The request by Mr. Smith was his final acknowledgment that after two years of courtroom drama, prosecutors will not be able to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his efforts to undo the results of the 2020 presidential election as he prepares to re-enter the White House.
The department’s policy that sitting presidents may not be prosecuted “is categorical and does not turn on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the government’s proof or the merits of the prosecution, which the government stands fully behind,” Mr. Smith wrote. “Based on the department’s interpretation of the Constitution, the government moves for dismissal without prejudice of the superseding indictment.”
November 25, 2024
Jack Smith moves to dismiss the January 6th case against Trump.
The NYT reports:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
120 comments:
Don't go away mad, Jack - just go away.
No, wait, mad's good...real good.
Well, well, well...
"dismissal without prejudice"
Oh now isn't that cute...unacceptable.
Mr. Smith’s filing held out the possibility that the charges could be refiled
Double jeopardy and the statute of limitations he'll ignore, but a "policy"? Well, that's a whole other animal.
Trump's DOJ should open up a case against Jack Smith, Dershowitz's opinion be damned.
I take it that “without prejudice” would mean Trump could still be prosecuted on the indictment if and when he leaves office.
Why would he let literally Hitler off the hook?
The show is over... for now. Corrupt Soviet Democrats will remain so.
Now - The real lawsuit needs to be filed against Rachel Maddow, MSNBC, Adam Schitt, Hillary Clinton and their various props for the Russia Russia Collusion lies.
I wish there was a way Smith and Garland could face consequences for their banana republic lawfare, but I don't imagine that's possible.
Can the Defense file for a 'Dismissal, With Prejudice' finding?
They spent 50 million dollars. Trump goes free and a lot of lawyers made a shit load of money. Win Win
In a civil case, they can file their own motion to dismiss or they can oppose and demand the trial continue. I'm less certain in a criminal case (why would a criminal defendant oppose a dismissal?), though I can't think of a rights-based reason why not.
"I take it that “without prejudice” would mean Trump could still be prosecuted on the indictment if and when he leaves office."
Yes. The article says that explicitly.
Smith gives up on trying to turn used horse stall straw into political gold. Since his dismissal is "without prejudice" this doofus may try again. Smith blows federal taxpayer dollars--but by Gum he made Trump pay a lot of legal fees!
Lets just ignore all the improper and illegal actions by Smith, the illegally installed special prosecutor.
Wanna bet money that we never hear anymore about this in 2028 or after?
How dare Trump undo the 2020 election by running in 2024.
50 millions dollars spent on this ridiculous prosecution. The goal was to make sure Trump would not be elected again and they failed. Spectacularly!
It's my hope that Trump pardons every Jan 6th defendant. Given the prosecution's violations of their Constitutional rights, even those that got out of hand and actually deserved some charges should be pardoned. And every judge and prosecutor who participated in the travesty should be indicted for their crimes in addition to being disbarred.
The media, the law professors, the experts had promised their voters that Trump was going to prison. The walls were closing in as one b*mbshell after another was added to their fake narrative.
Coming after the loss on November 5th, I don't know if leftist women can handle this announcement. D.C. psychiatrists are about to have another long week. There may actually be suicides due to this announcement and I certainly expect to hear of another murder due to some mental nut-case not being to able to believe the news.
Corporate media needs to be totally destroyed after their actions over the past few years. They promised! They lied. Repeatedly. Corporate media should never again be trusted even with the most insignificant piece of news.
Smith was illegally appointed, and any government funds he spent were spent illegally. He -- or perhaps Merrick Garland, who appears to have given him some bad legal advice -- should repay any such amounts immediately. With interest.
Should be WITH prejudice.
I hope the next DoJ requests accountability for the $50 million spent to have a case tossed out by the prosecution that spent the money.
Judge Chutkan still has a say, but I expect her to go along. Like Smith she will make it clear that the defendant may be free as a bird but is guilty as Hell.
Biden starting the season of pardons.
The reason the corrupt left whined ceaselessly during the campaign - they knew if Trump and his team - or anyone - looks into the Jan 6th committee - created by Pelosi and headed by Liz Cheney - ALL SORTS OF LIES would be uncovered.
My advise - do NOT move on. The American people deserve the truth.
