|
Jack Smith Appeals CORRUPT Cannons' Dismissal of TRUMP Classified Docs Case
Jack Smith Officially Challenges CORRUPT Judge Cannons' Dismissal of TRUMP Classified Document Case
Special Counsel Jack Smith Wednesday filed his appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit after Florida federal court Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed his classified documents case against Donald Trump MSNRAW 18 JUL 2024 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=675 This move comes just two days after Cannon tossed the Espionage Acts violations case against Trump on the grounds that Smith was not properly appointed as special counsel. Trump stood accused of illegally hoarding classified documents at his Florida social club Mar-a-Lago in boxes stacked haphazardly in a ballroom, bathroom and shower, among other places. Cannon, a Trump appointee, has been long criticized for showing deference to Trump. Her ruling Monday spurred hopes that the case could be transferred to another judge. This was one of four criminal cases brought against Trump, convicted in Manhattan of falsifying business records earlier this year. He also faces election racketeering and interference charges in Georgia and Washington, D.C. |
TRUMP Sues DOJ For $100MIL Over Mar-a-Lago Raid-Cites CORRUPT Judge Cannon
TRUMP Plans to Sue DOJ Over Mar-a-Lago Classified Docs Search –For $100MIL
TRUMPs' Revenge Cites CORRUPT Judge Cannon in Seeking Compensation For Mar-a-Lago Raid The Guardian 17 AUG 2024 https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/dbccb...0&dpr=1&s=none Trump to sue justice department over ‘improper purpose’ to Mar-a-Lago raid, he seeks $100m after alleging the 2022 sweep resulting in now-dismissed documents case was political persecution Donald Trump Lawyers are set to sue the US justice department over the 2022 federal raid on his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida that turned up classified documents hidden in unsecured locations around the expansive villa and resort. Lawyers for the former US president told Fox Business that the raid, conducted as part of an FBI investigation into Trump’s alleged improper retention of classified records, was done with “clear intent to engage in political persecution” and they would seek $100m in damages. The investigation produced 37 felony counts – 31 pertaining to the willful retention of national defense information – against Trump. Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts. The charges were dismissed last month after the presiding judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Jack Smith, the special counsel overseeing the case, had been illegally appointed and funded. The Trump attorney Daniel Epstein told the outlet that Trump was not standing up for himself but “standing up for all Americans who believe in the rule of law and believe that you should hold the government accountable when it wrongs you” Epstein said that there was “clear evidence” that the FBI failed to follow protocol and that showed that there was an “improper purpose”. In the filing of intent to sue, Epstein wrote that decisions made by attorney general Merrick Garland and FBI director Christopher Wray were not grounded in “social, economic and political policy” but instead in “clear dereliction of constitutional principles, inconsistent standards as applied to” Trump and a “clear intent to engage in political persecution – not to advance good law enforcement practices”. The government has 180 days to respond to the notice, after which the case could move to federal court in the southern district of Florida. https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=800 In dealing with legal issues on multiple fronts, Trump and his legal team have repeatedly sought to pursue a tactic of delaying them – especially until after November’s presidential election. Filing suits and countersuits is a key part of that strategy. |
Jack Smith Appeals CROOKED Judge Cannons' Dismissal of Trumps' Classified Docs Ca
Jack Smith Appeals CROOKED Judge Cannons' Improper Dismissal of Trumps' Classified Documents Case
Special counsel Jack Smith appeals ruling tossing Trumps' classified documents case AP 27 AUG 2024 https://npr.brightspotcdn.com/dims3/...1570150031.jpg Special Counsel Jack Smith just filed an appeal with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, urging them to REVERSE Judge Aileen Cannons' dismissal of Trumps' classified documents/obstruction of justice/espionage case. Jack Smith made clear that Cannons' dismissal has no legal support and is contrary to all precedent, including precedent form the Supreme Court dating back to the Nixon/Watergate era. As Smith writes, Judge Cannons' dismissal of Trumps' case "conflicts with an otherwise unbroken course of decisions, including by the Supreme Court, that the Attorney General has such authority, and it is at odds with widespread and longstanding appointment practices in the Department of Justice and across the government. Special Counsel Jack Smith says U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon was wrong when she dismissed the case last month against former President Donald Trump for mishandling classified and top-secret documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. In a brief filed with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, Smith says Judge Cannon was also mistaken in ruling that the process used to appoint the Special Counsel was unconstitutional. Smith is appealing Cannon?s ruling, asking the 11th Circuit Court to reverse her order to dismiss the case and send it back ?for further proceedings.? In his brief, the Special Counsel does not ask the court to remove the Trump-appointed judge from the case. Even before her dismissal, Cannon was criticized by legal observers for delays and rulings that favored Trump. If the Appeals court reverses her ruling, many legal observers believe it may also ask Cannon to recuse herself from the case. In her ruling last month, Judge Cannon said that Attorney General Merrick Garland exceeded his constitutional authority in appointing a prosecutor who was not subject to Congressional approval. ?The Special Counsel?s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority,? she wrote, ?threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers.? Cannon?s opinion runs counter to decades of rulings by other federal courts upholding the constitutionality of the Special Counsel?s office. In