Breaking: Grand Jury Returns Superceding Indictment Against Doald Trump

[skews13]

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has returned a superseding indictment against Donald Trump for his involvement in the attempts to overthrow the 2020 election.

Superseding indictments typically mean that the charges or definitions differ. As the Justice Department defines, "If an indictment is dismissed because of legal defect or grand jury irregularity, the government may return a new indictment within six months of the date of dismissal or within the original limitation period (whichever is later)."

According to Georgia constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis, "The superseding indictment is the Special Counsel's attempt to adhere to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision without showing the prosecution's cards in an evidentiary hearing a/k/a a mini trial. Jack Smith is working to preserve his case and move expeditiously."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.226.0.pdf

Superseding indictment returned against Donald Trump

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has returned a superseding indictment against Donald Trump for his involvement in the attempts to overthrow the 2020 election. Superseding indictments typically mean that the charges or definitions differ. As the Justice Department defines, "If an indictment is...

www.rawstory.com

For the magamites that don't know what this means. This is an entirely different indictment heard by another grand jury. In this filing, any testimony, or statements that may be considered immunity have been removed from the preceding case. There won't be any reviews by the Supreme Court, or any chance of the case being thrown out on those grounds.

There won't be any slithering out of this one. Brilliant move by the special counsel. And this case won't be in the friendly confines of Florida.

 

[WEATHER53]

Not entirely different but a mere rewording if what keeps getting kicked out continually. The definition change attempt is also bogus

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Zzzzzzzzz

 

[Independent thinker]

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has returned a superseding indictment against Donald Trump for his involvement in the attempts to overthrow the 2020 election.

Superseding indictments typically mean that the charges or definitions differ. As the Justice Department defines, "If an indictment is dismissed because of legal defect or grand jury irregularity, the government may return a new indictment within six months of the date of dismissal or within the original limitation period (whichever is later)."

According to Georgia constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis, "The superseding indictment is the Special Counsel's attempt to adhere to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision without showing the prosecution's cards in an evidentiary hearing a/k/a a mini trial. Jack Smith is working to preserve his case and move expeditiously."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.226.0.pdf

Superseding indictment returned against Donald Trump

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has returned a superseding indictment against Donald Trump for his involvement in the attempts to overthrow the 2020 election. Superseding indictments typically mean that the charges or definitions differ. As the Justice Department defines, "If an indictment is...

www.rawstory.com

For the magamites that don't know what this means. This is an entirely different indictment heard by another grand jury. In this filing, any testimony, or statements that may be considered immunity have been removed from the preceding case. There won't be any reviews by the Supreme Court, or any chance of the case being thrown out on those grounds.

There won't be any slithering out of this one. Brilliant move by the special counsel. And this case won't be in the friendly confines of Florida.

No surprising that with Kamala Harris starting to go back down in the polls Democrats weaponization of the justice system needs to step in.

 

[BackAgain]

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has returned a superseding indictment against Donald Trump for his involvement in the attempts to overthrow the 2020 election.

Superseding indictments typically mean that the charges or definitions differ. As the Justice Department defines, "If an indictment is dismissed because of legal defect or grand jury irregularity, the government may return a new indictment within six months of the date of dismissal or within the original limitation period (whichever is later)."

According to Georgia constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis, "The superseding indictment is the Special Counsel's attempt to adhere to the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision without showing the prosecution's cards in an evidentiary hearing a/k/a a mini trial. Jack Smith is working to preserve his case and move expeditiously."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.226.0.pdf

Superseding indictment returned against Donald Trump

A Washington, D.C. grand jury has returned a superseding indictment against Donald Trump for his involvement in the attempts to overthrow the 2020 election. Superseding indictments typically mean that the charges or definitions differ. As the Justice Department defines, "If an indictment is...

www.rawstory.com

For the magamites that don't know what this means. This is an entirely different indictment heard by another grand jury. In this filing, any testimony, or statements that may be considered immunity have been removed from the preceding case. There won't be any reviews by the Supreme Court, or any chance of the case being thrown out on those grounds.

There won't be any slithering out of this one. Brilliant move by the special counsel. And this case won't be in the friendly confines of Florida.

Assuming that Jack is in fact not validly appointed, his appeal shouldn’t even be accepted. Presumably it would have to be appealed by our illustrious AG, that scumbag Meritless Garland.

But one way or the other, when the court gets the appeal, it should be affirmed.

And unless his appointment’s invalidity is straightened out, it shouldn’t even be heard.

Still. It could be heard. Jack could “get” the relief he seeks. But that decision could also be reversed on appeal.

Fuck Jack Smith.

 

[Delldude]

FJS/FJB?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jack Smith has NO STANDING WHATSOEVER

 

[Delldude]

Jack Smith has NO STANDING WHATSOEVER

Boy oh boy oh...............that comes down, there's gonna be panic in River City.

 

[MarcATL]

The guy is a notorious criminal.

 

[Delldude]

The guy is a notorious criminal.

Biden?

 

[excalibur]

1. Election interference, big time, by Reichsleiter Merrick Garland (who had to approve this). This is so obvious that it will likely gain Trump hundreds of thousands of votes in the next few days (early voting begins in some states next week).

