Watchman Sees Civil War: The Hague Hack Anti-Christ Jack Smith Was Unsuccessful.Supreme Court Rules Against Special Counsel, Will Not Expedite Trump Immunity Clash,The Ungodly Lost Once Again

HNewsWire:

By SRH

The US Supreme Court refused special counsel Jack Smith's request for an expedited assessment of a defense in one of two cases he is pursuing against former President Donald Trump on Friday.

"Petition for writ of certiorari before judgment denied," the unsigned opinion states.

Although the Supreme Court ruled in 1982 that presidents enjoy absolute immunity from civil suit, the bounds of protection from criminal prosecution have not been defined, as both parties have asserted.

President Trump's move to have this case dismissed in the appeals court on the grounds of presidential immunity would have been decided if the Supreme Court had consented to consider the defense. He has also attempted, but failed, to bring this argument in a number of other matters, including civil ones.

"President Trump is arguing that all the actions he's been charged for were ones done in his official capacity as President of the United States." That is incorrect, but it does illustrate one of the most heinous aspects of this bogus case, which had nothing to do with justice. We, the people, need to get this right. Trumpy is genuinely claiming that he done nothing wrong, which sounds like a fairly compelling case to me.

He's also arguing that even if he did do something wrong—and, again, he says, and most right-thinking people know he didn't—they can't prosecute a president, any president, in the first place, which, of course, is a tune they'd all be singing if it were their guy. In the absence of his righteous, meaningful argument, the media is obviously doing the reporting, and of course Trump, a terrible disservice, which is exactly what these terrorists want.

The decision to schedule Trump's DC trial for the spring of 2024 - just one day before the Super Tuesday primaries - was certainly the consequence of a mutual interest between the Special Counsel and the presiding judge, Tanya Chutkan: to convict Donald Trump before the 2024 election. Furthermore, given the case's 11+ million pages of documents, hundreds (if not thousands) of hours of video and audio, and hundreds of witnesses, the accelerated trial date violated Trump's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, which includes the opportunity to prepare for trial.

The Special Counsel's DC case against Trump includes innovative legal ideas that have never been tested in American courts, most notably whether Presidential challenges to election results can be criminalized under US law. Trump's attorneys have filed lengthy and well-thought-out arguments, arguing that the Constitution and the idea of presidential immunity compel the criminal case to be dismissed. In order to expedite the trial, Judge Chutkan refused each of them.