her analysis, Cannon examined an important 1974 Watergate-era Supreme Court opinion. Cannon determined that the Justice?s ?passing remarks? are not ?binding precedent on future cases.? But in his brief Smith says, ?The district court erred.? In that case, Smith says the Supreme Court held ?the Attorney General has statutory authority?to appoint a special prosecutor comparable to the Special Counsel.? Smith lists four statutes passed by Congress that authorize the appointment and funding of the Special Counsel?s office. ?Precedent and history confirm those authorities,? Smith writes, ?as do the long tradition of special-counsel appointments by Attorneys General and Congress? endorsement of the practice.? Special Counsels have been appointed by Attorneys? General for more than 150 years, Smith points out, and were used after the Civil War to prosecute Jefferson Davis for treason and a conspirator involved in the assassination of President Lincoln. This Court should reverse."Trumps lawyers have 30 days to file their reply to Smiths brief. Smith is asking the 11th Circuit to schedule oral arguments, saying he believes they ?would assist the Court?s decisional process in this case of significant public importance.? https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/u...1.56.53-PM.png |
Melania Trump is ANGRY DOJ Went Through Her Stuff on Mar-a-Lago Raid
'It Made Me Angry': Melania Trump Complains to Fox News That DOJ Went Through Her Stuff'
Melania Trump is "angry" the Justice Department searching through her belongings as agents acted on a search warrant in the criminal document retention case against her husband, she said in a Fox News interview. MSNRAW 26 SEP 2024 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=656 In an interview released piece by piece early Thursday morning on Fox & Friends, Donald Trump's wife spoke out about everything from inflation to the assassination attempts against her husbands life. She has in the past been criticized for her failure to campaign alongside Trump, or even appear with him at his many criminal hearings. The interviewer asked the former first lady about the raid on Mar-a-Lago, asking, "How invasive was that? Did it make you angry?" "Yeah, it made me angry, yeah," Melania says. "Invasion of privacy and the way it was done was - I was really surprised." The host asks what the house looked like after it had been raided, to which the ex-first lady replied, "I saw unpleasant stuff that nobody wants to see it." "And you get angry because nobody should be putting up with that kind of stuff," she added. "Some person, I don't even know who or how many people, they went through my stuff." MORE; Melania Trump Born: April 26, 1970 (age 54), Novo Mesto, Slovenia Net worth: $50 Million(celebritynetworth.com) Height: 5'11" (1.80m) Spouse: Donald Trump(m 2005 - present) Children: Barron Trump Parents: Viktor Knavs, Amalija Knavs https://i2-prod.mirror.co.uk/incomin...4-DEC-2003.jpg Melania Trump May Be Republishing Her Nude Photos |
TRUMP Wants Judge Cannon For Attorn Gen- as 2 Motions To Remove Her Continue
Judge Aileen Cannon, Who Tossed Classified Docs Case, Proposed Candidate For Trumps Attorney General
Motion To Remove Judge Cannon From ANOTHER Trump-Related Case FILED AP 24 OCT 2024 https://npr.brightspotcdn.com/dims3/...2005662332.jpg A retired federal judge says Judge Cannon appears to show 'favoritism' toward Trump https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/22451...een-cannon.jpg A proposed personnel roster circulating and transition operation lists Aileen Cannon, the federal judge who threw out Trumps classified documents case, as candidate for attorney general, multiple sources familiar with the matter have told ABC News. Cannons name appears on a document reviewed by ABC News titled "Transition Planning: Legal Principals," which lists potential staffing for the White House counsels office, the Department of Justice, the FBI, and U.S. attorneys' offices, as well as proposed candidates for the top legal positions within multiple government agencies, should Trump be re-elected. Legal Experts Want Judge Cannon Removed From Trumps Mar-a-Lago Documents Case - Motion To Remove Judge Cannon From Trump-Related Case -Ryan Routh -Who Planned to Assassinate Donald Trump A retired federal judge is among those asking an appeals court to reassign former President Trumps indictment on charges of mishandling classified documents case to a new judge. Special counsel Jack Smith has appealed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon's decision when she dismissed the case last month against former President Donald Trump for mishandling classified and top-secret documents at his Florida home in Mar-a-Lago. In documents filed with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, two groups of legal experts and former government officials say U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon should be removed from the case. Former federal judge Nancy Gertner and two legal scholars, Stephen Gillers and James Sample say rulings by Judge Cannon and her numerous delays have raised well-founded concerns that she may be biased against the Government?s case and unable to manage that case impartially. They?re seeking permission to file an amicus brief. Many of us have waited a very long time for Special Counsel Jack Smith to file a motion to remove Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon from presiding over Trump's criminal case in Florida. Unfortunately, Judge Cannon dismissed the case before Smith ever got around to filing a recusal motion. Then, the defendant who allegedly planned to assassinate Donald Trump - defendant Ryan Routh - was arrested and Judge Cannon was assigned to Routh's case, in which Trump is the victim. Now, Rouths attorney has filed a motion to remove Cannon from presiding over Rouths case given Cannons unusually close relationship to Trump. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK14YIfCEAk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3QFcNNcO7I Trumps Legacy And How He Changed America https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xt1uOlT1PMU |
CLEVER Jack Smith Hands Mar-a-Lago Docs Case to Florida FED Prosecutors
CLEVER Jack Smith Hands Mar-a-Lago Docs Case to Florida Prosecutors