Yes
The entire fraudulent premise of this case needs to be fully exposed and destroyed, and the conspiratorial instigators need to also be fully exposed and charged where appropriate. The Republican-controlled Congress now has the authority to follow up in detail with investigations of the concocted evidence of the Pelosi-Cheney setup investigation.
If they do, Jack Smith and a whole lot of other people will rue the day they ever attempted this coup and persecution. Justice demands real closure here.
Agree! So many lies and deceptions were sold to the America people. Enough is enough.
Trump will appoint a new head of the Office of Legal council. Last time that happened shortly after his inauguration. The Senate took until November to approve the appointment.
Two people I respect suggested at one point that the Florida documents case was not bullshit. Coulter said: everyone has to answer a subpoena. She is remembering the impeachment campaign against Billy C, of which she was a part. Bullshit. Never should have happened. Lots of people ignore subpoenas. Andy C. McCarthy said: documents that belong to "agencies" cannot be lawfully taken "home" by the President. Surely Trump was only moving documents that had been presented to him for briefings and so on. He didn't scour agency offices for papers. He had the sole authority to de-classify documents up to his last minute in office. Given the precedent of Billy C's video about his presidency, this means if while still President, a person points at a bunch of boxes of papers and says: that all goes back with me; anything in there that says "classified" just got de-classified. Rifling through all the family quarters at MaL was a disgrace--an attempt to reinforce the message that Trump was some sort of buccaneer or con artist who never should have been President.
The more you look at unedited videos from J6, the less it looks like a violent insurrection, an attempt to force Biden out of office, or an attempt to overthrow the Constitution. The mob had left their guns on the Virginia side of the line, or at home; any weapons used were randomly picked up at or near the scene. The ex-Marine who is in prison for assault walked in with a flag on a flagpole, and ended up hitting a police officer with the flagpole. This is a serious crime at any time. The behavior of most of the protesters or rioters was in stark contrast to this.
Even if some of the rioters had something serious in mind, it doesn't follow that Trump encouraged them to do it. No evidence of that. Kaus says that Trump trying to stop Pence from certifying the result was impeachable. Not a matter of criminal law. No justification for applying language about ex-Confederates in the 1860s.
The best Trump admin recourse is a RICO charge, if it can find unshredded documents.
I'm waiting for the head explosions that happen when the 34 felony convictions are vacated.
These bastards just never stop.
So, Trump pardons himself.
Suck on it.
But wait, Trump is NOT a sitting president.
Tump needs to make sure this never happens again. Please Trump, don't listen to Dummies who think "This will never happen again" or "The dems have learned their lesson, lets forgive and forget".
No, they haven't learned their lesson. And they will prosecute Trump after he leaves office. I'd suggest a pardon for himself for everything prior to Jan 21, 2025. Let the SCOTUS strike it down, if they wish. Next, think of how to make his 2nd term unindictable.
Make it make mistake, its up the R's to protect themselves against lawfare by any means neccessary. The left never forgives and they never forget.
Biden has pardoned two Thanksgiving turkeys, named Peaches and Hunter.
Plus, the DOJ needs to investigate Smith. His appointment was flakey and his conduct outrageous. Hopefully, hasn't picked another Bill Barr for AG. Barr appointed a goofball to investigate Russiagate with the mission of not ruffling any feathers of those INSIDE the Federal Government. The next AG needs to do better.
He's not going anywhere. He filed this motion "without predjudice" meaning he can come back in 4 years and hound Donald Trump into his grave.
Unless of course, Donald Trump was to declare that Jack Smith is a clear and present danger to the security of the United States of America.
And kill him.
Like Obama did.
They have extra-judicial plans for Donald J. Trump. He will never be President of the United States again.
Dixus -- These are the type of comments that make me believe you are actually an FBI plant trying to get someone arrested.
... by winning in 2024.
Now make a DOJE
Department of Judicial Exile. They should start packing their bags immediately. Now that's efficient!
"tHerE GoES OUr dEMoCRacY!"
Every time in the last 4 years when I had to listen to (or consider actions of) AG Merrick Garland, I found myself repeating over and over again like a mantra “we sure dodged a bullet there on his nomination by Obama to the Supreme Court”. Middle of the road, moderate my ass. Total tool.
It is without prejudice. Can DOJ refile when Trump leaves office?
Our long national nightmare is over
Ray Epps...is that you...?
