CNN Top Legal Analyst: Jack Smith was a hack who didn’t follow DOJ protocol.

[Nostra]

He needs to be reported to the BAR Association and disbarred from practicing law anywhere in the Jurisdiction of the United States.

And then locked up.

 

[Independent thinker]

Hilarious! MAGA tears. It is hilarious listening you you MAGA blowhards, whining about Jack Smith, with nothing you can do about it. Thought you could prosecute. Nope. Couldn't even find a real prosecutor to take the case, so tried to sub some hot chick, that had never been inside a criminal court now kicked clean out of the Federal courts system. Looks like real courts, just weren't impress with her cup size, vs legal acumen. Thought you could keep his testimony out open hearing and hidden from the public. Nope. Now still whining, and no prosecution. Everybody knows it was Trump. Everybody knows it was not Antifa, but MAGA trying to overthrow the Capital. Your antics are like trying to close the door after that horse is long gone. Cheer up.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, we are doing something about it. What do you think these hearings were about?

 

[White 6]

I dunno man, Trump got elected anyway, right? So, who got fucked?

I'll be honest about this, I think that entire affair was unfairly politicized from the start. If Trump had not run for election then Smith and the democrats wouldn't have done a damn thing. That trial was a travesty of justice IMHO, it never should been brought in the 1st place and was prejudicially run from start to finish. Justice is supposed to be blind, but in this case it wasn't.

Dude, we were all fked, either way.

Ummmmmmmmmmmmm, we are doing something about it. What do you think these hearings were about?

More for Jack to get his testimony out, evidence out, more than anything else.

 

[Lockback]

I don't think I've ever seen a less impressive witness than Jack Smith this week.
Wow.

 

[Nostra]

Dude, we were all fked, either way.

More for Jack to get his testimony out, evidence out, more than anything else.

What evidence did he get out?

 

[Lockback]

What evidence did he get out?

That he was completely unprepared to answer serious questions since the entire operation was a sham.

 

[Nostra]

That he was completely unprepared to answer serious questions since the entire operation was a sham.

That may have been news to the idiot White, but to folks with a functioning brain we already knew all that.

 

[Clipper]

No doubt he committed multiple felonies with his ignoring pro;toco; and spying on Republicans.

Smith was exposed this week. But anyone with a functioning brain already knew the illegally appointed hack was illegally appointed by Garland to illegally lock up Biden’s leading political opponent. Third world country bullshit from Democrats.


CNN's Top Legal Analyst Zeroes in on Where the GOP Cornered Jack Smith Yesterday




Honig ripped apart Smith for trying to manufacture a 2024 October surprise with that Hail Mary filing against Donald Trump, a last-ditch effort to get something on the lawfare front done:

Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he’ll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump’s electoral prospects. At this point, there’s simply no defending Smith’s conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis. “But we need to know this stuff before we vote!” is a nice bumper sticker, but it’s neither a response to nor an excuse for Smith’s unprincipled, norm-breaking practice. (It also overlooks the fact that the Justice Department bears responsibility for taking over two and a half years to indict in the first place.)

Let’s go through the problems with what Smith has done here.

First, this is backward. The way motions work — under the federal rules, and consistent with common sense — is that the prosecutor files an indictment; the defense makes motions (to dismiss charges, to suppress evidence, or what have you); and then the prosecution responds to those motions. Makes sense, right? It’s worked for hundreds of years in our courts.

Not here. Not when there’s an election right around the corner and dwindling opportunity to make a dent. So Smith turned the well-established, thoroughly uncontroversial rules of criminal procedure on their head and asked Judge Chutkan for permission to file first — even with no actual defense motion pending. Trump’s team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith’s request to file first was “procedurally irregular” — moments before she ruled in Smith’s favor, as she’s done at virtually every consequential turn.

Which brings us to the second point: Smith’s proactive filing is prejudicial to Trump, legally and politically. It’s ironic. Smith has complained throughout the case that Trump’s words might taint the jury pool. Accordingly, the special counsel requested a gag order that was so preposterously broad that even Judge Chutkan slimmed it down considerably (and the Court of Appeals narrowed it further after that).

Yet Smith now uses grand-jury testimony (which ordinarily remains secret at this stage) and drafts up a tidy 165-page document that contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination, and files it publicly, generating national headlines. You know who’ll see those allegations? The voters, sure — and also members of the jury pool.

And that brings us to our final point: Smith’s conduct here violates core DOJ principle and policy. The Justice Manual — DOJ’s internal bible, essentially — contains a section titled “Actions That May Have an Impact on the Election.” Now: Does Smith’s filing qualify? May it have an impact on the election? Of course. So what does the rule tell us? “Federal prosecutors … may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election.”

CNN's Top Legal Analyst Zeroes in on Where the GOP Cornered Jack Smith Yesterday

CNN's top legal analyst critiques Jack Smith's testimony on Trump investigations.

townhall.com

The people had a right to know BEFORE the election what the outcome of a trial would be despite that puke Honing's self righteous angst. It's funny how you Trump humper's hate CNN except when they interview a clown like Honig.

Btw, Trump humper. Take a look at Ty Cobb's interview statements on Trump. He actually worked in the W.H., saw him frequently & he knows what a gangster like Trump is.

Now go wash your yap out with Listerine. Maybe you can get the stink of Trump's ass off your breath.

 

[Nostra]

The people had a right to know BEFORE the election what the outcome of a trial would

Nope.

Smith violated Trump’s Constitutional rights in order to influence the election. The length of trials have nothing to do with elections, Stupid.

 

[Clipper]

Nope.

Smith violated Trump’s Constitutional rights in order to influence the election. The length of trials have nothing to do with elections, Stupid.