Special counsel Jack Smith has shifted the Mar-a-Lago documents case to federal prosecutors in Florida, signaling a new phase in the ongoing legal proceedings involving Trumps co-defendants, The Hill reported. AP 1 JAN 2025 https://images.dailykos.com/images/1...jpg?1688052292 Smith formally transferred responsibility for the Mar-a-Lago documents case to the Southern District of Florida federal prosecutors on Friday. This decision is pivotal in prosecuting President-elect Donald Trump's co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira. Smith dropped all charges against Trump in November, citing Justice Department guidelines that prohibit prosecuting a sitting president. The charges, dismissed without prejudice, swiftly resolved Trumps election interference case and concluded his involvement in the Mar-a-Lago documents matter. However, the legal troubles for Nauta, Trumps personal valet, and de Oliveira, a Mar-a-Lago property manager, remain unresolved. Both men face serious allegations, including obstruction of justice, making false statements to investigators, and concealing government documents. The charges stem from accusations that the pair participated in a broader conspiracy to hide boxes of thousands of records from federal investigators and Trump's then-attorney. These records included approximately 300 documents bearing classified markings. Investigators allege that the documents were improperly taken from the White House at the end of Trumps presidency and not returned to the National Archives as required by law. https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=804 As usual the REAL thief gets away with it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GWmC6yng_U |
CORRUPT Judge Cannon TOLD Garland DONT RELEASE TRUMP Crimes NFO-Garland HAS
CORRUPT Judge Aileen Cannon ORDERS Merrick Garland NOT TO RELEASE Jack Smith Report About TRUMPs Crimes, After TRUMP Asked Her To
Key Trump Cabinet Nominee Could Be Implicated in Final Jack Smith Report MSNRAW 11 JAN 2025 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=704 Former FBI general counsel urged the release of special counsel Jack Smiths final report on his investigation into Donald Trump stealing government documents and suggesed it could contain interesting details that could have a bearing on one of his Cabinet picks. Speaking with the hosts, Andrew Weissmann explained that he was interested in seeing what Smith found which could have a bearing on the nomination of Kash Patel to be the next FBI director. Basically on Monday, unless things change, the temporary stay that Judge [Aileen] Cannon issued is over, he began. She shouldn't have even issued that with respect to either part of the report, but certainly the January 6th part is not a case thats in front of her. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPyDZmiv50A Judge Aileen Cannon Orders Merrick Garland NOT TO RELEASE Jack Smith Report About Trumps Crimes Did Trump-appointed judge Aileen Cannon abuse her judicial discretion yet again in favor of Donald Trump? Judge Cannon no longer presides over the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case, as the case is now in the exclusive jurisdiction of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Apparently undeterred by her lack of jurisdiction over the documents case, The New York Times just reported that; 'Judge Cannon Blocks Release of Special Counsels Final Report on Trump' Will this act turn out to be the third time Judge Cannon abuses her judicial discretion to the benefit of Trump? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXd9GZgI_pg Prosecutors Tell Court AG Garland WILL RELEASE Vol. 1 of Smiths Report Re: Trumps Election Crimes Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon issued an order prohibiting Attorney General Merrick Garland from publicly releasing any of Special Counsel Jack Smiths final report documenting the federal crimes for which Donald Trump was indicted. Federal prosecutors responded by telling the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that AG Garland WILL publicly release Volume 1 of Smith's report - documenting Trumps crimes in connection with his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election - but will not publicly release Volume 2 - detailing Trumps classified documents/obstruction of justice/espionage crimes - because release Vol. 2 could prejudice the future trials of Trumps co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira. This video reviews the prosecutions new court filing with the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lYYMJhLglA . |
Jack Smith Resigns From DOJ Due to Pressure From Trump & CORRUPT Judge Cannon
Reports That Exhausted Special Counsel Jack Smith Has Resigned From DOJ Due to Continuing Threats From Trump And Before He Takes Office
Special counsel Jack Smith, who spearheaded multiple criminal cases against Donald Trump, has reportedly resigned from the Department of Justice. The special counsels departure was disclosed in a court filing submitted Saturday afternoon to US District Judge Aileen Cannon. MSNRAW 13 JAN 2025 https://www.politico.com/dims4/defau...1497253668.jpg Word of Smiths departure came in a footnote to a court filing Justice Department officials submitted to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon Saturday afternoon, urging her not to extend a court order she issued last week temporarily blocking the release of the final report Smith submitted to department leaders on Tuesday. DIRTY BUSINESS Lawless Judge Cannon Scorched For Saturday Attempt to Bail Trump Out https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=694 District of Florida Judge Aileen Cannon once again tried to throw Donald Trump a lifeline late Saturday with another demand for the Department of Justice in an effort to keep a damaging Jack Smith report from being released. MSNBC, Greenberg expressed exasperation with the Trump-appointed jurist and ripped into her with the prosecutor labeling her an attention seeker, and Michael Steele calling her in the tank for the man who handed her a lifetime appointment. So what is she doing? She's to be able to make sure to punt this until he, Trump can come in and try and bury it ?? hopefully the 11th circuit stops it. Justice Department officials say Cannons order overstepped her authority and that she has no power to block Attorney General Merrick Garland from releasing Smiths findings. Her ban on disclosure of Smiths report currently runs through Monday. Garland has said he plans to release publicly only the portion of Smiths report that covers his investigation into Trumps effort to subvert the 2020 election. The attorney general has said in court filings that he agreed with a recommendation from Smith to keep the other volume ? which addresses the probe into Trumps possession of a raft of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago after he left office in 2021 ? under wraps due to prosecutors ongoing efforts to revive a criminal case against two Trump allies and former co-defendants. Instead, Garland intends only to show that report to a handful of members of Congress. Smiths resignation before the end of President Joe Bidens term was widely expected and foreshadowed by other Justice Department officials. https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=857 Crooked Trump has repeatedly urged that Smith be prosecuted for his handling of the Trump cases and has even suggested that he be thrown out of the United States. . |
