Detailed Filing On Jan. 6 Trump Immunity Coming

 

Special Counsel Jack Smith is ready to move to the next step in the criminal case against the Malignant Loser for his role in trying to overturn the 2020 election. First, he'll be dealing with the Trumpist-dominated Supreme Court's ruling on Presidential immunity for official acts in a detailed brief:

"Department of Justice (DOJ) special counsel Jack Smith stated in court documents filed on Saturday that the government's upcoming filing in the federal election subversion case against former President Donald Trump will not exceed 180 pages.

The opening brief on presidential immunity, required to be filed to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan by September 26, is expected to be half composed of a 'detailed factual proffer,' and include around 30 pages of 'extensive footnote citations to an exhibit appendix.'

Given the 'substantial amount of sensitive material' to be filed, the government proposed a redacted version to later be filed on the public docket."

Legal observers noted the "detailed factual proffer" language and the anticipated "substantial amount of sensitive material" against the Malignant Loser, as well as his desperate attempt to block it:

 

NEW: Steel yourself. In a new filing, the Special Counsel tells Judge Tanya Chutkan its opening immunity brief will be roughly 180 pages with roughly half devoted to a “detailed factual proffer” and plenty of sensitive material warranting redactions. 1/https://t.co/QwBqMHttyB

— Lisa Rubin (@lawofruby) September 21, 2024

 

Trump's court filing demanding that Judge Chutkan dismiss his case "promptly" says: "Dismissal is required to protect the integrity of the Presidency & the upcoming election, as well as the Constitutional rights of ... the American people." This would make George Orwell blush. pic.twitter.com/CfVpHFQVjz

— Glenn Kirschner (@glennkirschner2) September 22, 2024

Although as Smith notes, a redacted version will be filed on the public docket, we can only imagine what evidence the unredacted version will contain. The Malignant Loser's lawyers know it's devastating.

BONUS: More analysis from Marcy Wheeler / Emptywheel. 

(photo: The Insurrectionist-in-Chief points his cult toward the Capitol)

 

The Road Map For Trump's January 6 Insurrection Trial And Conviction

As he awaits sentencing for 34 felony fraud counts in New York State, the prospects of the Malignant Loser going to trial for his part in the January 6 coup and insurrection haven't been seriously diminished by the Republican Supreme Court's immunity decision in Trump v. United States, according to one expert.

This is a lengthy excerpt from an op/ed by Richard Lazarus, Charles Stebbins Fairchild Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, in today's Washington Post:

... The chief justice’s opinion leaves little doubt that [Judge Tanya] Chutkan can now validly conclude that Trump is not entitled to any immunity from felony prosecution (even though he was president at the time) for the calls and meetings he held with state and local election officials to persuade them to block the election results. The court ruled that any immunity Trump enjoys, whether absolute or presumptive in nature, is limited to “official acts.” There is no immunity for actions that are “unofficial” in nature. The court accordingly invited Chutkan to analyze Trump’s “interactions with a wide variety of state officials and private persons” to determine whether those interactions were official or unofficial in nature. But Roberts’s opinion did not hesitate to make clear that Chutkan could legitimately conclude that all these contacts were unofficial in nature. The court carefully pointed out that “this alleged conduct cannot be neatly categorized as falling within a particular Presidential function.”

The court similarly left little doubt that Chutkan was free to conclude that the speeches Trump made to the general public, including the rally on Jan. 6, which prosecutors alleged were designed to incite the mob that attacked the Capitol, were unofficial in nature and therefore not entitled to any immunity. The chief justice expressly acknowledged that there are “contexts in which the President … speaks in an unofficial capacity.” And to drive the point home, he offers an example: “as a candidate for office.” The reference is hardly subtle. The court is peremptorily endorsing a finding that, based on Chutkan’s “objective analysis” of “content, form, and context,” Trump’s speeches were those of a “candidate for office” and not entitled to immunity from prosecution.  [snip]

Finally, it is quite clear that the special counsel can secure a conviction without relying on any of the evidence that the Supreme Court ruled must be out of bounds on immunity grounds even for a prosecution of unofficial acts that are not subject to immunity. That includes evidence of Trump’s “discussions with Justice Department officials” about securing an official opinion suggesting fraud in the 2020 election. While such evidence would certainly have weighed in favor of a jury’s finding the former president guilty, the special counsel has more than enough incriminating evidence without it, beginning with the stunning recordings of Trump’s conversations with officials in states such as Georgia...

While it will not go to trial before the election, the evidence of the Malignant Loser's guilt can be laid out in time for the public to be reminded of his disqualifying, authoritarian conduct once again.  We may yet see him get his comeuppance like so many of his frothing followers have, especially if Vice President Harris prevails.  He may want to book that flight to Venezuela (or more likely Moscow) soon.

(Illustration:  Salon/Getty Images)

Trump Seeks More Delays In January 6 Trial

During his entire adult lifetime, the Malignant Loser has faced lawsuits, and his tactic has been virtually unchanged: obstruct, delay, and wait for his opponent to settle. He's applying those tactics to his current multiple legal fights, whether in state courts or Federal court. Yesterday, his lawyers filed a notice of appeal to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkin's ruling that he's not immune from criminal prosecution for the January 6 attempt to overthrow the 2020 election. The Malignant Loser's appeal also asks that the D.C. Court of Appeals freeze deadlines in the trial while the appeal is considered. 

Were the appellate court to go along with the Malignant Loser's obvious attempt to delay the January 6 trial for weeks, if not months, the trial would slip closer to the election, providing the Malignant Loser another bogus argument for more delay past the election. However, the Malignant Loser's immunity argument has already been rejected by the same appellate court in civil suits brought against him for the January 6 insurrection. From the Associated Press article:

"Now that the immunity argument has already been rejected by Chutkan, Trump’s best hope at delaying the trial appears to be convincing the D.C. appeals court or ultimately the Supreme Court to pause the case while the higher courts consider his prosecutorial immunity claim.

However, the rejection last week by a three-judge panel of the appeals court of Trump’s sweeping claims of immunity in civil cases accusing him of inciting the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021, suggest he likely faces an uphill battle. While it’s possible the Supreme Court may feel compelled to step in to address an unprecedented legal question, there’s also no guarantee the justices will take the case up at this stage."  (our emphasis)

At this point, it's not the flawed legal argument so much as it is the time consumed in litigating appeals and motions by his team of legal hacks. Everyone knows that Malignant Loser believes that if he can push the cases against him into 2025, assuming the electorate is foolish and perverse enough to put him back in the White House, he'll be home free after stopping the Federal trials in their tracks.