The "People" have a right to a speedy trial just as much as a criminal like Trump does, you moron. You Trump humper's wanted the trial delayed so your boy could run out the clock.

Please come back soon for another thrashing.

 

[Lockback]

The people had a right to know BEFORE the election what the outcome of a trial would be despite that puke Honing's self righteous angst. It's funny how you Trump humper's hate CNN except when they interview a clown like Honig.

Btw, Trump humper. Take a look at Ty Cobb's interview statements on Trump. He actually worked in the W.H., saw him frequently & he knows what a gangster like Trump is.

Now go wash your yap out with Listerine. Maybe you can get the stink of Trump's ass off your breath.

Your side had nothing and tried to manufacture a narrative.
Jack Smith's a joke. So is your party.

 

[Nostra]

The "People" have a right to a speedy trial just as much as a criminal like Trump does,

Nope.

You are Constitutionally illiterate.

 

[Clipper]

Nope.

You are Constitutionally illiterate.

No, you are.

 

[Clipper]

Your side had nothing and tried to manufacture a narrative.
Jack Smith's a joke. So is your party.

Some joke. He has you MAGA Trump humper's heads exploding because he had & has the goods on your cult leader, but good.

Trump is so innocent that his DOJ lackeys are pulling out all the stops to prevent Smith's final report on the documents case locked away forever.

 

[Nostra]

No, you are.

Rubber/glue kid has nothing.

 

[Care4all]

This man is a total fraud.
He is a partisan hack.
He is a liar.
Why is a partisan hack and a fraud and a liar?
Because he's a Democrat.

He's a lifelong registered independent. Try again.

 

[Lockback]

He's a lifelong registered independent. Try again.

So?
That's a completely meaningless point.

 

[Lockback]

Some joke. He has you MAGA Trump humper's heads exploding because he had & has the goods on your cult leader, but good.

He has nothing.
Case closed.
Nothing.
He failed.

Trump is so innocent that his DOJ lackeys are pulling out all the stops to prevent Smith's final report on the documents case locked away forever.

Oh, I didn't know that.
That changes everything.

 

[candycorn]

No doubt he committed multiple felonies with his ignoring pro;toco; and spying on Republicans.

Smith was exposed this week. But anyone with a functioning brain already knew the illegally appointed hack was illegally appointed by Garland to illegally lock up Biden’s leading political opponent. Third world country bullshit from Democrats.


CNN's Top Legal Analyst Zeroes in on Where the GOP Cornered Jack Smith Yesterday




Honig ripped apart Smith for trying to manufacture a 2024 October surprise with that Hail Mary filing against Donald Trump, a last-ditch effort to get something on the lawfare front done:

Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he’ll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump’s electoral prospects. At this point, there’s simply no defending Smith’s conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis. “But we need to know this stuff before we vote!” is a nice bumper sticker, but it’s neither a response to nor an excuse for Smith’s unprincipled, norm-breaking practice. (It also overlooks the fact that the Justice Department bears responsibility for taking over two and a half years to indict in the first place.)

Let’s go through the problems with what Smith has done here.

First, this is backward. The way motions work — under the federal rules, and consistent with common sense — is that the prosecutor files an indictment; the defense makes motions (to dismiss charges, to suppress evidence, or what have you); and then the prosecution responds to those motions. Makes sense, right? It’s worked for hundreds of years in our courts.

Not here. Not when there’s an election right around the corner and dwindling opportunity to make a dent. So Smith turned the well-established, thoroughly uncontroversial rules of criminal procedure on their head and asked Judge Chutkan for permission to file first — even with no actual defense motion pending. Trump’s team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith’s request to file first was “procedurally irregular” — moments before she ruled in Smith’s favor, as she’s done at virtually every consequential turn.

Which brings us to the second point: Smith’s proactive filing is prejudicial to Trump, legally and politically. It’s ironic. Smith has complained throughout the case that Trump’s words might taint the jury pool. Accordingly, the special counsel requested a gag order that was so preposterously broad that even Judge Chutkan slimmed it down considerably (and the Court of Appeals narrowed it further after that).

Yet Smith now uses grand-jury testimony (which ordinarily remains secret at this stage) and drafts up a tidy 165-page document that contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination, and files it publicly, generating national headlines. You know who’ll see those allegations? The voters, sure — and also members of the jury pool.

And that brings us to our final point: Smith’s conduct here violates core DOJ principle and policy. The Justice Manual — DOJ’s internal bible, essentially — contains a section titled “Actions That May Have an Impact on the Election.” Now: Does Smith’s filing qualify? May it have an impact on the election? Of course. So what does the rule tell us? “Federal prosecutors … may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election.”

CNN's Top Legal Analyst Zeroes in on Where the GOP Cornered Jack Smith Yesterday

CNN's top legal analyst critiques Jack Smith's testimony on Trump investigations.

townhall.com

So when is he going to be arrested for all of these “felonies”? Uhhhh never. Seems like Blondi is the real hack...right?

Speaking of hacks...did you see where the blonde dolt who got the first Comey case tossed out of court has left the DOJ in disgrace?

 

[Clipper]

He has nothing.
Case closed.
Nothing.
He failed.


Oh, I didn't know that.
That changes everything.

Why does Trump's DOJ want to DENY the American people including his own supporter's ability to read Smith's final report & decide for the themselves the merits of the case?

Judge Cannon has been stonewalling that proceeding for over a year & was ORDERED recently by the Appeals Court to get off her Trump loving ass & get moving on a decision.

Btw, why is DOJ who were prosecuting that case in the first place now acting as Defendent Trump's lawyer in attempting to hide that report? Why? Because DOJ is now acting as Trump's lawyer & the taxpayer's are paying for it. It's a disgrace.