TRUMP Would Have Been CONVICTED of Illegal Interference Jack Smith Report Says
TRUMP Would Have Been CONVICTED of Election Interference, Jack Smith Report Says
Smith is Deranged And His Findings Are Fake, Trump Said After The Report Was Released BBC 14 JAN 2025 https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/ff0b7...5&dpr=1&s=none Donald Trump would have been convicted of illegally trying to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election - which he lost - if he had not successfully been re-elected in 2024, according to a Department of Justice report released to Congress. https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standar...0b215d3fef.jpg The admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial, the report by Special Counsel Jack Smith said. Trump was accused of pressurising officials to reverse the 2020 result, knowingly spreading lies about election fraud and seeking to exploit the riot at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021. He denied any wrongdoing. Trump, who was president at the time of the alleged crimes, subsequently spent four years out of office - but was successfully re-elected to the White House in November. He will return to the presidency next week. After his success in the 2024 vote, the various legal issues that he had been battling have largely evaporated. Although Jack Smith - the special counsel who investigated him in this and one other case - has resigned from his post ahead of Trump's return, the path was cleared by a judge for the first part of his report to be released. The 137-page document was sent to Congress after midnight on Tuesday. The judge, Aileen Cannon, ordered a hearing later in the week on whether to release the second part of the report - which focuses on separate allegations that Trump illegally kept classified government documents at his home in Florida. Posting on his Truth Social website, Trump maintained his innocence, taunting Smith by writing that the prosecutor was unable to get his case tried before the election, which I won in a landslide Trump added: THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN!!! Smith was appointed in 2022 to oversee the US government investigations into Trump. Special counsels are chosen by the Department of Justice (DoJ) in cases where there is a potential conflict of interest. In the interference case, Trump was accused of conspiring to overturn the result of the 2020 election, which he lost to Joe Biden. These are detailed by Smith in his report, which accuses Trump of unprecedented efforts to unlawfully retain power through a variety of methods, including threats and encouragement of violence against his perceived opponents Both this case and the separate classified documents case resulted in criminal charges against Trump, who pleaded not guilty and sought to cast the prosecutions as politically motivated. But Smith closed the cases after Trumps election in November, in accordance with DoJ regulations that forbid the prosecution of a sitting president. The report explains: It has long been the departments interpretation that the [US] Constitution forbids the federal indictment and prosecution of a sitting president, but the election results raised for the first time the question of the lawful course when a private citizen who has already been indicted is then elected president. But the document goes on to say: But for Mr Trumps election [in 2024] and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial. There has been a legal back-and-forth over the material related to the cases. Last week, on instruction from Trump, CORRUPT Judge Cannon put a temporary stop on releasing the whole Smith report, over concerns that it could affect the cases of two Trump associates charged with him in the classified documents case. Walt Nauta, Trumps personal aide, and Carlos De Oliveira, the property manager at Mar-a-Lago, are accused of helping Trump hide the documents. Unlike Trumps, their cases are still pending ? and their lawyers argued that the release of Smiths report could prejudice a future jury and trial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hp_1mW6XrU Donald Trump - Convicted Felon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr0JB1mGQ6A . |
re: CONVICT 47-TRUMP; Jack Smiths Words on FELON TRUMP & Supreme Courts UNETHICAL Ruling
UPDATE TO PREVIOUS POST:
Trumps Executive Orders are So Dangerous Even the GOP Compared Them To WAR CRIMES! Arizona AG Wants Jack Smiths ENTIRE FILE on Donald Trumps 2020 Election Subversion Crimes Glenn Kirschner FED Prosecutor 14 JAN 2025 https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/922...pjpg&auto=webp GOP Senators promise shock and awe when Trump unleashes his first executive orders next week. Trump is planning to issue 100 executive orders on his first day in office. Shock and Awe is reference to the opening bombardment of the Iraq war, that many describe as a war crime leaving Americans to wonder what Trump has in store? https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/8A...6fa0aa057af5ce In a second development, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mays formally requested that the Department of Justice provide Special Counsel Jack Smiths ENTIRE FILE on Trumps election crimes so that evidence can be used in the Arizona state prosecution of Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani and the other defendants indicted for trying to undermine the 2020 election results in Arizona. Notably, in the Arizona prosecution, Trump is designated unindicted co-conspirator 1. Given that the evidence against one co-conspirator is admissible against all co-conspirators, courtesy of the doctrine of co-conspirator liability https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/asse...0-full-169.jpg When the Arizona case goes to trial in January of 2026, Americans should get to see the evidence of Trumps 2020 election subversion crimes as they pertain to the Arizona charges https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYJcJAnbQTU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_oJWKTbJjI . |
