Special Counsel January 6 conspiracy case against Trump in DC (Update: Trial set for March 4, 2024) (1 Viewer)

[superchuck500]

Trump and Eastman appear to be preparing to be indicted. It’s probably better to have a new, separate thread for this case.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Senate Democrats are pressuring the supreme court justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from deciding whether Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution for alleged crimes he committed while president.

Democrats have argued that Thomas poses a potential conflict of interest because his wife, Ginni Thomas, has previously supported Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen, the Hill reported.

During her testimony to the committee investigating the January 6 insurrection in 2022, Ginni Thomas said she still believed the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

Following the 2020 election, Ginni Thomas also texted Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows and told him to contest the election results, accusing Biden and Democrats of “attempting the greatest Heist of our History”.

The Illinois senator Dick Durbin, who is chair of the Senate judicial committee, has called for Thomas’s recusal, arguing the relationship between Trump and the Thomas family is unclear.

“There are so many unanswered questions about the relationship of the justice and his family with the Trump administration that I think in the interests of justice, he should recuse himself,” Durbin said to the Hill.

Durbin later told CNN that Thomas should “think twice” and recuse himself from the case……

Clarence Thomas pressured to recuse himself from Trump immunity case

Senate Democrats argue justice poses potential conflict of interest because his wife has previously supported Trump’s election lies

www.theguardian.com

 

[DaveXA]

Senate Democrats are pressuring the supreme court justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from deciding whether Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution for alleged crimes he committed while president.

Democrats have argued that Thomas poses a potential conflict of interest because his wife, Ginni Thomas, has previously supported Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen, the Hill reported.

During her testimony to the committee investigating the January 6 insurrection in 2022, Ginni Thomas said she still believed the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

Following the 2020 election, Ginni Thomas also texted Trump’s former chief of staff Mark Meadows and told him to contest the election results, accusing Biden and Democrats of “attempting the greatest Heist of our History”.

The Illinois senator Dick Durbin, who is chair of the Senate judicial committee, has called for Thomas’s recusal, arguing the relationship between Trump and the Thomas family is unclear.

“There are so many unanswered questions about the relationship of the justice and his family with the Trump administration that I think in the interests of justice, he should recuse himself,” Durbin said to the Hill.

Durbin later told CNN that Thomas should “think twice” and recuse himself from the case……

Clarence Thomas pressured to recuse himself from Trump immunity case

Senate Democrats argue justice poses potential conflict of interest because his wife has previously supported Trump’s election lies

www.theguardian.com

He's not going to recuse himself if his history in other cases is any indication.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

there could be a text from Clarence himself to Trump to challenge the election and he still wouldn't recuse himself..

 

[SaintForLife]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will hear an appeal that could upend hundreds of charges stemming from the Capitol riot, including against former President Donald Trump.

The justices will review a charge of obstruction of an official proceeding that has been brought against more than 300 people. The charge refers to the disruption of Congress’ certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory over Trump.
That’s among four counts brought against Trump in special counsel Jack Smith’s case that accuses the 2024 Republican presidential primary front-runner of conspiring to overturn the results of his election loss. Trump is also charged with conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding.

The court’s decision to weigh in on the obstruction charge could threaten the start of Trump’s trial, currently scheduled for March 4. The justices separately are considering whether to rule quickly on Trump’s claim that he can’t be prosecuted for actions taken within his role as president. A federal judge already has rejected that argument.

Supreme Court will hear a case that could undo Capitol riot charge against hundreds, including Trump

The justices will review an appellate ruling that revived a charge against three defendants accused of obstruction.

apnews.com

Judge pauses Trump election interference case in ruling that could delay March trial start | CNN Politics

amp-cnn-com.cdn.ampproject.org

 

[SaintForLife]

I am honestly shocked that someone at CNN is saying the plan out loud and making these points.

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

I am honestly shocked that someone at CNN is saying the plan out loud and making these points.

i don't think that was ever a secret.
he deserves to be in jail.
you just mad he sent it to the supreme Court before Trump had time to drag it out.. that's not crazy that's just the right way to do it .

 

[MT15]

I am honestly shocked that someone at CNN is saying the plan out loud and making these points.

You do realize these guys are just giving their opinion, correct? This isn’t gospel. In fact, they sound idiotic because while a conviction might be possible, there isn’t any way he would ever go to prison before the election because they will appeal.

Smith’s contention, which is not a secret, is that the public has a right to see the evidence and the outcome of these court cases before they decide who to vote for in the election. He has put this in numerous court filings. So these guys are just trying to rile you up, and they evidently succeeded. This is on you for being so misinformed about this.

