The commentator is Elie Honig, who put his opinion in a New York Magazine piece, "Jack Smith’s October Cheap Shot," which I blogged here, 4 days ago.
Watch the CNN interview:
🚨BREAKING:
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) October 7, 2024
A CNN legal analyst just DESTROYED Jack Smith and Judge Chutkan for what appears to be political motivation in releasing the 165-page brief.
A legal analyst, who has handled thousands of cases, stated that he has NEVER witnessed such an occurrence before. He also… pic.twitter.com/7a5ZHa3hmJ
Posts
72 comments:
Assume Smith and the judge acted improperly. What is the remedy? Reversal and perhaps sanctions--after the election.
Hauk tui.
If Trump is smart, he'll hire me as his Attorney General.
I'll have Jack Smith in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba by the end of business Day One.
When it comes to Donald Trump “prosecutorial ethics” is a sheet of paper that is blank on both sides.
There's nothing "cheap" about this shot. We are all - have all - been paying for this for DOJ abuse for the last 3 and a half years.
..and the edges.
If either Smith or Chutkin were accused of election interference for this, their first refuge would be prosecutorial or judicial immunity.
Is anybody else noticing the occasional sudden whiffs of 'even-handedness' from our loathsome comrades in the entertainment world, network news included? I sense the ranks are starting to divide up a little bit, with some of them apparently being able to read when they look at the wall.
Honig is right, it did sound like Clinton had the Jack Smith judges mixed up.
If it turns out Smith was illegally appointed, then he is not and never properly was a "prosecutor" and prosecutorial immunity should not apply.
The CNN lady should lay off the botox a little bit - she looks like her face would crack into pieces if she tried to make a facial expression.
Looks like part of your post was covered-up by the video frame.
She sure frames it the way Smith prefers, "Trump's attempts to overturn the election." He wanted a recount. Like Gore. Anyone recall CNN accusing Gore of trying to overturn the election? And given that Trump's efforts, such as they were, ended on January 6th with the certification, how exactly was he trying to overturn something that had yet to be ratified? If that's "overturning" then so is all the ballot harvesting in California, which tends to reverse the election results on election day, conveniently almost 100% for democrats.
Nice point Tommy
Yes it confuses me.
Remember folks: Democrats boarded up the windows to the counting room in the last election and they're going to do it again.
Don't bring your cell phone to Washington DC this time.
Yes, along with sensing more vocal Trump support than in 2016 (2020 JD Vance vs 2016 JD Vance being an example)
It's hard to gauge. There's always an element of being just tough enough to give plausibility to claims of being even-handed, coupled in this case no doubt with a desire to provide the Harris campaign with a plausibly 'tough' interview. I think those count more than any anticipation of having to work with a Trump administration, though.
Legal Expert Leslie Gordon
“Facts” & allegations “supported” by evidence (testimony, statements, documents) that hasn’t been subject to cross examination or confrontational techniques are not properly or constitutionally established.
They thus cannot satisfy the govt’s burden of proof."
Elon Musk openly asked how long his prison sentence would be if Kamala-lala-ding-dong was elected.
Was he joking?
"Over-Turning the election" right in line with "Insurrection!" and "Without Evidence" collective D-left's in-unison/ propaganda repeat button / loyalist utterances.
Yes, Cannon was the judge in the documents case in Florida, she dismissed the documents case based on an erroneous understanding of what a Special Counsel is. It’s in front of the 11th circuit now and most likely will be reversed, as they’ve reversed her twice before in the documents case.
Judge Chutkin, a much better, more experienced judge has this case thank goodness. Trump is panicking because he doesn’t want voters to see what is in those filings. Voters deserve to know.
P-Inga: "Yes, Cannon was the judge in the documents case in Florida, she dismissed the documents case based on an erroneous understanding of what a Special Counsel is."
LOL
The Special Counsel rules are quite clear and Jack Smith's fake "appointment" violates ALL of them.
But only ALL of them.
Back to the drawing board for pro-Hamas P-Inga!
Why do they deserve to know? I thought the DoJ was concerned with justice, which is why they have rules about cases with political implications close to election day.
Maybe voters deserve to hear from VP Harris on what her policies actually are, and why, if they're so good, they haven't been done already by the Administration of which she is such a key figure.
"Deranged Jack Smith is fighting for Lyin’ Kamala. LOST BIG IN FLORIDA! Justice Department is a political weapon. Never happened in USA before! MAGA2024."
Trump always expresses himself like a surly and none-too-bright adolescent. How can any but the most stupid be entranced by his sub-literate drivel, self-flattery, name-calling, and lies?
A much better judge would have followed ordinary procedure so as not to expose herself to being overturned on appeal.
It comes on rolls too, Garland’s choice of soft or strong.
