Jack Smith Has Set a Trap for Trump
And it’s based on his “advice of counsel” defense
https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/jack-smith-has-set-a-trap-for-trump?sd=pf
Jack Smith Has Set a Trap for Trump
And it’s based on his “advice of counsel” defense
https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/jack-smith-has-set-a-trap-for-trump?sd=pf
Plot twist: he can still run (and be elected) from prison.
The crazies have not been getting less crazy, and they're doing their best to convert as many femce-sitters as possible.
But its not just about who wins and who loses the presidential election. There's also down-ticket races, as well as the increased extremism that this ongoing spectacle is pushing on all parts of the political spectrum.
Won’t happen.
First Republican debate is 8/23. We won’t even have a trial date for the Jan. 6 stuff until 8/28.
Primary calendar is here:
www.frontloadinghq.com/p/the-2024.html?m=1
Trump has 2 trial dates set so far, New York in March and Florida in May.
1st trial is 15 days after Super Tuesday.
2nd trial is before just a handful of states.
Caseload. The D.C.courts have 800 cases pending for 1/6 alone, not counting any other crimes.
NY most likely has similar load issues. The Florida case has the added bonus of needing lawyers with security clearances.
If we could lock him up before election season really kicks in that would be great
Just going to point out that convicting and jailing him does not disqualify him from holding office, and would likely just embolden his base.
Narrator: But she did find that she was being honored at an award show dedicated to the achievements of young people in the entertainment business.
Maeby: I’m getting an Opie?
Narrator: And it did boost her esteem.
Maeby: Hey!
Narrator: The only bigger honor would be having an award like that named after you, I guess.
“advice of counsel” is a tough defense to assert. It comes with some preconditions that could prove highly damaging to Trump as well as legal hurdles that the jury could quickly find render the defense unavailable to him.
one thing that disappears right away is your right to assert that your communications with those lawyers are “privileged.”
Skipping a bunch of the other items why it’s tough and going for the trap:
flipping attorneys is problematic, normally, because even if they agree to squawk, prosecutors normally can’t put them on a stand and ask them to testify about communications with their client. That’s because the attorney-client privilege belongs to the client. It isn’t something attorneys by themselves can decide to waive.
But here, again by putting advice of counsel at issue, Trump himself has waived the privilege.
Trick that I expect Trump to pull that the article doesn't talk about:
Trump will pull presidential privilege, national security, or the ever popular "I don't remember" when asked to explain details.
I was in civil court before and almost fucked up by submitting previous emails from a former lawyer of mine. Glad my attorney caught it and mentioned the shitstorm it would start.
What I don’t understand is how someone who has been dealing with lawsuits his whole life could be so stupid?
he hasn’t been dealing with lawsuits.
His lawyers have been dealing with lawsuits his whole life.
It’s the same with his businesses- the ones that are successful are successful in spite of him, because somehow he got someone competent to work under him.
But he really is an idiot, and totally incompetent at everything he touches. Except maybe reality tv, because people just eat up shitty assholes there
What I don’t understand is how someone who has been dealing with lawsuits his whole life could be so stupid?
He has $40 million worth of legal advice, it’s not being stupid or uninformed. They’re giving the best possible defense, and it’s a very bad one.
I hate the terminology of ‘prosecutor set a trap’ or ‘perjury trap’ if you remember when Mueller wanted to get Trump to testify under oath. It might be a trap in the sense of catching someone, but it gives off this sense of plotting and scheming to unjustly nab an unknowing innocent being that was just going about its business, like when you trap a rabbit or something.
It’s not a trap. Trump doesn’t have a good defense because he did do the thing he is accused of. A horseback cavalry charge against a machine gun isn’t “a clever trap by the machine gunner” one side just has the tools to win, and the other side doesn’t.
I’d put just a bit more distance in there. Trap, to me, implies bait or deception being used to lure something or someone into a place or situation of your design.
Jack Smith did not design the situation that the defense team placed themselves in. I am reasonable sure he’s overjoyed that they did.
The OP article does make a good case for exactly how that defense will fail in multiple ways, from a legal standpoint.