This is for everyone who is distressed about the dismissals of Jack Smith's cases against Trump

[melm00se]

First things, first:

The thing to remember about Jack Smith: He is an excellent attorney. He exhibits two skills that it took me a long time to figure out their importance.

Strategy - every move that Smith made was meticulously planned and targeted. Redoing the indictments? Specifically designed to avoid the appearance of relying on evidence that could be excluded by the Trump immunity Supreme Court ruling. Move, countermove, counter-countermove and so on.
Attention to detail - good attorneys have a level of attention to detail that, to many people, border on the pathological. This attention to detail for Trumpers is almost non-existent as they all subscribe to the moral disaster of “the ends justify the means”. If they get what they want, they don’t care about the details.

With these 2 points in mind, let’s revisit the dismissal motions.

If Smith had held on and let the game play out, he gets canned and a Trumpian muppet steps in and makes the dismissal motion, the cases would be dismissed. Of that there is no doubt.

Initially, I thought it would be a good idea to allow this scenario to happen because then and forever more, the Trumpians would own the biggest travesty in presidential judicial history. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that this would have absolutely no impact on the Trumpians. Trumpians are 100000% sure that Trump has never done anything wrong. The crimes were all made up. The evidence manufactured. The courts so corrupted that they have lost all credibility etc. So for them, the dismissal, no matter how outrageous to non-Trumpians, was all that matters. it vindicates their fearless leader.

Trumpians hearing the news that the cases against Trump have been dismissed



I continued to think about it and I then realized that if Smith had let the Trumpians handle the dismissal, the dismissals would have happened but they might’ve been dismissed with prejudice. This would have closed the door, locked it and threw away the key on the government from revisiting the case.

Now, I want you to remember numbers 1 and 2 above: strategy and details.

So, Smith made his dismissal motions but he did so with 2 things in mind. First, as he filed the dismissal motions, he controlled the what it said and what was asked. Second, he relied on the Trumpians’ laser like focus on the end result but not the means or the details.

So, he filed for the dismissal, which he got. but he also included the caveat of dismissal without prejudice. This leaves the door open for the government to revisit the case sometime down the road.

Trumpians when (actually if) they realize that they got had by the “Deranged Jack Smith”



If you read thru the Trumpian exaltations, you will see that, to the last, they have completely missed this move by Smith but it’s too late now. You can’t dismiss a dismissed case.

Trump is not completely off the hook. He can still be held to account for his actions.

We may be stuck with him for a while but there is some light and hope in the distance.

[UTUSN]

1. Just so he lays it all out in the report in front of the country.

There was nothing else he could do at this point. And he's resigning before Drumpf gets in, so he can't be fired. Although he's sure to be dragged by harassment, but he can take it.

[choie]

2. I will not be surprised at all if

Garland decides that the report shouldn't be released. Not at all surprised.

[electric_blue68]

5. Hopefully someone will be brave enough to leak it, then. 🤞

[H2O Man]

13. Mr. Smith

serves in a manner that is much more independent than did Mueller or Fitzgerald. He would not have accepted the position if anyone could tell him what -- or what not -- to do.

[choie]

14. Hope very much that you're right!

[H2O Man]

16. I think the

biggest "disappointment" we could see with what is published for the public will be the significant amount of "redacting." But a lot of both cases, perhaps especially the documents case, is that it relied a lot on "national security" issues. And that includes information from non-domestic intelligence sources. I'm not saying we shouldn't demand a high bar, but I anticipate some will complain, because we don't get everything. On the other hand, many of us will think it is intense.

[Fiendish Thingy]

25. He hasn't blocked the release of any other report.

Why would he block this one?

“Something something Federalist Society”

[dpibel]

27. I'm thinking he has the authority to release Meuller

What do you think?

If he has the authority and doesn't do it, that's a lot like blocking, at least as I see it.

[Meowmee]

3. I'm not sure what you're saying here exactly

Do you actually think anything‘s ever going to come of this case? It doesn’t even matter that he did the best he could under the circumstances in my opinion. It’s over, fascism has won in this arena anyway.

[melm00se]

7. Smith's actions

have left the door open rather than Trump's muppet who would have slammed the door shut, nailed it and welded a big steel plate over it.

There is hope.

[Meowmee]

10. Considering they have control of the government, I don't see any hope

And a Supreme Court who will rubber-stamp any decision they want. The orange psycho is going to escape any consequences for anything he ever did, end of story. He can’t escape death, though as no one can. Believing otherwise at this point is in my opinion delusional.

[UTUSN]

11. In case you're replying to me, post #1,

1- the current prosecutions ended with the election making him unprosecutable as sitting president, dismissal the only option.

2- While it could start up when Drumpf is out, it likely would be somebody else doing the case and with Drumpf at the age prolly too late besides Statute/Limitations.

