Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo did I hear that he's blocking the Jack Smith Report?
Must really have stuff to hide.
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So did I hear that he's blocking the Jack Smith Report? (Original Post)
malaise
Jan 2025
OP
I think Cannon's withholding the Documents part of the report for 30 days
Dennis Donovan
Jan 2025
#5
FoxNewsSucks
(11,684 posts)1. He's not doing it directly, his pet judge Cannon issued the order
bucolic_frolic
(55,040 posts)2. Wikileaks the Sequel /nt
Baitball Blogger
(52,299 posts)3. Shame on the Democrats for not letting this get revealed before now.
gab13by13
(32,211 posts)4. Garland isn't a Democrat
Pretty sure.
Blue Full Moon
(3,452 posts)10. Correct. That is why Obama put him up for Supreme Court
Mitch McConnell knew Trump was going to win and waited. If he didn't know Trump was going to win they would have voted for him.
Dennis Donovan
(31,059 posts)5. I think Cannon's withholding the Documents part of the report for 30 days
emptywheel - Aileen Cannon Locks Up the Jack Smith Report For at Least 30 More Days
January 21, 2025
Aileen Cannon issued her ruling withholding any sharing of Jack Smiths Volume Two which she extended to thirty days after all appellate proceedings.
She claims the report which would only be released in redacted form includes non-public information (and also revealed that Trump was claiming attorney-client privilege over some of the material).
/snip
January 21, 2025
Aileen Cannon issued her ruling withholding any sharing of Jack Smiths Volume Two which she extended to thirty days after all appellate proceedings.
2. Attorney General Garland or his successor(s), the Department of Justice, its officers, agents, officials, and employees, and all persons acting in active concert or participation with such individuals, are enjoined from (a) releasing, sharing, or transmitting Volume II of the Final Report or any drafts of Volume II outside the Department of Justice, or (b) otherwise releasing, distributing, conveying, or sharing with anyone outside the Department of Justice any information or conclusions in Volume II or in drafts thereof
3. This Order remains in effect pending further Court order, limited as follows. No later than thirty days after full conclusion of all appellate proceedings in this action and/or any continued proceedings in this Court, whichever comes later, the parties shall submit a joint status report advising of their position on this Order, consistent with any remaining Rule 6(e) challenges or other claims or rights concerning Volume II, as permitted by law. Any disagreements between the parties can be denoted separately.
She claims the report which would only be released in redacted form includes non-public information (and also revealed that Trump was claiming attorney-client privilege over some of the material).
Volume II includes detailed and voluminous discovery information protected by the Rule 16(d)(1) Protective Order entered in this case [ECF No. 27]. Much of this information has not been made public in Court filings. It includes myriad references to bates-stamped information provided by the Special Counsel in discovery and subject to the protective order, including interview transcripts, search warrant materials, business records, toll records, video footage, various other records obtained pursuant to grand jury subpoena, information as to which President-Elect Trump has asserted the attorney-client privilege in motions in this proceeding [ECF No. 571 (sealed); ECF Nos. 641, 656], potential Rule 404(b) evidence, and other non-public information.
/snip
malaise
(295,805 posts)6. Thanks
Rec
Silent Type
(12,412 posts)7. Volume 1 -- the report that really mattered -- was released. Jack Smith wimped out like Mueller saying prosecuters
didn't think they could convict on insurrection.
Unless Smith has evidence trump sold/showed the documents to spies or something, it's all but a waste of time. Apparently, Smith doesn't have that evidence.
malaise
(295,805 posts)9. I know this os Vol 2
Wiz Imp
(9,940 posts)8. Wrong. He has no authority to do that on his own. Only a court can block a report like that.
Which is being done for now. It's unclear what will happen after the current order expires.