Special Counsel Jack Smith appears to be pleading with the Supreme Court to proceed with Donald Trump’s trial on time, which could potentially interfere with the presidential election if it drags into 2024. And now Jack Smith has filed a motion with the United States Supreme Court and wants to have an expedited review of the previous lawsuit filed against former President Donald Trump. However, there’s a slight possibility this motion could inadvertently help Donald Trump if the court allows the expedited review AND rules in favor of Trump – thereby scorching Jack Smith’s motion against him in ways that he probably won’t like – although we’re sure he’s prepared for. You don’t get this high in the legal system by being unprepared, but if it backfires, then Trump has a solid deck of cards to play with.
The motion is asking for a decision on multiple issues revolving around presidential immunity from prosecution. Should presidents be immune to prosecution? In my opinion, no – no one should be immune to prosecution from anything, but no one should be prosecuted without solid evidence worthy of an actual prosecution. Trump is facing a four-count indictment at the time, but many people with more knowledge of the law are saying this is just a political move to disrupt Trump’s campaign for president in the 2024 election. A political move that involves baseless accusations meant to take his time away from spending time on the campaign trail and hold him up in court.
Prosecutors wrote, as quoted by Trending Politics, “This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin.”
Are the charges against Donald Trump rooted in solid evidence or a dishonest attempt to derail Trump’s campaign. If it’s found that Democrats had no substantial evidence against Trump, and he wins this outright – then will the people who pushed this lawsuit be punished for falsifying it in a political move? They should be, that’s for sure. Trending Politics further reported some other information about Jack Smith’s motion:
I’m not a lawyer, but I can smell BS when it’s obvious. I don’t think these indictments have a leg to stand on. I believe they’re more of a political move targeting a political opponent. It’s my opinion that Democrats are using this lawsuit to give themselves a better chance to win in 2024. Considering how bad Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are, the Democrats need every distraction, lawsuit, and deceased illegal immigrant voter they can find.
You know what SHOULD win an election? A GOOD candidate with common sense ideas, but it doesn’t seem like Democrats have anyone like that at the moment. So what’s next on their list? Play political games like a true politician. Isn’t that what many of them do anyway? At what point will politicians be held accountable for their failures? Will Jack Smith’s motion help Trump or hurt him? Watch the video below…
Continue reading...
The motion is asking for a decision on multiple issues revolving around presidential immunity from prosecution. Should presidents be immune to prosecution? In my opinion, no – no one should be immune to prosecution from anything, but no one should be prosecuted without solid evidence worthy of an actual prosecution. Trump is facing a four-count indictment at the time, but many people with more knowledge of the law are saying this is just a political move to disrupt Trump’s campaign for president in the 2024 election. A political move that involves baseless accusations meant to take his time away from spending time on the campaign trail and hold him up in court.
Prosecutors wrote, as quoted by Trending Politics, “This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy: whether a former President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office or is constitutionally protected from federal prosecution when he has been impeached but not convicted before the criminal proceedings begin.”
Are the charges against Donald Trump rooted in solid evidence or a dishonest attempt to derail Trump’s campaign. If it’s found that Democrats had no substantial evidence against Trump, and he wins this outright – then will the people who pushed this lawsuit be punished for falsifying it in a political move? They should be, that’s for sure. Trending Politics further reported some other information about Jack Smith’s motion:
Smith wants to skip the appeals court and has asked the Supreme Court on Monday to handle the case directly. This move aims to ensure the trial, scheduled for March 4, happens on time. Smith wants to avoid any postponements that might delay the case until after the upcoming presidential election.
His petition to the Supreme Court, therefore, opens a new chapter in this legal saga. If the Court agrees to an expedited review and ultimately finds in favor of Trump, particularly on the grounds of presidential immunity, it could lead to a significant legal victory for the former President, especially with the election less than a year away.
I’m not a lawyer, but I can smell BS when it’s obvious. I don’t think these indictments have a leg to stand on. I believe they’re more of a political move targeting a political opponent. It’s my opinion that Democrats are using this lawsuit to give themselves a better chance to win in 2024. Considering how bad Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are, the Democrats need every distraction, lawsuit, and deceased illegal immigrant voter they can find.
You know what SHOULD win an election? A GOOD candidate with common sense ideas, but it doesn’t seem like Democrats have anyone like that at the moment. So what’s next on their list? Play political games like a true politician. Isn’t that what many of them do anyway? At what point will politicians be held accountable for their failures? Will Jack Smith’s motion help Trump or hurt him? Watch the video below…
Continue reading...
