1 The political persectution of Trump, a story that would make Stalin green with envy.  There has been so much coming out this week that it’s hard to know where to start, so I guess I’ll just dive in: Election Interference Case.  This case was brought by Special Council Jack Smith in the federal District Court for the District of Columbia (DC) and involves four charges relating to election interference.  I think the charges brought are at best a real stretch and were brought in nothing more than an effort to get a quick conviction ahead of the November elections.  I believe a conviction on these charges would be overturned on appeal, but by the time it could be appealed, the damage to Trump’s reelection bid would have been done.  However, things have not been going as Smith planned.  And now there’s a new twist – Special Counsel Jack Smith may not be Special anything. BREAKING: The DOJ is asking a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans (1/3). https://t.co/u6H3VmpSrQ — Judicial Watch ⚖️ (@JudicialWatch) February 14, 2024 Currently there is a question before the Supreme Court involving the timing of Trump’s DC trial and whether he has Presidential immunity.  The case against Trump was brought by Special Prosecutor Jack Smith, who was appointed by the current U.S. Attorney General Merick Garland.  None of this is shocking, what is shocking and potentially earth shattering is an amicus brief filed by former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese and law professors Steven Calabresi and Gary Lawson. An amicus brief is a brief filed by a non-party offering information and legal argument to the Supreme Court on issues they are interested in, but which may not have been covered by the parties to the litigation.  This is not unusual; in fact, it is common.  What is unusual is that Meese and company are arguing that Special Counsel Jack Smith was unlawfully appointed and therefore, he has no standing (authority) to bring this case against Trump. If Meese is correct, then not only must Smith be removed from the case, but the case must be dismissed because he had no authority to bring it in the first place. I’ve read the amicus brief and though I’ve not had time to research it in depth, I do believe Meese has an argument. However, I won’t have an opinion on how strong his argument is until I do more research. We plan on discussing this, among other things, on Jester Politics’ Tuesday 8 pm (MT) spaces. This case has been placed on indefinite hold pending the ruling of the Supreme Court decision. Yesterday Biden’s DOJ announced they were letting their top party official off for decades of willful disclosure of classified info … while trying to imprison Trump, their party’s biggest threat to power, over post-first administration document disputes. Soviet. — Mollie (@MZHemingway) February 9, 2024 The Classified Documents Case. This is the only case against Trump that has not been brought in NYC or DC, and the only one I believe has any merit whatsoever.  However, it was also brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith and has more than a few problems, including: Jack Smith brought this case as Special Counsel. If the Supreme Court finds he was unlawfully appointed to that position, then he will be removed as Special Prosecutor.  Of more import this case, as well as the election interference case pending in DC will have to be dismissed because Smith would not have had the authority to bring either; Trump is arguing he had declassification authority and declassified the documents he retained; Selective prosecution. Clinton, Biden, and Pence all had classified information in their possession, and none were prosecuted.  From what I have read, the documents Clinton and Biden had in their possession were as sensitive, if not more so, than the ones’ Trump had in his possession and were maintained in a much less secure manner then the Trump documents were.  Clinton had documents electronically stored on an unsecure private server in her home and Biden had highly classified paper documents scattered over several locations, including stacked in a box in his garage. The judge in this case has scheduled the trial for May 2024, but has indicated she may move the trial date back. Currently, there are a significant number of pre-trial motions she is wading through. Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis attended a five-hour White House meeting with Vice President Kamala Harris in the months before seeking the indictment on RICO charges for Donald Trump in Georgia.https://t.co/8HYB6VCOXE — Americat 🇺🇸 (@catmurphy209) January 12, 2024 The Georgia’s State RICO case against Trump. To be honest, this is a dumpster fire of incompetence.  RICO cases, whether federal or state, are complex cases requiring sharp attorneys with experience in complex litigation in general and RICO law in particular.  In this case the lead attorney not only lacks those requirements but is also incompetent. Nathan Wade was hired by District Attorney Fani Willis to be lead prosecutor and has been paid $654,000 since January 2022.  This most likely makes him the highest paid prosecutor in Georgia.  Additionally, his law partner has been paid another $126,000 for his work with Fulton County prosecutors. Prior to being hired to prosecute this complex RICO case against a former President, Wade’s legal experience was limited to defending misdemeanors, sitting as a municipal judge – who hears misdemeanor cases, and for a period of time prosecuting misdemeanors.  The rest of his legal career seems to be limited to being a plaintiff’s attorney representing people involved in car accidents.  Nothing in his resume qualifies him to be lead on this case, and certainly not to be paid $654,000 in two years. That’s enough to raise eyebrows, but there’s more. There is credible testimony that Fulton County DA Fani Willis and Wade have been … Continue reading Jester Politics News Roundup For February 16, 2024