2. Seems to be a violation of the laches doctrine and I expect Trump attorneys to move to dismiss because of laches, and whatever Chutkin does will go to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, then back to SCOTUS.

 

[0311]

From The Hill.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4850566-superseding-indictment-trump-election-subversion-case/

 

[0311]

Waiting for MAGA MAGGOTS to start rending their garment and gnashing their teeth.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So when would double jeopardy apply?

 

[Delldude]

From The Hill.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4850566-superseding-indictment-trump-election-subversion-case/

Meh, same charges, supposedly 'sanitized' to get Trump.

Turley has lots of questions.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

1. Election interference, big time, by Reichsleiter Merrick Garland (who had to approve this). This is so obvious that it will likely gain Trump hundreds of thousands of votes in the next few days (early voting begins in some states next week).

2. Seems to be a violation of the laches doctrine and I expect Trump attorneys to move to dismiss because of laches, and whatever Chutkin does will go to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, then back to SCOTUS.

Yep. Was it filed within 90 days of the election?

 

[HikerGuy83]

The guy is a notorious criminal.

This thread is about Hunter Biden ?

 

[HikerGuy83]

Waiting for MAGA MAGGOTS to start rending their garment and gnashing their teeth.

Or laugh at you.

 

[elektra]

1. Election interference, big time, by Reichsleiter Merrick Garland (who had to approve this). This is so obvious that it will likely gain Trump hundreds of thousands of votes in the next few days (early voting begins in some states next week).

2. Seems to be a violation of the laches doctrine and I expect Trump attorneys to move to dismiss because of laches, and whatever Chutkin does will go to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, then back to SCOTUS.

I think this is the issue?

Justice Thomas' Concurrence in Trump v. United States Questions Legality of Jack Smith Appointment as Special Counsel - Landmark Legal Foundation

On July 1, the Supreme Court ruled on Trump v. United States. Justice Thomas questioned the legality of Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment, impacting Trump's federal cases.

landmarklegal.org

On Monday, July 1, the Supreme Court released its decision in the case of Trump v. United States. Along with the historic presidential immunity question at issue in the case, Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurrence raises an extremely important foundational question for both federal prosecutions pending against former President Donald Trump. Thomas’s opinion questions the legality of Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of Jack Smith as Special Counsel.

You will recall that this exact issue is currently before Judge Aileen Cannon in the Florida documents retention case against Donald Trump. Landmark participated as a friend of the court during Judge Cannon’s hearing held last month in Florida, arguing that Smith’s appointment violated the U.S. Constitution’s Appointments Clause. Former Attorneys General Edwin Meese III (Landmark’s vice chairman) and Michael Mukasey also presented arguments challenging the legality of Smith’s appointment.

Article II of the Constitution empowers the President to appoint all officers of the United States. Congress, however, may assign appointment power for inferior officers to the President, the courts, or the heads of various departments, if that office has been established pursuant to the laws of the United States. That language is key. The Constitution does not grant the President any authority to create offices; rather, that power lies with Congress. Justice Thomas recognizes that while Congress has previously created offices for independent counsels, it has apparently not done so for the position currently occupied by Jack Smith.

Justice Thomas points out that Attorney General Garland cited no statute that creates an office of the Special Counsel when he appointed Jack Smith. Instead, the statutes upon which Garland relied in appointing Smith merely provide general authority to appoint officials to offices already created by law.

Justice Thomas’s position on two of these statutes, sections 515 and 533 of the United States Code, are consistent with those taken by Mr. Trump’s lawyers and amici curiae in the classified documents case: they do not create an office of the Special Counsel. He notes that section 515 discusses attorneys already occupying an office created by law, and that section 533 includes a term, “official,” which does not clearly encompass officers. Further, section 533 is unlikely to grant authority for an office of the Special Counsel, as it pertains to the FBI rather than attorneys.

Justice Thomas also recognizes that the appointment of Jack Smith may be unconstitutional even if an office of the Special Counsel is authorized by law. He questions whether Jack Smith is a principal or inferior officer. If Smith occupies a principal office, he must be appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. That did not happen here. And Justice Thomas concludes by arguing that the courts below must first answer these questions before the prosecution may be allowed to proceed.

That a Supreme Court Justice is skeptical of the constitutionality of Jack Smith’s appointment is no small matter. Justice Thomas’s concurrence provides Judge Cannon with an effective roadmap for her consideration of a fundamental question before her in the classified documents case. While the media and anti-Trump political class trash the judge for taking so much time considering the very question Justice Thomas is raising, she can persevere knowing that she is not the only judge in America who at least has questions about the Special Counsel’s appointment.

 

[MagicMike]

Assuming that Jack is in fact not validly appointed, his appeal shouldn’t even be accepted. Presumably it would have to be appealed by our illustrious AG, that scumbag Meritless Garland.

But one way or the other, when the court gets the appeal, it should be affirmed.

And unless his appointment’s invalidity is straightened out, it shouldn’t even be heard.

Still. It could be heard. Jack could “get” the relief he seeks. But that decision could also be reversed on appeal.

Fuck Jack Smith.

Look at BackAgain showing off that fancy law degree from Trump University once again!