Megyn Kelly debunks Smith's claims against Trump and makes the case he is election interfering

[meaner gene]

Now you're making assumptions, the documents now days are created in computers. They simply save the original, then do the proposed redactions and save it to a different file name and submit both at the same time.

.

And they submitted both of them under seal. Well before the deadline.

 

[meaner gene]

Exactly, there was no reason, other than election interference, to release anything before all argument have been made. Which they haven't and it can taint the jury pool, by releasing more than necessary before the trial. Just having a DC jury is bad enough.

.

The sixth amendment.

Duh!!!

 

[Marener]

Exactly, there was no reason, other than election interference, to release anything before all argument have been made. Which they haven't and it can taint the jury pool, by releasing more than necessary before the trial. Just having a DC jury is bad enough.

There was no reason to keep it secret. Courts are supposed to operate in the open. It’s fundamental to our justice system.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Exactly, there was no reason, other than election interference, to release anything before all argument have been made. Which they haven't and it can taint the jury pool, by releasing more than necessary before the trial. Just having a DC jury is bad enough.

.

Funny how you guys think informing the voters is interference.

Kinda says it all.

 

[meaner gene]

There was no reason to keep it secret. Courts are supposed to operate in the open. It’s fundamental to our justice system.

If Trump didn't want this coming out during the election, he shouldn't have filed so many lawsuits designed only to delay the adjudication.

Trump could have stood in court in 2022 and cleared his name years before the election.

 

[OKTexas]

The sixth amendment.

Duh!!!

Nothing in the sixth requires public disclosure of a damn thing prior to trial. It says the trial will public, not pretrial motions or anything else for that matter. Doing so can deprive the defendant of due process.

.

 

[Marener]

Nothing in the sixth requires public disclosure of a damn thing prior to trial. It says the trial will public, not pretrial motions or anything else for that matter. Doing so can deprive the defendant of due process.

.

Binding precedent requires public disclosure of pre-trial motions in most circumstances.

 

[OKTexas]

There was no reason to keep it secret. Courts are supposed to operate in the open. It’s fundamental to our justice system.

Well that's just a lie. Trials are required to be public, trying a case in the court of public opinion can easily deprive the defendant of their right to due process and taint the jury pool.

.

 

[Rambunctious]

Megyn Kelly has a kickass show... I don't miss an episode...

 

[OKTexas]

Binding precedent requires public disclosure of pre-trial motions in most circumstances.

Here we go again

.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's funny to me how Megan Kelly has to go on tv and pretend to be retarded to get a paycheck.

 

[Marener]

Well that's just a lie. Trials are required to be public, trying a case in the court of public opinion can easily deprive the defendant of their right to due process and taint the jury pool.

.

Precedent says otherwise.

It’s hilarious, because not long ago Trump was demanding the release of the search warrant affidavit in the Mar a Lago case. Doesn’t seem like anyone, including his favorite judge Cannon, thought about tainting the jury pool.

Court documents, including pretrial motions are public unless otherwise required.

 

[Marener]

Here we go again

.

Loading…

storage.courtlistener.com

 

[meaner gene]

Nothing in the sixth requires public disclosure of a damn thing prior to trial. It says the trial will public, not pretrial motions or anything else for that matter. Doing so can deprive the defendant of due process.

.

That's where the various federal court acts make that a requirement. That federal courts by law have to make everything they do both public, and on the public record.

 

[OKTexas]

View attachment 1023414

Loading…

storage.courtlistener.com

The release of unduly prejudicial material is listed in your link. This judge released the material with the full knowledge of how it would be amplified by the propaganda MSM. It can be full justification for a reversal of any future verdict.

“the issue of unduly prejudicial pretrial publicity is likely to recur with more frequency in this modern day of technology.”

Irvin case was landmark decision on pretrial publicity

It is timely to reflect on that famous case from Evansville.

www.courierpress.com

.

 

[OKTexas]

That's where the various federal court acts make that a requirement. That federal courts by law have to make everything they do both public, and on the public record.

See ^^^^^^^^^^^^ And post the law.

 

[Marener]

The release of unduly prejudicial material is listed in your link. This judge released the material with the full knowledge of how it would be amplified by the propaganda MSM. It can be full justification for a reversal of any future verdict.

“the issue of unduly prejudicial pretrial publicity is likely to recur with more frequency in this modern day of technology.”

Irvin case was landmark decision on pretrial publicity

It is timely to reflect on that famous case from Evansville.

www.courierpress.com

.

If only Trump’s lawyers had argued it was prejudicial, but they didn’t (at least not convincingly).

The judge merely has to perform adequate jury selection. That’s what your link says.

Surely you’re not going to claim that pretrial motions are always kept under seal?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Well that's just a lie. Trials are required to be public, trying a case in the court of public opinion can easily deprive the defendant of their right to due process and taint the jury pool.

.

Well, you are lost in this.

 

[OKTexas]

If only Trump’s lawyers had argued it was prejudicial, but they didn’t (at least not convincingly).

The judge merely has to perform adequate jury selection. That’s what your link says.

Surely you’re not going to claim that pretrial motions are always kept under seal?

Exactly how can that be done in a city that is 96% commiecrat in a politically charged trial? And yes they can be kept under seal if the release is unduly prejudicial to the defendant/s.

.

 

[Marener]

Exactly how can that be done in a city that is 96% commiecrat in a politically charged trial? And yes they can be kept under seal if the release is unduly prejudicial to the defendant/s.

.

Trump failed to argue it was going to be prejudicial. Blame him.

Besides, the conservative media says this is nothing new and it’s inconsequential. DONT READ IT.

Nothing but double standards with you guys. One day you’re screaming for transparency. The next day you’re screaming that things should be kept secret. I get whiplash listening to you guys.