CONVICT 47-TRUMP; Jack Smiths Words on FELON TRUMP & Supreme Courts UNETHICAL Ruling
Jack Smith Breaks Silence on TRUMP Smears: DOJs Final Evidence on CONVICT 47
CONVICT 47 -TRUMP; Prop. 47 is a Term Passed in 2014 For Repetitive Nonviolent Felons Like TRUMP Final Chapter of The Special Counsels Jan. 6 Case Against Trump is Now Public AP 15 JAN 2025 https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/...,w_1480,c_fill WASHINGTON ? Less than a week before Donald Trump is sworn into office, a report from special counsel Jack Smith is refocusing attention on the brazen steps he took to cling to power at the conclusion of his first term. Those allegations have been well documented through criminal indictments and investigative reports, but the report released early Tuesday offers by far the most detailed explanation of the actions Smith took, and did not take, as well as a steadfast defense against the Republican former presidents claims that the prosecution was politically motivated. Here Are Some Of The Highlights: Smith Disputes Trumps Claim of Complete Exoneration Trump may never face trial in court for his efforts to undo the 2020 election after he lost to Democrat Joe Biden. But, Smith emphatically noted, that does not mean Trump was exonerated. Weeks after Trumps 2024 presidential win, Smiths team moved to dismiss the case and a separate case charging Trump with mishandling classified documents because of a longstanding Justice Department prohibition against prosecuting a sitting president. Trump and his lawyers have asserted that that decision proves the cases should never have been brought and that he did nothing wrong. His lawyers said in a letter urging Attorney General Merrick Garland to block the release of the report that Trump had achieved a complete exoneration. But Smith, in his own letter, called that assertion false and took pains to note that the dismissal decision was simply a reflection of his teams adherence to Justice Department policy rather than declaration of Trumps innocence. In fact, Smith said, he believes Trump would have been convicted at trial had his 2024 election victory not foreclosed a criminal prosecution. As the Office explained in its dismissal motions and in the Report, the Departments view that the Constitution prohibits Mr. Trumps indictment and prosecution while he is in office is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Governments proof, or the merits of the prosecution ? all of which the Office stands fully behind, Smith wrote. In that way, his message echoes that of Robert Mueller, who as a Justice Department special counsel during Trumps first term investigated whether the then-president had obstructed an investigation into Russian election interference. Mueller cited the same Justice Department policy as Smith and, like Smith, made clear that his findings had NOT EXONERATED Trump. Smith says his team stood up for the rule of law For more than two years, Smith stood silent in the face of blistering personal attacks from Trump and allies, who alleged that he was compromised, that he was in cahoots with the Biden White House, that the investigations he was shepherding amounted to political persecution. In His Final Public Message, Smith Responded https://media.tag24.de/1200x800/3/r/...kxl3ehz9i2.jpg His report, and in particular a letter he addressed to Garland that accompanied the document, amounts to a full-throated defense of his team and its investigative decisions. The idea that his actions were influenced by anyone in the Biden administration -Laughable, Smith wrote. The suggestion that political appointees at the Justice Department meddled with his work - Simply not so, he wrote. As for the prosecutors who comprised his team: The intense public scrutiny of our Office, threats to their safety, and relentless unfounded attacks on their character and integrity did not deter them from fulfilling their oaths and professional obligations. These are intensely good people who did hard things well. I will not forget the sacrifices they made and the personal resilience they and their families have shown over the last two years. The report was released just days before Trump is to take office again, with plans to pardon supporters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in a bid to halt the certification of the election results. Trump has sought to rewrite the violent history of that day in remarks as recently as this month, when he said incorrectly that none of the rioters at the Capitol had guns. While we were not able to bring the cases we charged to trial, I believe the fact that our team stood up for the rule of law matters, Smith wrote. I believe the example our team set for others to fight for justice without regard for the personal costs matters. The facts, as we uncovered them in our investigation and as set forth in my Report, matter. Unanswered Questions Remain Around Presidential Immunity The abandoned prosecution leaves unresolved questions around the scope of presidential immunity from criminal charges following the Supreme Courts landmark ruling last year. Without that further legal wrangling, questions remain about how the Supreme Courts interpretation would be applied, Smith wrote. Smith made clear his team takes issue with the Supreme Courts ruling, which he said put a greater emphasis on protecting the independence and fearlessness of the President as opposed to the risk that immunity would encourage lawless behaviour of dishonest Presidents like Trump https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/FT...d6735308333ac8 DIRTY Trump Will Go Down In History as The FELON PRESIDENT Who Never Did Any Jail Time https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h78u_JFiqOk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4RE8_cZljM |
The Great REVENGE-Orwellian America: 100% ILLEGAL-TRUMP Fires DOZENS in Many Agencies
The Great Revenge as TRUMPs Orwellian America Takes Shape...