I don't trust 'Red Wave' theorists, and seeing this kind of support makes me highly suspicious, as if it's geared toward dis-incentivizing turnout by turning down the highly-charged bias / heat that we've been seeing for 5 years.
We'll see.
Explain the Special Counsel appointment process in your own words.
2020 was fraudulent. We know it. They know it. Democrats support it and will again in 2020 if they can pull it off. Liberal white women LOVE voter fraud.
We never had two attempted assassinations of a former president. What's this "never before"? OMG.
Trump is not "a broken record", because nobody can play "a broken record". What Trump sounds like is a scratched record. Stuck playing the same GIF over and over.
It's possible Judge Engoron helped Trump by gaging him up.
I'm still voting for him. I'm not... 'deranged' 😉
The Soviet idiot hath spoken.
Same old bull dung; just in a new wrapper.
"Looks like part of your post was covered-up by the video frame."
I'm not seeing that on either my desktop or my iPhone. I'd be sad if I thought embedded video from X didn't display properly. What device are you using?
Voters deserve to know.
I'm not a lawyer, but I understand the difference between the language of politics versus the language of the law. If those obvious differences are too difficult to understand, your opinion is irrelevant.
Is there a law class at the University of Wisconsin about how to handle a corrupt prosecutor and a corrupt judge coordinating their corrupt efforts against a defendant???
BREAKING:
A CNN legal analyst just DESTROYED Jack Smith and Judge Chutkan for what appears to be political motivation in releasing the 165-page brief.
It's seems to be a feature by design to ensure that either the video or associated text is displayed.
There are clearly defined rules regarding the appointment of a Special Counsel. None of them were followed when Smith was appointed. He has no standing.
I'm viewing the post on Mac Book. n.n. captured what flashes and disappears behind the video frame.
Kudos to CNN for airing this story.
G-Pub
The mythical Jack "Jackelope" Smith is half man, half jackass (male "donkey").
It will hopefully be RFK.
Strong horse politics.
Inga just reinforces that she is a Soviet and believes the legal system is a tool to maintain political power.
She wants Trump dead or in jail because he is a political opponent. Just an evil person.
Cook said...
Trump always expresses himself like a surly and none-too-bright adolescent. How can any but the most stupid be entranced by his sub-literate drivel, self-flattery, name-calling, and lies?
Trump tends to draw an extreme rhetorical line about his enemies that his enemies -- from that point on -- tend to asymptotically approach.
This reversal of normal procedural order by the judge at the behest of a "deranged" prosecutor in this case is a prime example.
“How can any but the most stupid be entranced by his sub-literate drivel, self-flattery, name-calling, and lies?”
A question that will be asked in the history books yet to be written.
I often get flashes of text I suspect is provided by the 'alt' attribute of the 'IMG' tag used to generate the thumbnail for various links to X. It just depends on how fast your browser can process the thumbnail.
You're seeing the text from the writer of the post on X, not Althouse. It appears briefly before the video loads. It happens with most links to an X post video.
I'm pretty sure this is something coming from the X feed or Blogger based on the comments from n.n. and Wince
Judge Inga has ruled. What is her education in the Law you say ? Emptying bedpans, she replies.
Cook and Inga make quite a team.
And the Senile Asshole #1 is a legal scholar? Disparaging nurses now? You should try to be kind to nurses, they are the ones who have to change your shitty diapers.
What I notice about so many of these Democrats and their operatives with bylines is their dead eyes when they appear on TV. There is nothing life-affirming behind those eyes.
Iman
What I notice about so many of these Democrats and their operatives with bylines is their dead eyes when they appear on TV.
"Lifeless eyes. Black eyes, like a doll's eye."
I think they botox to hide the scoffing reactions that would otherwise appear when they have to read the bs they are given.
Say the people who support and/or tolerate the guy who had two previous Presidental campaigns implode because he's a serial fabulist and plagiarist.
But that was back when Democrats still had some shreds of integrity and decency.
I contend that every ethical prosecutor knows Smith is doing all this including this filing to interfere with the election.
CNN has actually been displaced as the Chickenshit News Network by NBC and MSNBS which are nearly interchangeable.
If it turns out Smith was illegally appointed, then he is not and never properly was a "prosecutor" and prosecutorial immunity should not apply.
I thought that had already been determined by one of the court decisions. Why has this freelance Inspector Javert not been prosecuted already?
Honig has it right, of course. What's funny about the whole thing is how much he reminds me of JD Vance -- he knows what he's talking about and does a nice, lawyerly job of demolishing the opposing view, in this case the Jack Smith/Hillary Clinton excuse for trying to misuse the legal norms to influence the election in such an obvious way.
A much better judge would have followed ordinary procedure so as not to expose herself to being overturned on appeal.