Statute of limitations will likely have run out by then. At least some of the charges have, I believe, a 5 year statute of limitations. T
No Double Jeopardy, since jeopardy doesn’t typically attach until the jury is sworn in.
"Statute of limitations will likely have run out by then."
Wasn't the statute of limitations passed on one of the NewYork cases they prosecuted anyways?
My preference is deprivation of a civil right under color of law. Pretty much LawFare practiced by Democrats violates Due Process, an enumerated civil right under the 5th and 14th Amdts.
Can't we prosecute him for something? Impersonating a government official? Theft of government funds?
rhhardin said…
“The best Trump admin recourse is a RICO charge, if it can find unshredded documents.”
Don’t forget mail/file servers unwiped.
Jack Smith illegally prosecuted Trump. He should be prosecuted for doing so. No man is above the law, Jack.
Due Process is violated because defendants were not on notice of their extreme interpretation of criminal statutes. Left wing prosecutors depend on getting their LawFare by Dem judges, despite knowing it won’t with the Supreme Court, but it will take years to get there.
This whole farce, just cutting a road here to get the devil. They never should have brought this forward. Instead they created this situation, creating a President, who has these king like powers, by attempting to pervert the law to take down a man. And now these people leave this mess behind. This is how republics fall.
I would’ve preferred a dismissal with prejudice, a sincere apology to the Trump family and the nation, reimbursement of all of Trump’s legal fees, and a full-throated groveling for forgiveness.
Someone send Inga a pair of dentures for all the teeth gnashing.
So Smith is filing for dismissal without prejudice meaning DOJ can refile at a later date. Can the judge overrule the request and make the dismissal "with prejudice?"
Get as many of the lawfare perpetrators disbarred as you can.
I'm kind of worried about Inga.
Well, OK, maybe not.
without prejudice
Trump can fight the "without prejudice," but doing so opens up the door to Smith essentially litigating the merits of the charges, i.e. putting Trump on trial.
Between now and when he gets fired for real? I think Trump should fight to get this into court imo, to clear his name completely. Ending the prosecution like this leaves too much of a legal mess. Smith was never appointed legally. The armed Mar-a-Lago raid was a massive overreach by the Democrats and needs to be repudiated legally and politically.
Thanks for the assist
"I think Trump should fight to get this into court imo, to clear his name completely. Ending the prosecution like this leaves too much of a legal mess."
Most attorneys would say you should jump at the chance for a dismissal of any kind. This is not one of those cases. Trump is not an ordinary defendant. His prosecution was prejudicial and political. In his particular case he should absolutely fight for dismissal with prejudice.
Not only was there prejudice, it prima facie unethical.
but doing so opens up the door to Smith essentially litigating the merits of the charges, i.e. putting Trump on trial.
Go for it. See what it gets ya.
Any lawyer worth their salt would have filed the motion without prejudice. But that doesn’t mean Smith will pursue this when Trump is out of office. Once Trump is out of office and ineligible for the Presidency, Smith won’t give a fuck about the case because it will have lost its political value. I love that the fucking lawfare waged against Trump backfired and likely helped Trump get reelected.
Worst insurrection ever.
More shots fired at Trump's head.
The Devil now turns on Roper. How will he stand In the wind that will soon blow.
Adios Subway Jack. Probably fleeing the country sooner than later.
Double Secret Probation then!
Turn the tables, investigate, indict, arrest, prosecute, and punish all involved in the anti-American anti-Trump conspiracies, including demented tramp E Jean Carroll.
"...prosecutors will not be able to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his (alleged) efforts to undo the results of the 2020 presidential election (without evidence) as he prepares to re-enter the White House."
Fixed.
The goals were:
1: Get GOP Voters to pick Trump
2: Cause Trump to lose
As with 2016, the idiots were 1 for 2
Ballot Box beats Bullet and Lawfare.
No brainer and see through. Trump goes out with one last bang,pardoning himself,making the court and all spend the rest of his life trying to sort it out. DELAY DELAY DELAY the absolute MO of the convicted felon, he wil also get that resolved through his SCOTUS! EASY PEASY!
Indeed!!!
It’s gotten to the point that the NYT guys are sickening as they repeatedly croak like frogs that our President tried to overturn an election. They know the truth and eternally refuse to report it.