And I'm not a lawyer, so all I say is general community knowledge, but, no, my uncredentialed opinion is that courtroom consequences won't happen to Drumpf.

[Meowmee]

12. Agree

No I was replying to the OP or I thought I was anyway, but thank you for your reply anyway. 😀

[Rebl2]

4. Wonder if

he had been brought in a year earlier if things would be different. Probably not I guess.

[RockRaven]

6. By 2029 the federal judiciary is going to be such that it will never allow anything

to happen to TCF. No matter what Jack Smith did or didn't do, or what kind of eleventeen-dimension chess anyone claims he has played.

[moonscape]

8. By 2029 the odious one

will have terminally choked on a Big Mac and all that’ll be left to show up is his ashes.

[melm00se]

9. To all the negative nellies here

Your dismay is understandable but if you let it consume you, you have let Trump win and you have abandoned the field.

[Bobstandard]

24. Using the term 'negative nellies" is a little misogynistic, isn't it?

Perhaps you could rephrase.

I would thank you for your advice but, as a great wit once observed, advice unasked for is really criticism. I’m not sure an unconscious misogynist has standing to offer blanked criticism on this topic.

[recovering_democrat]

29. very well expressed and it WILL ultimately succeed/

my title says all it needs to say. law enforcement and government laws eventually do what they are supposed to do. Sometimes it has to get done by some that are not in the governmental phase yet.

[2naSalit]

15. Reading this brought up...

Something else.

There is some speculation that he won't actually be president for very long as it is thought that vance is prepared to take over shortly after inauguration. Knowing that he could be back in legal trouble on these charges could make an early exit a hard sell to get him out of the way.

Just a thought.

[dpibel]

28. That would not maximize JD's reign

If they let the wacko stay in office for 2 years and one day, JD is eligible to serve for 10 years.

Just a thought...

(Not that I think JD is electable in any sort of free and fair election.)

[2naSalit]

30. Ageed...

He's not electable but I feel that everything is speculation at this point, including what I suggested.

[WarGamer]

17. What happens when AG Bondi kills it?

[dpibel]

20. How do you kill something that's dead?

Right now, it's not a case. Nothing for Bondi to kill.

Now we can imagine that Bondi will file a new indictment solely for the purpose of dismissing it with prejudice.

But that would be a show that might not quite fly.

[GreenWave]

18. Just release the info without publicly saying you will.

It will give the Trump team a good chance to thwart or stall.

It is better to ask for forgiveness than permission.

[Bobstandard]

19. Garland will not authorize release of any report

Redacted or not, garland won’t allow release of any Jack Smith report. Somehow he’ll find that doing so violates some norms or customs or some damn thing. He’s been covering for TSF in the past. Now he’ll be covering himself, hoping that The orange one won’t go after him. I almost can’t blame him. Except I do.

[Skittles]

21. yes

Garland will err on the side of......the greedy old pig party.....pretty predictible

[ForgedCrank]

22. Is he

as skilled as Robert Mueller was? People were saying the same thing about him.
Sorry, but that boat has already sank, and clinging on to the floating debris will do absolutely nothing for us. We need to abandon this pursuit as it has only served to hurt us in the end. Like it or not, the optics are horrible, and a lot more so for us than Trump.

[ancianita]

23. Those who say Garland won't release Jack Smith's report should remember that he released the Hur Report.

Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to release it was a foregone conclusion — and anything short of publicizing the full report would have been worse.

Technically, the report from special counsel Robert Hur on Biden’s mishandling of classified documents is considered confidential under DOJ rules. Hur even labeled it as such.

In practice, though, burying or censoring the report would have been untenable... informed by previous politically sensitive investigations: Special counsel reports have always been made public in recent years, and Garland would have been slammed by Republicans and the press if he tried to keep this one under wraps. Hur, meanwhile, clearly understood that political reality, so the harsh language he included was exactly what he expected the public to see.

The result on Thursday was a public 345-page document, bearing the Justice Department’s imprimatur, that described the president as embarrassingly, and perhaps dangerously, forgetful. Hur’s allies say he needed to include the details about Biden’s mental state because such judgments are critical to decisions about whether to prosecute for these sorts of crimes.

... said former Attorney General Bill Barr, referring to the decision to release Hur’s report. “Can you really draw the line and say, ‘I’m not going to put this out,’ without having people even more suspicious? That’s almost as bad as letting it out. At that point, your options are very limited.”

“Rob Hur didn’t issue a public report,” Rosenstein said. “He wrote a confidential internal memo. Attorney General Garland made the decision to release it.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/09/garland-decision-release-hur-report-00140806

And Garland also released the transcript of Hur's interview with Biden, but refused congressional Republicans' subpoena of the audio version of that transcript.

So those who say Garland will make some excuse about "norms," forget that he has already set the norms.

[LilElf70]

26. Smith is no fool.

I can guarantee every move he has made to date, will insure a quick trial in 4 years.