14 Comments
User's avatar
Lance Khrome's avatar

OMG, SC Smith is going the Full Monty here, petitioning for cert before judgment, not willing to await the DC Circuit's hearing on tRump's "absolute immunity" appeal. My sense before this action broke was that the CA would uphold Judge Chutkan's ruling with a closely- and thoroughly-argued opinion, and that SCOTUS would deny cert. based upon the appellate court's decision, and in view of the previous SCOTUS decision on tRump's immunity claims in a criminal investigation.

What a turnabout, as it does appear that the higher courts do indeed want to expedite all appeals ASAP in order to land as close as possible onto the 4 Mar 2024 trial date. The Nixon ruling surely is controlling here, regardless of today's SCOTUS makeup, and the massive corpus of evidence already filed in DC points *a fortiori* to the breadth and depth of tRump's alleged criminality vis-à-vis the Watergate crimes.

No way will tRump merit an "absolute immunity" dismissal.

Expand full comment
loganbacon's avatar

This was also what I expected, but not 100% certain that the Extreme Court would deny cert.

Expand full comment
Joanne A martinez's avatar

Aloha🌺Thank you for this important update. We rely on you guys to bring us truth. Msm is not reliable and avoid much of the relevant news and is only interested in both side ism. They don’t report all of which Biden has valiantly and skillfully accomplished. Owned by billionaires to determine what info they give to the masses. We can count on you. Mahalo so much 🤙🏽

Expand full comment
Max Eichelberger's avatar

"Finally, Defendant contends that the indictment violates the Due Process Clause becaused he lacked fair notice that his conduct was unlawful."

Sorry, Officer, I didn't know I couldn't do that. (Dave Chappell voice)

Expand full comment
Phyllis Carlin, Miami's avatar

Go! Go! Jack & Michael! And THANKS!

Expand full comment
Teddy Partridge's avatar

"Double jeopardy?!"

It is to laugh.

Expand full comment
Phyllis Carlin, Miami's avatar

Double Jeopardy? All of the issues are not even the same when comparing the Impeachments and J6, 2021. There are even new players, new statutes, new causes of action from Jack Smith and he's broadened the investigations going backward and I also think forward from J6.

Clearly neither Trump nor his MAGA-paid lawyers have the gravitas to be with the big boys at the Supreme Court -- their Double Jeopardy claims are a joke, for one thing, and neither do they have the consciences required to be on their way to "Big Boyhood." To claim that Clown Trump's positions here should triumph over those brave law enforcement officers that lost their lives J6 or were maimed, is truly cruel and absurd.

Further: It's unconscionable to claim that there's "absolute immunity" for all times for any President and Ex- Prez: "the Founders of America" came here to escape a "crazy" King named George that only wanted what HE wanted and all others be damned.

Expand full comment
Teddy Partridge's avatar

Wow!

This is an amazing response from a Court I hardly thought would even take up the case. Quoting US v Nixon probably got their attention, big time: hey, we're playing at the big kids' table now.

Well done, Jack Smith

Expand full comment
Victoria Brown's avatar

Bet Trump's attorneys swallowed their ties tonight and there was lots of ketchup

hitting the wall wherever Donnie is tonight. Expect an

all caps rant later on Lies(sic) Social.

Expand full comment
Lance Khrome's avatar

Lost in all this fast-breaking news is the announcement that SC Smith's team have access to tRump's mobile-phone data, which is of immense importance concerning the who/what/when aspects of Jan6 itself, and tRump's actions before and after. A real evidentiary coup there, and I'm surprised that tRump hadn't already destroyed any and all communications devices before the FBI came calling. Maybe he did, but records were still accessible, not an IT guy, so can't answer that one.

"Stand back and stand by", as Jack Smith is opening up his Christmas sack, and goodies - and a hunk of coal - are there for us all.

Expand full comment
Brendan MacWade's avatar

Let's be clear though, the court hasn't officially taken the case, right? It's a slam dunk if they do. I wonder if Thomas would be the only one willing to go on record that Trump is a monarch.

Expand full comment
Chris Geidner's avatar

Yes, that is exactly what it says, multiple times. “ If the court grants cert before judgment and agrees to hear the merits of the case now …” etc.

Expand full comment
Brendan MacWade's avatar

A lot of journalists are reporting that the Supremes have taken the case, and I can hear Marcy Wheeler screaming from across the Atlantic Ocean.

Expand full comment
loganbacon's avatar

If I were either party, I’d be writing my brief now. After all, this is almost a pure question of law. The only fact question is whether TFG was in fact acting within his presidential powers at all, and that one requires real mental gymnastics to find in his favor. They have to remember they set precedent for non Republicans, too.

Expand full comment