyrannical and beyond categorizing and highly biased person can not be the only person s/he answers to in this country...herself! There must be an overseeing body of people or person(s) who has/have the authority or right to review the judgments that Chutkan makes IF they are up for question as to their validity. It cannot just be an appellate body can it?
Of course, the jurisdiction is so obviously jaded and biased because of it's location, it's likely that this would be a replay of the Michael Sussmann case that came back as an acquittal because that decision was made even before voir dire was played out for the perspective jurors (which, I believe at least one juror admitted to).
Then, I suppose, all that remains is to pray...
Great job on Bannon today (12/13)!
You are an American heroine!
Congrats on your fantastic day exposing the Deep State communists Smith & Chutkan.
https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1735036970043167070?s=46&t=AuwkS69LUgCQwbNTQq8gww