Published January 4, 2024
Former President Donald Trump’s campaign announced Thursday that it had filed a “powerhouse motion” to hold special counsel Jack Smith in contempt of court for continuing forward with his 2020 election interference case.
The filing — submitted to Washington, D.C., federal District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan who is overseeing the case — noted last month she had ordered a stay in any further proceedings while Trump’s appeal over whether presidential immunity applies to charges Smith has brought against Trump.
Trump’s appeal to the Washington, D.C., Circuit Court of Appeals “automatically stays any further proceedings that would move this case towards trial or impose additional burdens of litigation,” Chutkan’s order said, according to the Associated Press.
Smith tried unsuccessfully late last month to get the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on the issue to expedite the appeal, but the Court denied the request, so the review will proceed through the normal process.
The D.C. Circuit Court is set is hear arguments Tuesday in the case and signaled it intends to move quickly, the AP said.
Despite Chutkan’s Dec. 13 order staying proceedings at the federal court level, Trump’s filing says Smith’s office served on Trump for 4,000 pages of “additional discovery’ on December 17, 2023, including what the prosecutors’ production letter described as several hundred video and audio recordings.”
The next day, Smith’s prosecutor’s served a “purported exhibit list” for the trial.
Trump’s filing contends Smith’s office is seeking to “score cheap political points against President Trump on behalf of the Biden Campaign.”
“In so doing, the prosecutors have repeatedly and willfully disregarded the Court’s explicit instructions. Such malignant conduct undermines the integrity of this proceeding and warrants severe sanction,” Trump’s legal team argued.
READ FULL ARTICLE
SOURCE: www.westernjournal.com
RELATED: Jack Smith Goes Off the Rails, Claims Trump Immunity Argument Would Allow Him to Order His Supporters to Murder Opposing Lawmakers
Published January 4, 2024
Special Counsel Jack Smith went completely off the rails and told a federal appeals court that Trump’s immunity argument would allow him to order his supporters to murder opposing lawmakers.
Trump’s lawyers argued that Trump is immune from federal prosecution for alleged ‘crimes’ committed while he served as US President.
“In 234 years of American history, no president ever faced criminal prosecution for his official acts. Until 19 days ago, no court had ever addressed whether immunity from such prosecution exists,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in last month’s filing, according to CBS News. “To this day, no appellate court has addressed it. The question stands among the most complex, intricate, and momentous issues that this Court will be called on to decide.”
Oral arguments in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals begin on January 9.
Jack Smith argued Trump is not immune from prosecution because he could order the murder of his political opponents or sell nuclear secrets.
“The implications of the defendant’s broad immunity theory are sobering. In his view, a court should treat a President’s criminal conduct as immune from prosecution as long as it takes the form of correspondence with a state official about a matter in which there is a federal interest, a meeting with a member of the Executive Branch, or a statement on a matter of public concern,” according to Jack Smith’s 82-page filing reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
Jack Smith’s team argued that if Trump is protected by the presidential immunity argument, what could stop him from telling his “inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers…”
“That approach would grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a President who accepts a bribe in exchange for directing a lucrative government contract to the payer; a President who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy; a President who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics; or a President who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary, because in each of these scenarios, the President could assert that he was simply executing the laws; or communicating with the Department of Justice; or discharging his powers as Commander-in-Chief; or engaging in foreign diplomacy. Under the defendant’s framework, the Nation would have no recourse to deter a President from inciting his supporters during a State of the Union address to kill opposing lawmakers—thereby hamstringing any impeachment proceeding—to ensure that he remains in office unlawfully,” Jack Smith wrote.
READ FULL ARTICLE
SOURCE: www.thegatewaypundit.com
RELATED: Jack Smith uses Donald Trump’s previous argument to fight immunity claim
Special counsel Jack Smith speaks during a press conference after Donald Trump is indicted on criminal charges by a federal grand jury in the 2020 election interference case in Washington on August 1. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo
Published January 4, 2024
Jan. 2 (UPI) — In a new filing in the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump, special counsel Jack Smith cites a previous argument from Trump that immunity from prosecution ends with presidency.
Smith’s filing to the D.C. court of appeals, made public on Saturday, is the clearest rundown yet of the prosecution’s case against granting Trump immunity from prosecution. Oral arguments are slated to be heard on Jan. 9.
Trump’s defense team has claimed he has broad immunity from being prosecuted for his role in attempting to stop the certification of the 2020 election and inciting a riot at the U.S. Capitol. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan has previously denied Trump’s immunity claim before pausing the case until the immunity question is resolved.
The prosecution’s argument cites a past attempt by Trump to claim immunity in another case.
READ FULL ARTICLE
SOURCE: www.upi.com