100% ILLEGAL: Trump Fires ALL Justice Department Lawyers Who Investigated Him. The Lawyers Were Part of Former Special Counsel Jack Smiths Team This comes after Trump ordered the dismissal of more than a DOZEN Inspectors General, another move that legal experts have broadly warned is illegal. PLUS Fired Labour Official Vows to Fight Trump in Court Which Wont Cost Trump One Cent. The American Taxpayers Will Foot The Bill For ALL of His Legal Costs BBC 29 JAN 2025 https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standar...a91255dc3d.jpg A dozen were fired after Acting Attorney General James McHenry concluded they could not be trusted to faithfully implement the presidents agenda because of their significant role in prosecuting the president The lawyers were part of former special counsel Jack Smiths team which investigated Trumps alleged mishandling of classified documents and his alleged attempt to overturn his 2020 election defeat. The firings on Monday are effective immediately. Trumps last attempt to purge government officials is blatantly illegal, according to experts ? and all but certain to trigger lawsuits. Trump fired more than a dozen justice department lawyers who worked on two criminal cases against him. Federal prosecutor Jennifer Rodgers on Tuesday shredded Trumps moves to purge the United States Department of Justice of lawyers who once worked for former special counsel Jack Smith. Rodgers said that Trumps efforts to fire or sideline multiple career DOJ officials sends a terrible message to the rest of the department. The president is not supposed to direct the activities of the Department of Justice, Rodgers said. The notion that he has policies and priorities that he wants the Justice Department to act on is not something that historically has been a thing at the Justice Department, right? Criminal cases are supposed to be brought based on evidence. They're supposed to be based on the law. They are not supposed to be based on the whims and the retribution desires of the president. This week, the president moved to clean house at the National Labour Relations Board, the agency responsible for investigating and adjudicating claims of violations of labour union law in the workplace. In addition to firing general counsel Jennifer Abruzzo, a progressive labour watchdog who has protected workers from noncompete agreements and anti-union captive meetings Trump has also dismissed NLRB board member Gwynne Wilcox, one of two Democratic members at the agency. '''I will be pursuing all legal avenues to challenge my removal, which violates long-standing Supreme Court precedent''' The problem is that NLRB members cannot be dismissed at will. Federal law protects them through the duration of their term, except in cases of malfeasance, which the Trump administration has not provided any evidence of. However, this comes as some of Trumps business allies, particularly tech billionaire Elon Musk, have expressed interest in challenging the constitutionality of the protections for the NLRB. This is 100% illegal, wrote legal reporter Mark Joseph Stern . Its a new escalation in Trumps battle for absolute control over the administrative state. Federal law explicitly protects Wilcox against termination. That law is constitutional under binding Supreme Court precedent. The Purge Of The DEMON Continues... https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=798 An UGLY streak in American politics |
TRUMP Appeals to SUPREME COURT on Firing Agency Boss & Another Court Denies Him
TRUMP Appeals to SUPREME COURT on Firing US Agency Boss
PLUS Divided Appeals Court Denies TRUMPs Attempt to Fire Watchdog BBC 17 FEB 2025 https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/N_...d602cf1de77487 Hampton Dellinger was fired in a one-sentence email this month https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standar...cce09551b6.jpg Donald Trump has asked the US Supreme Court to allow him to fire the head of an independent ethics agency that protects whistleblower federal employees. He has filed an emergency appeal to the countrys highest court to rule on whether he can fire Hampton Dellinger, head of the US Office of Special Counsel. It is thought to be the first case related to Trumps blizzard of executive actions to reach the highest court. Trump has also cut more than a dozen inspectors general at various federal agencies and fired thousands of employees across the US government. Mr Dellinger, who was nominated by President Joe Biden, sued the Trump administration after he was fired by email this month. He argued that his removal broke a law that says he can only be dismissed for poor job performance and that was not given as a reason in the email dismissing him. The agency lists among its primary objectives the protection of federal employees from unlawful actions in reprisal to whistleblowing, according to its mission statement. A federal judge in Washington DC issued a temporary order on Wednesday allowing Mr Dellinger to hold on to his position while the case is being considered. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson said the firing broke US law which tried to ensure the independence of the agency and protect it from political interference. On Saturday, a divided US Court of Appeals in the nations capital rejected the Trump administrations request to overrule the lower court. That has led to the justice department filing an emergency appeal to the conservative-dominated Supreme Court, a filing seen by various US media. This court should not allow lower courts to seize executive power by dictating to the president how long he must continue employing an agency head against his will, Sarah M Harris, acting solicitor general, wrote in the filing provided by the Department of Justice to the Washington Post. Appeals Court Denies TRUMPs Attempt to Fire Watchdog https://cdnph.upi.com/svc/sv/i/24617...e-watchdog.jpg Feb. 16 (UPI) -- A divided federal appeals court has denied President Donald Trump's request to fire a federal official from a post overseeing workplace protections for federal employees. The White House plans to appeal the 2-1 decision by the District of Columbia Court of Appeals issued late Saturday