DJT filed lawsuits to stop the steal…all of which all courts refused to hear.
Meanwhile Pelosi, the FBI and the CIA created a Hollywood movie with paid extras to stampede a small part of the peaceful protesters into entering the Capital at the invitation of the police. ALL PROPAGANDA. JUST LIKE THE Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping. Charade.
Why is that idiocy in business??
56 days until Jack Smith is unemployed. Na na na na, hey hey, goodbye!
“I love that the fucking lawfare waged against Trump backfired and likely helped Trump get reelected.”
That’s what helps make this so very special. The grenade was chucked back in the rathole. How sweet it is!
The plan to keep Trump from office by non-political means failed and is unwise to continue at this point.
tHerE GoES OUr dEMoCRacY!"
Redditors are beside themselves lol. Though most the hate is for Merrick Garland.
Let's see if I understand this. The Democrats appointed a special prosecutor to prevent Trump from running for President in 2024. The prosecutor failed and the Democrats failed, and Trump was elected in 2024. Now can we all agree that NOBODY cares about what a special prosecutor says bout Trump after he leaves the Presidency in 2029?
Judge Chutkan promptly granted the motion and dismissed the case without prejudice.
Have prosecutors identified the people who brought the gallows on Jan 6th? We know who wore the funny hat. We heard about various grandmas tossed into the clink for just being there. But who were those involved in the most premeditated (because people don’t just conceal and carry gallows) act on Jan. 6th? Why aren’t they the face of that day?
"Now can we all agree that NOBODY cares about what a special prosecutor says bout Trump after he leaves the Presidency in 2029?"
They care; they have an irrational hatred. Trump's DOJ needs to prosecute these bastards or Trump needs to pardon himself, because they will follow their white whale to the ends of the Earth.
These Stalinist show trials helped re-elect Trump. That must cause great anguish to the government scum like Smith, Garland, and their henchmen. It is a victory of the people over the government scum that is greatly to be savored.
The punishment going forward must match the crimes these Chekist scum have committed. It must be so severe and inescapable as to put all government scum in fear of violating our civil rights for many generations to come.
My idea is this:
1) All career civil-servant scum in the Justice Department, or any other permanent government employee scum with involvement in the Get-Trump prosecution/persecution, must sign an affidavit under oath to keep their job. Former government employee scum are offered the opportunity to sign the same affidavit. The affidavit must either (a) attest to all pertinent details of participation in or knowledge of any crimes committed by the Get-Trump conspirators, and agree to testify in court about them, or (b) deny under penalty of perjury any participation in or knowledge of such crimes.
2) The Fifth Amendment obstacle to forcing this testimony is removed by granting the scum who signed these affidavits a pre-emptive pardon of all Federal crimes pertinent to the Get-Trump conspiracy, so long as they testify truthfully.
3) I believe the President or AG has the power to withhold the privilege of qualified immunity that protects government scum against civil suits filed by their victims for violations of their rights. This privilege should be permanently revoked for any government scum or former government scum who refuses to sign the affidavit. It should be provisionally revoked for those scum who do sign the affidavit, but the possibility of restoring it should be held out as a reward for the government scum who are the first to step forward and squeal on their co-conspirator scum.
---- (contiinued below) ----
---- (continued from above) ----
4) Appoint Matt Gaetz as a special investigator with no powers to bring charges and no need for Senate confirmation. The Gaetz Commission will take sworn testimony about the conspiracy from any of the scum who signed the affidavits, and offer it up to AG Bondi for prosecution when warranted.
5) In the name of governmental transparency, the Gaetz Commission will issue a detailed report publicizing the crimes of all the government scum involved in the conspiracy, whether or not they go to criminal trial.
6) The ringleaders and major malefactors must go to prison for decades. No expense shall be spared in prosecuting the scum. Restoring the peoples' faith in and supremacy over the government will become the #2 priority of the Justice Department, behind only the effort to prosecute the politician scum and NGO scum who have been violating Federal law on importing and harboring illegal aliens. Overlapping and duplicative charges will be stacked to the moon, to give the former prosecutor scum a taste of what they have been doing to the people for decades. Every effort will be made to bankrupt individual government scum via legal fees, again so they can feel the lash they made for others on their own worthless hides, even if they manage to escape criminal punishment.
