THE MEX PRESIDENT, LIKE THE ONE PRECEEDING, IS ON THE TAKE FROM THE DRUG LORDS. GOOGLE IT!
Luttig: U.S. Constitution Requires SCOTUS Disqualify Trump
Retired Federal Judge J. Michael Luttig said Thursday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that he believed the Constitution requires the Supreme Court to allow the disqualification of former President Donald Trump from state ballots.
Co-host Mika Brzezinski said, “A lot of people have said, ‘Oh, they will keep Trump on the ballot because they don’t want the public to lose confidence in the court. They don’t want the Supreme Court interfering in elections. It will make people uncomfortable.’ Is that what this is about, or is it about whether or not Donald Trump engaged in insurrection and then sort of gave safety and comfort to those who participated in the insurrection alongside with him?”
Luttig said, “It’s the latter. Section 3 disqualifies any person who engaged in an insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution of the United States, having previously taken an oath to support the Constitution. There’s no question whatsoever that the former president engaged in an insurrection against the Constitution when he attempted to remain in power beyond his constitutional term of four years and denied President Joe Biden the powers of the presidency to which he was entitled, having won the election by a vote of the American people. All of this prevented the peaceful transfer of power for the first time in American history.”
He added, “This is precisely the insurrection that disqualifies one under Section 3 of the 14th amendment. So you’re right, that is the only legal issue. But there are such massive political consequences, that although the Supreme Court ought not consider those undoubtedly they will consider them, but the Constitution requires the disqualification of the former president.”
Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN
MEANWHILE DOJ GARLAND IS PROTECTING JOE BIDEN FROM HAVING PILED HIS GARAGE WITH CLASSIFIED DOCS.
“Awful and unethical”: Legal experts say Judge Cannon could face removal for “disturbing” order
Legal experts sounded the alarm after the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s classified documents case rejected special counsel Jack Smith’s bid to keep government witnesses secret.
Smith’s team opposed making information public that could reveal the identity or any personal identifying information of any potential witnesses in the case or any transcripts or other documents they may have provided, citing concerns about witness intimidation.
Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled in Trump’s favor on the matter, writing: “Following an independent review of the Motion and the full record, the Court determines, with limited exceptions as detailed below, that the Special Counsel has not set forth a sufficient factual or legal basis warranting deviation from the strong presumption in favor of public access to the records at issue.”
Cannon questioned Smith’s concern for witnesses, writing that “the Special Counsel’s sparse and undifferentiated Response fails to provide the Court with the necessary factual basis to justify sealing.”
The Press Coalition, which is comprised of major media companies, also asked the court to unseal Trump’s redacted motion in unclassified form, citing public interest.
Jeremy Foley, a Berkeley College law professor who specializes in judicial ethics, told Newsweek it is "unusual for a judge to make classified documents public."
"Before doing so, Judge Cannon was required to weigh the factors favoring disclosure: potential aid to the defense and the public interest argument asserted by the media groups against those identified by the government: release of the documents could harm national security, impair an ongoing investigation, or compromise potential witnesses in the case," he said.
"If the government is concerned that the judge's order will cause harm, it can seek emergency relief from the 11th Circuit, which could stay the order pending review. We should know very soon if that happens," Foley added.
The order raised concerns among legal experts who have long worried that Cannon may be tilting the case in favor of Trump.
“Judge Aileen Cannon continues to make rulings that are disturbing,” former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance wrote on Substack. “Perhaps we’d view any one of them, on their own, as a judicial aberration. But the pattern of ruling upon ruling that is out of the legal mainstream and results in delay well past the point where this case should have been ready for trial is something that shouldn’t be ignored. Judges should not put their fingers on the scales of justice either for or against a defendant or any other party. Here, it’s impossible to avoid the conclusion that the scales are being tipped.”
Smith’s “best option” may be to ask Cannon to reconsider, but the judge’s “dismissive tone towards the government suggests that there is little they can do to persuade her,” Vance wrote.
A big test will come next week when Cannon holds a hearing under Section 4 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), where she will make rulings on what classified material in discovery can be used at trial. Trump is expected to seek additional delays in the case, asking Cannon to postpone the deadline for some pre-trial motions and revisiting his presidential immunity and Presidential Records Act claims that “border on being frivolous at this point, and using them to further delay this case would be a travesty,” Vance wrote.
“The time for Smith to decide whether to actively seek Cannon’s recusal, or at least hint to the Circuit that it’s merited, will be after the Section 4 hearing rulings are issued,” Vance noted. “Forced recusals are rare. But at this late date, even if the 11th Circuit were to move quickly, as it has in the past, and force Cannon to step aside, it would take a new judge some time to get up to speed. There are no quick fixes for the damage Judge Cannon has done,” she added.
Biden classified docs probe ends with charges unlikely, attorney general says
Feb. 7 (UPI) — The special counsel investigation of classified documents found at President Joe Biden’s residences has concluded with no charges likely, Attorney General Merrick Garland said Wednesday.
Special counsel Robert Hur ended his investigation and submitted his report to the Justice Department on Monday, Garland reported to House and Senate leaders.
A White House privilege review hasn’t concluded, but Garland said the Justice Department will make “as much of the special counsel’s report public as possible.”
He said the Department of Justice will provide members of Congress with the report, appendices and Hur’s letter after the White House review is done.