that affirmed a district court judges decision blocking the firing of Office of Special Counsel chief Hampton Dellinger, an appointee of President Joe Biden. I can and am continuing with my work as Special Counsel, and I am grateful for the opportunity to do so, Dellinger said in a statement to Politico after the appeals court ruling. The Justice Department described the district courts ruling as an unprecedented assault on the separation of powers, according to a copy of the appeal Until now, as far as we are aware, no court in American history has wielded an injunction to force the president to retain an agency head whom the president believes should not be entrusted with executive power and to prevent the president from relying on his preferred replacement. MORE; Legal showdown looms as Trump tests limits of presidential power Trump Insults ALL Federal Workers With Resign-or-Else Threatening '''Fork In The Road''' Email Glenn Kirschner FED Prosecutor 17 FEB 2025 https://www.tampafp.com/wp-content/u...Kirschner.jpeg Glenn Kirschner In this Justice Matters interview, Representative Jim Himes pulls no punches discussing the transgressions of the Trump administration; 1. Trumps demeaning fork in the road email to all federal employees, asserting that the dedicated federal public servants are low productivity employees. 2. The Trump administrations dangerous attempted decimation of the FBI. 3. The obvious unsuitability of Kash Patel to be Director of the FBI. 4. What We The People can do to remain engaged in the battle for a healthy American democracy. And more.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdolofHRZzE https://i.ytimg.com/vi/xe-zGtdoXBo/h...1fDDoKY8izdfLg . |
GOODBYE FREE America-Supreme Court Hands Trump HUGE Power Over Judges
GOODBYE FREE America - SHOCK Supreme Court Ruling Hands Trump Vast New Power
A HUGE Decision - Supreme Court Limits Ability of Judges to Stop Trump - Deathblow to Rule of LAW Supreme Court sets off alarm bells that its in the bag for Trump MSRAW 27 JUN 2025 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=800 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=666 Donald Trump said he will act very quickly to advance policies blocked by federal judges, including birthright citizenship restrictions, after the Supreme Court ruled in his favour against lower courts. Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson accused the court of hastening their demise by handing Donald Trump a huge victory Why It Matters The Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision on Friday ruled that individual federal judges do not have the authority to issue nationwide injunctions, delivering a key victory to Trump The Court said lower courts should not issue nationwide injunctions which go beyond relief for individual plaintiffs on cases. Trump has frequently criticized lower court judges for blocking his policies on a broad scale. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzZL7BCUnmw Supreme Court Limits Power of Lower Courts to Stop Trumps Executive Orders https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj_ZDMNC2Yc https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...C172%2C0%2C172 |
Trump Has Supreme Court on Speed Dial & is Charging Asylum Seekers $100
Is This The WORST Trump Supreme Court Decision -Trump Has Supreme Court Justices on Speed Dial
The Supreme Court lifted an injunction that had protected immigrants from removal to dangerous countries where they could face torture and death Newsweek 6 JUL 2025 https://people.com/thmb/8dK-KBZEqdaF...c597517042.jpg In a dissent of a Supreme Court ruling, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor said This order clarifies only one thing. Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th/id/OIP.q...=Api&P=0&h=180 Justice Sotomayor made this statement in her dissent from the ruling allowing for migrants to be deported to countries they are not from. https://mr.cdn.ignitecdn.com/client_...jpg?1751393625 In her dissent, which she wrote with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, she said that this would result in the government deporting noncitizens to potentially dangerous countries without notice or the opportunity to assert a fear of torture Sotomayor and Jackson levied other criticisms at the Trump administration and the conservative-leaning court in their dissent, saying, The order not only excuses once again the Governments undisguised contempt for the Judiciary it also leaves the District Court without any guidance about how this litigation should proceed. https://dailycurator.com.ng/wp-conte...701-155415.jpg DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Tricia McLaughlin, spoke to Newsweek about the deportation of eight men to South Sudan, saying, These sickos will be in South Sudan by Independence Day This Supreme Court contains three justices put on the bench by Donald Trump. Although not all have always ruled in his favor, several major decisions over the past month have supported the Trump agenda, including allowing for transgender service members to be temporarily barred from the military and blocking judges from issuing nationwide injunctions on birthright citizenship. In her dissent, Sotomayor accuses the justices of failing to serve in their roles as members of an independent branch of government. On July 3, the Supreme Court removed a district judges injunction blocking the government from deporting people to countries they are not from. TRUMP is Charging $100 Per Person Applying For Asylum in The U.S A total of 892,904 asylum applications were recorded in the U.S. in 2024. Trump To Make Millions Off Charging Asylum Seekers: What to Know Carnival of Corruption -Report Shows Trump Milks Presidency For MONEY For Badly Needed Bailout https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLZK_9jnCak Torture and Mistreatment Abrego Garcias Brutal Prison Experience https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI0bSrNjrkk Federal Judges Continue To Push Back, Rule Against & Reject Trumps Lawless Schemes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E99fWZdvKkE . |
Supreme Court SLUG Clarence Thomas Could UNDO Voting Rights Protections