7) Trump and Musk start a well funded foundation to finance a legal jihad against government scum who violate our civil rights under color of law. It will pay for lawyers to bring suit against all the government scum who are named in the Gaetz Report, on behalf of their many victims. The suits will go after the individual government scum by name, not their agencies, and qualified immunity will not apply, as mentioned previously. The lawyers will be junkyard dogs who will not settle out of court for relative peanuts, but work to strip the government scum of everything they own. It will file the suits in the jurisdictions where the victims live, so the government scum face expensive travel costs and hostile Oklahoma and Wyoming juries, not friendly local D.C. and Manhattan juries. I will donate heavily to such a foundation if it is set up.
It is within our grasp to deal the government scum a shattering blow that will remind them for the next thousand years that they are our lazy, untrustworthy hired help and not our masters. Let us go forth and do it.
Democrats selfie-aborted with prejudice. Karma-lic. Choice matters. Ironic.
That’s part of why Smith’s case falls apart. The basic problem with the case is that it was predicated on the rules that apply to everyone else, but likely not to the sitting President. Smith just assumed that those rules did apply to Trump, and never addressed his defense that they don’t. None of the documents that Trump was accused of taking were the original documents. The originals are the ones that the agencies control - both their possession and classification. What Trump had were legitimately made copies of those original documents. As the sitting President, was he authorized to have had those copies made? Of course. It’s done hundreds of times a day by or for the White House. So, the copies were legally in his possession when he left office. Who owed those copies at that point? Archives or Trump? The law is ambiguous, which defaults to Trump owning them. Which leaves whether or not he was entitled to possess the national security information in them. That then leads to the declassification implied in his order to ship them to MAL. DID he have the power to declassify them? Of course - he had plenary declassification authority while in office. The agencies could classify them however they wanted, but that is an Executive Branch decision, and Constitutionally he had plenary Executive Branch power. End of discussion - except that he still had a DOE Q clearance at the time the indictment was filed, after the FJB WH had helpfully ordered his security clearances revoked, so that they could file this suit.
Their essential argument was that you needed at least an X level security clearance to access X level documents. So, revoking his security clearances (never done before for a former President (and almost never with former high ranking EB employees, like SoS Clinton, CIA and FBI Directors, etc)) was key to Smith’s case. That maybe would have worked with anyone else. But not a former President like Trump.
"It is within our grasp to deal the government scum a shattering blow that will remind them for the next thousand years that they are our lazy, untrustworthy hired help and not our masters."
Slightly (with apologies) edited:
It is within our grasp to deal government personnel a shattering blow that will remind them for the next thousand years that they are our hired help and not our masters.
Now, show of hands- is there anybody here who disagrees with this idea?
“ Andy C. McCarthy said: documents that belong to "agencies" cannot be lawfully taken "home" by the President.”
Silly argument by McCarthy, if he ever made it. Presidents routinely take classified documents home with them while in office, since their home, by law, is the White House. And, as I pointed out above, Trump was never really charged with having classified documents, but rather the National Defense information in the lawfully created copies of those documents, as well as the copies themselves, in separate charges.
Smith will be fired on Trump's first day in office, if he hasn't already done so previously. If a Trumpist is elected in 2028 that will be the end of the matter.
If not, the Dem AG will have to have a huge set of stones to resuscitate the case, using a Special Prosecutor actually appointed by Congress.
Not being a lawyer I know nothing about the law concerning this other than what I read. Reference this from an article on PJ Media...Attorney and Article III founder Mike Davis says that "Jack Smith and his office must face severe legal, political, and financial consequences for their blatant lawfare and election interference. This includes a federal criminal probe for conspiracy against rights under 18 U.S.C. § 241."
“ Coulter said: everyone has to answer a subpoena.”