I'm of the opinion that this is entire shit-show is for purposes of influencing the 2024 election. It's a Potemkin village. It doesn't matter if it falls apart in December, or 2025, or 2026. It doesn't matter if it's reversed on appeal. It's using the court system ("lawfare") to subvert an election. That's the point, and nothing more than that. If Trump wasn't running for president, none of this would be happening to him.
How can any but the most stupid be entranced by his sub-literate drivel, self-flattery, name-calling, and lies?
He received more than 75 million votes. How many do you think you'd get from the 'smart' set?
Tommy… 🤛
That looked like one of my old Prince albums, Wince. 😁
"Trump always expresses himself like a surly and none-too-bright adolescent."
Hum. Like you, except for the "always" which isn't an accurate description of Trump's rhetoric. For example, if you were even slightly inclined to make a substantive argument, you could attempt to refute Trump's assertion that the DOJ's actions are purely or primarily politically motivated and without precedent.
"How can any but the most stupid be entranced by his sub-literate drivel, self-flattery, name-calling, and lies?"
Hum again. You seem to be addressing the question to Trump supporters. Its a question you should supply an answer to. You teel me. Why did the likes of Elon Mush, Tulsi Gabbard, the Weinstein brothers, RFK, and Bari Weiss to name a few defect from the left to the right during the Era of Trump. Why are the right to left defectors in the Era of Trump all pearl clutching, establishment defending, highly status conscious people barely able to make an argument beyond "orange man bad" or " Trump always expresses himself like a surly and none-too-bright adolescent." Inquiring minds want to know.
Marcy Wheeler notes that Honig is often wrong.
There are a number of laugh-in-his-face funny things about Elie Honig’s column bitching that Jack Smith submitted his immunity filing before the election. First, for years Honig whined and moaned that the January 6 investigation would never reach the Willard Hotel, which was, in the opinion he formed without examining much of the evidence, the only way it would reach Trump.
Well, now the court filings have incorporated the Willard, yet Honig seems not to have noticed (but then, he has never exhibited much awareness of what’s actually in court filings).
But many people rebutted Honig, because his objections pertain to stuff DOJ controls, like indictments, not to things a judge controls, like the briefing Judge Chutkan ordered, briefing about an indictment charged 14 months ago.
No No, n.n. - Jackalopes are mythical jackrabbits with antelope horns. And of course you are making things up as you rush to make personal insults against someone you have never met - starting with a nonexistent nickname.
Here's the wording hiding behind the video frame:
"BREAKING:
A CNN legal analyst just DESTROYED Jack Smith and Judge Chutkan for what appears to be political motivation in releasing the 165-page brief.
A legal analyst, who has handled thousands of cases, said that he has NEVER witnessed such an occurrence before. He also...
pic.twitter.com/7a5ZHa3hmj
- Gunther Eagleman™
@GuntherEagleman"
I can't figure out why it's behind the video or what it has to do with the post.
https://abovethelaw.com/2024/10/elie-honig-makes-pitch-to-become-donald-trumps-favorite-legal-analyst/
“Elie Honig Makes Pitch To Become Donald Trump's Favorite Legal Analyst
Move over, Turley! Take a seat, Dershowitz! Donald Trump may have a new favorite cable news law talkin' guy.
And while the king was looking down, the Jester stole his thorny crown.
That’s not exactly fair. Turley’s Trumpy screeds routinely spout legal nonsense when he’s just not making up facts. Honig’s work presents more subtlety — more reliance on just casually ignoring basic issues to further his chosen narrative. Like when he parachuted into the New York criminal case with analysis so far afield of the facts and law he got dragged to hell and back by those actually keeping up with the case. So it’s sort of a trend.”
The filing of Smith’s brief was unethical, violated DOJ rules, as well as court rules and requirements. And the judge was just as prejudicial by allowing it to be filed. Most of it is inadmissible, because it is hearsay, irrelevant, or privileged. And that is why the judge’s actions were so prejudicial - allowing the prosecution to file the brief, then unsealing it, didn’t allow the defendants to challenge it in any way, violating the Constitutional right to confront your accuser. And, yes, it was very blatant election interference. That was why Smith filed it, and the judge accepted the brief, and then unsealed it.
Smith is a figure head, like Mueller.
From Washington Post:
"The effort involves at least 40 lawyers, plus FBI agents and support staff, based on court filings and interviews with people familiar with the special counsel’s office. Some were working on the investigation even before Attorney General Merrick Garland tapped Smith in November to serve as a special counsel — a designation that gives him more independence from Justice Department leaders than other federal prosecutors have. Garland made that decision once Trump formally announced his third run for the White House.
Good. One more thing to charge Smith with when Trump gets elected. That boy is NOT going to enjoy prison.
Post a Comment