Special Counsel Report Says Trump Would Have Been Convicted in Election Case

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Special Counsel Report Says Trump Would Have Been Convicted in Election Case

The report, which said the special counsel’s office stood “fully behind” the merits of the prosecution, amounted to an extraordinary rebuke of the president-elect.

www.nytimes.com

Jack Smith, the special counsel who indicted President-elect Donald J. Trump on charges of illegally seeking to cling to power after losing the 2020 election, said in a final report released early Tuesday that the evidence would have been sufficient to convict Mr. Trump in a trial, had his 2024 election victory not made it impossible for the prosecution to continue.​

​

“The department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a president 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 office stands fully behind,” Mr. Smith wrote.​

​

He continued: “Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.”​

​

The Justice Department delivered the 137-page volume — representing half of Mr. Smith’s overall final report, with the volume about Mr. Trump’s other federal case, accusing him of mishandling classified documents, still confidential — to Congress just after midnight on Tuesday.​

​

Convicted-Felon-In-Chief.

 

[essentialsaltes]

The report reveals that prosecutors also considered charging Trump with violating the Civil War-era Insurrection Act ... Smith said prosecutors felt they had enough evidence to prove Trump had provoked the Jan. 6 attack but opted not to charge him with insurrection because they had no modern precedent to guide them and believed the other charges Trump faced were sufficient.

“The Office did not find any case in which a criminal defendant was charged with insurrection for acting within the government to maintain power, as opposed to overthrowing it or thwarting it from the outside,” the report says.

In case law interpreting “insurrection" in another context, one court has observed that an
insurrection typically involves overthrowing a sitting government, rather than maintaining
power, which could pose another challenge to proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr.
Trump's conduct on January 6 qualified as an insurrection given that he was the sitting President
at that time.

--

Sounds like a loophole that Congress should address with specific legislation.

 

[KCfromNC]

Sounds like a loophole that Congress should address with specific legislation.

Right after they get done with investigating those nude pictures of Hunter Biden. Priorities, you know.

 

[Servus]

Aw too bad it went nowhere.

 

[Nithavela]

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Aw too bad it went nowhere.

That's an egregious understatement. The prosecution should have moved forward regardless of convcted felon Trump's (that was just for you, boo! ) electoral status.

 

[Servus]

That's an egregious understatement. The prosecution should have moved forward regardless of convcted felon Trump's (that was just for you, boo! ) electoral status.

Apparently it's really hard to move forward with a farce. Case in point, he was sentenced only four days ago for something that started back in 2006.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Apparently it's really hard to move forward with a farce. Case in point, he was sentenced only four days ago for something that started back in 2006.

No crimes were involved until Trump started falsifying business documents in 2017.

 

[Servus]

No crimes were involved until Trump started falsifying business documents in 2017.

Oh yeah, 2017 was only a mere 7 years ago.

 

[NxNW]

Oh yeah, 2017 was only a mere 7 years ago.

The additional charges should keep for four years then.

 

[BPPLEE]

Special Counsel Report Says Trump Would Have Been Convicted in Election Case

The report, which said the special counsel’s office stood “fully behind” the merits of the prosecution, amounted to an extraordinary rebuke of the president-elect.

www.nytimes.com

Jack Smith, the special counsel who indicted President-elect Donald J. Trump on charges of illegally seeking to cling to power after losing the 2020 election, said in a final report released early Tuesday that the evidence would have been sufficient to convict Mr. Trump in a trial, had his 2024 election victory not made it impossible for the prosecution to continue.​

​

“The department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a president 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 office stands fully behind,” Mr. Smith wrote.​

​

He continued: “Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the presidency, the office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.”​

​

The Justice Department delivered the 137-page volume — representing half of Mr. Smith’s overall final report, with the volume about Mr. Trump’s other federal case, accusing him of mishandling classified documents, still confidential — to Congress just after midnight on Tuesday.​

​

Convicted-Felon-In-Chief.

What else is he going to say, it's his case.

 

[Servus]

The additional charges should keep then.

What additional charges.

 

[BPPLEE]

No crimes were involved until Trump started falsifying business documents in 2017.

How did that affect the 2016 election?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

The world all ready know Trump is responsible for January 6th. And other things. Trump wasn't slick about it. And doesn't care that he deceived people. While the world was watching people defending him.

 

[essentialsaltes]

How did that affect the 2016 election?

Trump was not charged with that.

But since you ask...

Michael Cohen paid off Stormy Daniels just before the election... out of the goodness of his heart.

 

[BPPLEE]

Trump was not charged with that.

But since you ask...

Michael Cohen paid off Stormy Daniels just before the election... out of the goodness of his heart.

I thought it was a campaign finance violation that allowed the DA to make it a felony,
Oh yeah I forgot it was pick and choose a felony and the jury didn't have to agree which felony so we don't know what the crime was

 

[perplexed]

I have linked a discussion note that fake slates of electors are brought up at 3:49
but the trump supporter resorts to the usual strategy of ignoring it.

 

[Arcangl86]

I mean what else would you expect him to say? DoJ policies require that a criminal prosecution only be brought if the prosecutor believes that the admissible evidence is likely to result in a conviction.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I thought it was a campaign finance violation

Trump was not charged with that or with "affecting the 2016 election".

 

[BPPLEE]

Trump was not charged with that or with "affecting the 2016 election".

Law Professor: The Manhattan District Attorney’s Convoluted Legal Case Against Donald Trump Gets More Convoluted

To request an interview with Professor Germain, please contact Ellen James Mbuqe, executive director of media relations, at ejmbuqe@syr.edu. By Gregory Germain, Professor of Law, Syracuse University College of Law. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has charged Donald Trump with a “Class E”...

news.syr.edu