Yes, maybe. But you don’t necessarily produce the documents requested. A lot of reasons that you don’t is when the material is protected by privilege - such as Attorney/Client Attorney Work Product, Doctor/Patient, Priest/Penitent, etc privilege, or here Executive Privilege (again revoked by the FJB WH). But it turns out that Trump and his attorneys were cooperating with the DOJ here - just not quickly enough. They requested extensions of time, as well as rolling production. Both were denied by Deputy Special Prosecutor and DOJ Counterintelligence and Export Control Branch chief JayBratt. Which turns the question from being about refusing to respond to a subpoena, to whether the time frame set by Bratt was reasonable (arguably that it wasn’t), and whether they had the specific intent required for the alleged crime. And, yes, whether they had a reasonable expectation that their subpoena was justified and that that expectation was shared by Trump and his attorneys (which gets into Scienter - intent)
The posters floating plans for legal retribution against Trump's tormentors ignore his history of giving Hillary a free pass. Trump instinctively understands that the only remedy he can hope for is transparency. He can get to the documents that demonstrate the nefarious doings around Jan 6, crossfire hurricane, and the other schemes. That may, just may, delegitimize these careerist thugs. Not a sure thing. And btw --- forget having a DC jury stick it to a Dem.
The whole anti-Trump mania has left the legitimacy of our legal system in tatters. That was both a crime, and in a way a public service.
Bring it -
Add in Deputy Special Counsel and DOJ Counterintelligence and Export Control Branch (CECB) Chief Jay Bratt, who was the one, from the very start orchestrating the FL documents case. It has long been suspected that the real reason for the MAL raid was to seize the binder of incriminating documents formally ordered declassified by Trump his last full day-in office that disclosed misfeasance and malfeasance by Bratt’s CECB, as well theFBI’s Counterintelligence Division (who ran the MAL raid), in their RussiaGate, etc investigations. Interestingly, the binder of declassified documents was never mentioned. Was it seized in the MAL raid, and disappeared? Of course, we may never know, because Bratt and his people deniedTrump’s attorneys’ request to be present during the raid. If it can be shown that the binder wasnthere, and was disappeared, then the case goes from minor to major Obstruction of Justice, As well as being a predicate RICO offense. Should be interesting.
Let me clarify - the denial of Trump’s Attorney’s request to observe the MAL raid arguably becomes a criminal act, if it can be shown that the FBI seized, then disappeared, that declassified binder of documents.
All that saved Trump was his winning the election. If he had lost, the crazy NYC judge would've sentenced him to prison. And smith and the leftwing crazy DC judge Chunking would've found a leftwing jury and found Trump guilty of election interference or whatever the fuck he was charged with.
Democrat Lawfare would've gotten the biggest scalp since Nixon. And make no mistake, unless Trump pardons himself, or an R POTUS in elected in 2028, they will back in Jan 2029 to go after him.
Plus, it will be 8 years from when most of the alleged acts occurred, and most, if not all alleged act would be at least 5 years old, beyond te statute of limitations for mot, if not all, of the charges.
I suppose there's little chance Biden will be prosecuted for stealing classified documents from the BO administration (HE had no declassifying authority), but I'd like him indicted regardless, just to highlight the double standard in the media and the DoJ.
There's no point in continuing. Besides not being able to prosecute a sitting president, the charges were legally dubious at best, the point of the prosecution was to stop Trump's election (ironically, it had the opposite effect) and Smith and his team are all getting canned anyway on January 20.
"and most, if not all alleged act would be at least 5 years old, beyond te statute of limitations"
What about the Trump Exemption?
"If"?
Jack Smith needs a special prosecutor of his very own for the next four years.
I’ve worried about this propensity in him. It’s a mark of truly great men to be magnanimous with former enemies, but power needs to be securely consolidated and opponents made helpless before the forgiveness starts. Julius Caesar had this inclination too, and look what it got him.
I just hope that Althouse will have the integrity to call out Trump's use of Lawfare just as consistently and vociferously as she has Biden's alleged use of Lawfare.
I'm not holding my breath.
For all your hatred of commies and the Soviet Union, you all are sure hoping for Trump to use Soviet tactics to purge government employees.
“ Wasn't the statute of limitations passed on one of the NewYork cases they prosecuted anyways?”
Yes. Possibly. As with a lot of LawFare, the trick is that the cases usually would ultimately fail on Due Process grounds. But lower state courts often don’t |concern themselves a lot over those concerns. It’s only when cases get to the appeals level, and esp into federal courts. And in many cases, esp like this, the process is the punishment.
Granted this morning.
That will end January 20th. Right now the Biden administration is working tirelessly to get us into WW3.
So seeking justice for obvious wrongs is lawfare? Just want the dumbass perspective.
Althouse's concern were the indictments themselves. She didn't seem to care whether Trump had actually committed crimes or not.
Cite the law, Freder.
Post a Comment