Smith is correct, BTW. These are serious charges which have a direct bearing on his ability to do the job of being president. All of what happened needs to be put out there for everyone to see.

 

[DaveXA]

You do realize these guys are just giving their opinion, correct? This isn’t gospel. In fact, they sound idiotic because while a conviction might be possible, there isn’t any way he would ever go to prison before the election because they will appeal.

Smith’s contention, which is not a secret, is that the public has a right to see the evidence and the outcome of these court cases before they decide who to vote for in the election. He has put this in numerous court filings. So these guys are just trying to rile you up, and they evidently succeeded. This is on you for being so misinformed about this.

Smith is correct, BTW. These are serious charges which have a direct bearing on his ability to do the job of being president. All of what happened needs to be put out there for everyone to see.

And regardless, SCOTUS needs to rule on the validity of Trump's claim that he somehow is immune from prosecution. It's an open question that needs to be settled before they do anything with the case. Proceeding without having an answer to that question doesn't make any sense.

 

[Optimus Prime]

And regardless, SCOTUS needs to rule on the validity of Trump's claim that he somehow is immune from prosecution. It's an open question that needs to be settled before they do anything with the case. Proceeding without having an answer to that question doesn't make any sense.

Why doesn’t anyone ask Trump and anyone else claiming this immunity if it means that Biden is immune as well?

If this impeachment hearing does in fact reveal acts Biden committed as president that are not only impeachable but criminal is Joe automatically shielded from prosecution the same way Trump thinks he is?

I’m a bit curious how they would answer that question

 

[DaveXA]

Why doesn’t anyone ask Trump and anyone else claiming this immunity if it means that Biden is immune as well?

If this impeachment hearing does in fact reveal acts Biden committed as president that are not only impeachable but criminal is Joe automatically shielded from prosecution the same way Trump thinks he is?

I’m a bit curious how they would answer that question

They'll just say Trump is immune and Biden isn't because them's the breaks, lol. But yeah, they'll make excuses as usual.

 

[Optimus Prime]

They'll just say Trump is immune and Biden isn't because them's the breaks, lol. But yeah, they'll make excuses as usual.

No doubt. but I still want them to say it and jump through hoops to try to explain why that is

 

[SaintForLife]

i don't think that was ever a secret.
he deserves to be in jail.
you just mad he sent it to the supreme Court before Trump had time to drag it out.. that's not crazy that's just the right way to do it .

I think it's you all that will be mad when this other case is resolved at the Supreme Court. It's not about Trump specifically, but it deals with the main charge that the Biden DOJ apparently overreached by using the charge of corruptly obstructing an official proceeding against the January 6th defendants.

It's also the main charge that they used on Trump. The Supreme Court doesn't take up cases that they agree with.

 

[Optimus Prime]

He's not going to recuse himself if his history in other cases is any indication.

If there is a case that a justice 100% should recuse themselves from but refuses is that it?

Or is there some procedure the other justices can use to force it?

“You need to sit this one out”

 

[MT15]

The Supreme Court doesn't take up cases that they agree with.

This is objectively false.

 

[SaintForLife]

This is objectively false.

Okay. Tell me how. I'm not aware that they do.

Are you worried about the charge of corruptly obstructing an official proceeding that the Biden DOJ has used against January 6th defendants and Trump being overturned by the Supreme Court?

 

[MT15]

Okay. Tell me how. I'm not aware that they do.

Are you worried about the charge of corruptly obstructing an official proceeding that the Biden DOJ has used against January 6th defendants and Trump being overturned by the Supreme Court?

No, I’m not worried. They will decide whatever they decide. Nothing I can do about it.

As far as I know, the Supreme Court takes up cases that they think need to be clarified. The fact that they took this case in no way means that they do not agree with the DOJ’s stance here. They could end up confirming it or they could decide against.

Where do you get the idea that just by taking the case it means they will decide against the DOJ?

 

[SaintForLife]

No, I’m not worried. They will decide whatever they decide. Nothing I can do about it.

As far as I know, the Supreme Court takes up cases that they think need to be clarified. The fact that they took this case in no way means that they do not agree with the DOJ’s stance here. They could end up confirming it or they could decide against.

Where do you get the idea that just by taking the case it means they will decide against the DOJ?

 

[MT15]

You didn’t answer my question, you just posted another opinion on this specific case.

Where do you get the idea that whenever the Supreme Court takes up a case it means they will find for the plaintiff?