Mysterious Order Could Give SLUG Clarence Thomas an Excuse to UNDO Voting Rights
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has long telegraphed his desire to gut crucial portions of the Voting Rights Act, and he might finally get a chance to undermine protections ensuring equal rights for Black and Hispanic voters MSRAW 12 JUL 2025 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=800 Thomas first laid out his objections to those protections in 1994, when only the late Antonin Scalia signaled a willingness to go along with him https://i.imgur.com/hafXTQz.jpg Trump has since packed the court with fellow right wing ideologues, and a new case could give him a pretext to achieve his longtime goal Now, a mysterious order from the high court in a Louisiana redistricting case suggests it is seriously reconsidering the scope of VRA safeguards against congressional and state legislative district maps that dilute minority votes. The looming battle comes as some states, notably Alabama, are resisting court orders to remedy discrimination, and Trumps Justice Department is abandoning the federal governments usual role in protecting minority voting rights. The court will reconsider a case in October involving a U.S. district court ruling on Louisianas congressional map that created two Black majority districts but protected the states favoured incumbents, including House speaker Mike Johnson, and Thomas wrote a six page dissenting statement after justices heard arguments on 27 June but were unable to reach an agreement. I am hopeful that this Court will soon realize that the conflict its Section 2 jurisprudence has sown with the Constitution is too severe to ignore, Thomas wrote. No other justices signed on to his dissent, but justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett have all signaled support for his views once deemed radical by his colleagues on a race neutral approach to voting rights, and chief justice John Roberts and justice Brett Kavanaugh have also appeared willing to strike down those protections. During March oral arguments in the Louisiana case, Roberts was skeptical of the states new map with two Black majority districts, which were created after a lower court found the original map with a single Black majority district likely violated Section 2. Roberts questioned whether one of the new districts was sufficiently compact to meet standards; he called it a snake that runs from one end of the state to the other Gorsuch agreed and even went further, saying that any consideration of race in redrawing a discriminatory map would violate the 14th Amendments guarantee of equal protection, and Kavanaugh questioned the authority of states to do so. https://www.usatoday.com/gcdn/author...pjpg&auto=webp |
Clarence Thomas Clerk WARNS Supreme Court Expansion of Trump Power Over FED Agencies
Bombshell! Ex Clerk to Clarence Thomas Sends Shockwaves With Supreme Court WARNING
Former clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas has issued detailed warning about the Supreme Courts accelerating push to expand presidential power over federal agencies, coinciding with active cases that could overturn decades of precedent. MSRAW 14 OCT 2025 https://www.rawstory.com/media-libra...200&height=699 The U.S. Supreme Court seems almost certain to side with Donald Trump in an upcoming challenge to his authority to fire government officials for any reason, but a leading conservative legal scholar sent a warning that could give the justices pause. University of Virginia law professor Caleb Nelson, a leading originalist scholar whose work has been cited by all of the courts conservative members in more than a dozen opinions, published an article Sept. 29 for the Democracy Project that has sent shockwaves through the legal community, reported the New York Times. Bombshell posted University of Chicago law professor William Baude on social media. Caleb Nelson, one of the most respected originalist scholars in the country, comes out against the unitary executive interpretation of the Constitution. Nelson, a former clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas, argued that the text of the Constitution and historical evidence shows Congress has broad authority to shape the executive branch and place limits on the presidents ability to fire officials. If most of what the federal government currently does on a daily basis is executive, and if the President must have full control over each and every exercise of executive power by the federal government including an unlimitable ability to remove all or almost all executive officers for reasons good or bad, then the President has an enormous amount of power more power, I think, than any sensible person should want anyone to have, and more power than any member of the founding generation could have anticipated, Nelson wrote. I am an originalist, and if the original meaning of the Constitution compelled this outcome, Nelson added, I would be inclined to agree that the Supreme Court should respect it until the Constitution is amended through the proper processes. The textual and historical evidence for limiting the presidents power to fire executive officials is much stronger than the justices have suggested, he argued. In the face of such ambiguities, I hope that the justices will not act as if their hands are tied, Nelson wrote. If a highly respected originalist scholar like Professor Nelson, on whom the court relies frequently, denies that originalism supports the unitary executive theory, Professor Pildes said, that inevitably raises serious questions about an originalist justification for the courts looming approach. However, Chief Justice John Roberts has spent his entire career on the bench advancing the unitary executive theory and chipping away at the 1935 precedent of Humphreys Executor v. United States, which found that Congress could place limits on the presidents power to fire people. Since 1789, the Constitution has been understood to empower the president to keep these officers accountable by removing them from office, if necessary, Roberts wrote in 2010. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 20:05. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2