The investigation largely involves Biden’s retention of classified documents while he was vice president and after leaving office in January 2017.
Biden allegedly retained the documents in error instead of returning them to the National Archives and Records Administration, CBS News reported.
The classified documents were placed in two storage units and eventually wound up in a private office used by Biden. Some documents also were found in boxes inside Biden’s garage at his home in Wilmington, Del.
A search of Biden’s Rehoboth Beach house in Delaware and at the University of Delaware did not locate more documents.
An additional 10 classified documents were found at the Penn-Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement in Washington, D.C., which prompted Garland to appoint Hur to investigate Biden’s handling of classified documents in January 2023, ABC News reported.
The classified documents date to Biden’s time as vice president under President Barack Obama, and several were marked as “top secret.”
The investigation by Hur included interviewing about 100 former and current White House and governmental employees. Hur also interviewed Hunter Biden and spent two days interviewing the president.
Biden has told reporters he was surprised to learn of the classified documents in his possession and denied breaking any federal laws.
Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump has been indicted on 40 counts of illegally possessing classified documents. Trump pleaded innocent to the charges against him and accused Justice Department officials of targeting Republicans.
Officials with the National Archives reported that Biden and his legal representatives cooperated with its search for missing classified documents but said Trump and his representatives intentionally withheld classified documents from investigators and the FBI.
Joe Biden Pressured Merrick Garland to Prosecute Donald Trump, Resurfaced NYT Report Says
President Joe Biden pressured Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2022 to prosecute former President Donald Trump, a resurfaced New York Times report says.
The report, which reemerged Thursday on X, appears to be attracting attention because of the recent legal attacks against Trump:
- Colorado – Prohibiting Trump from Colorado’s 2024 primary ballot
- New York – “Stormy Daniels” (state)
- Miami – “Documents” (federal)
- Washington, D.C. – “January 6” (federal)
- Fulton County, Georgia (state)
Times reporters Katie Benner, Katie Rogers, and Michael S. Schmidt published an article on April 2, 2022, about Biden’s frustration with Garland about the lack of prosecution against Trump, according to two people familiar with Biden’s comments.
“The attorney general’s deliberative approach has come to frustrate Democratic allies of the White House and, at times, President Biden himself,” the Times reported. “As recently as late last year, Mr. Biden confided to his inner circle that he believed former President Donald J. Trump was a threat to democracy and should be prosecuted, according to two people familiar with his comments.”
“And while the president has never communicated his frustrations directly to Mr. Garland, he has said privately that he wanted Mr. Garland to act less like a ponderous judge and more like a prosecutor who is willing to take decisive action over the events of Jan. 6,” the report added.
Since the report was originally published, state and federal officials have indicted Trump four times. He faces 91 counts and 717.5 years in jail, Breitbart News reported.
Trump also faces challenges to remaining on state ballots in some blue states. On Tuesday the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in a four-to-three opinion that the United States Constitution’s “Insurrection Clause” blocks Trump from appearing on the state’s presidential ballot, preventing voters from deciding who should become the next president.
“Is Trump an insurrectionist, sir?” a reporter asked Biden Wednesday.
Biden mumbled, “I think … it’s self-evident.” He continued, “Whether the Fourteenth Amendment applies, we’ll let the Court make that decision.”
“But he certainly supported an insurrection,” Biden claimed without evidence. “No question about it. None. Zero.”
Follow Wendell Husebø on “X” @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
Report: Merrick Garland Waited Weeks to Approve Warrant for Mar-a-Lago Search
Attorney General Merrick Garland reportedly waited weeks to approve the search warrant of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago private residence.
While the establishment media suggested “classified documents relating to nuclear weapons were among the items the FBI” sought in the raid of Mar-a-Lago, it took weeks for Garland to make up his mind on whether to approve the warrant, the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday.
“The decision had been the subject of weeks of meetings between senior Justice Department and FBI officials, the people said,” the Journal reported. “The warrant allowed agents last Monday to seize classified information and other presidential material from Mar-a-Lago.”
After the raid and significant public pressure, the Justice Department filed a motion in court to release the FBI’s property receipt of the 28 inventory items federal agents seized. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart agreed to make the search warrant public the next day.
On Monday, Donald Trump said the FBI “stole” his “passports” in last week’s raid. The passports were not independently itemized on the FBI’s property receipt of the 28 inventory items federal agents seized.
The warrant, signed by Reinhart and approved by Garland, did not state that they could take Trump’s passport. Typically, the government needs a separate court order to seize someone’s passport, even temporarily.
After the report, Trump’s team released an email from Jay Bratt, the top counterintelligence official in the Justice Department’s national security division, which confirmed Trump’s passports were seized in the raid of Mar-a-Lago the previous Monday. The email also said the passports would be returned to the Trump “at 2 PM today.”
According to the Wall Street Journal, “The department Monday asked a judge not to make public the affidavit on which the search warrant was based, as some news-media outlets had sought, writing in a court filing that the document contains ‘critically important investigative facts’ about witnesses and tactics.”
Prosecutors explained they do not want the affidavit made public because it would “likely chill future cooperation by witnesses whose assistance may be sought as this investigation progresses,” they wrote.
Follow Wendell Husebø on Twitter @WendellHusebø. He is the author of Politics of Slave Morality.
No comments:
Post a Comment