Donald Trump once again in the crosshairs of the DOJ.

On October 2, 2024, a redacted version of Special Counsel Jack Smith's brief in the Donald Trump election subversion case was partially unsealed, possibly breathing new life into the DOJ's case. A ruling by the US Supreme Court, earlier, determined that, now former President Donald Trump, could not be prosecuted for official actions taken by him while in office, giving him immunity from prosecution for those actions. As a result, the Special Counsel had to reconstruct the case, in light of the SCOTUS decision, and the brief mentioned here was filed. Without getting into the appellate process or evidence specifics, I want to comment on what I have learned about certain aspects of this brief and Jack Smith's arguments set forth therein.


What follows is my own take on the subject and events, as I understand them, based on what I have read, and not on any personal connection or personal knowledge beyond that. I'm a concerned US citizen, and I am concerned about maintaining our Constitution and our democracy. Because I have an interest in politics, and because I graduated from law school in the mid 1980s, I have some thoughts I want to share.


First off, I'm very happy there is again some forward movement in this case. I see it as a important case, not only as it concerns Donald Trump's actions, but also because of the ramifications the outcome of this case may have for the actions of future Presidents and their ability to act with impunity, minus the threat of prosecution, based on the SCOTUS decision that a President of the United States can have immunity from prosecution for alleged wrongdoing, provided he or she is acting in his or her official capacity, while committing crimes. This is especially relevant, in my view, as we already have Donald Trump, a convicted criminal, found guilty on 34 felony counts, once again running for President of the United States. He has said, if elected again, he will pardon those convicted of crimes for the attempted overthrow of the United States government, which took place on January 6, 2021. For me, the implications of this total disregard for the law are enormous, and must be considered in any presidential immunity determination. I feel the SCOTUS was not at all forward thinking as to the future implications of their decision in terms of what official immunity from prosecution could mean for the precepts of the Constitution and the rule of law, in general. Both could easily be set aside, and dictatorship, anarchy or dissolution of our democracy could result, if a US President could act with impunity.


Following the decision of the SCOTUS, apparently, Jack Smith decided to take a different approach to the case, and in the brief, filed on October 2, 2024, he detailed, page after page, of evidence which he contends are instances of Donald Trump acting, not in his official capacity as President of the United States, but as a private person, and, in the process, committing alleged criminal acts, many of which have been outlined by legal analysts for mainstream news outlets. This brief, according to analysts, is detailed and replete with supporting documentation. I've read various references to the number of pages, somewhere between 160-180 pages. That is lengthy--more of a trial brief.


The next step will be for the judge in the case to determine which conversations and other occurrences are official actions, and which are personal actions of Donald Trump. What strikes me, forcefully, is we're looking at actions of Donald Trump, while still occupying the White House, he was engaging in conversations and activities involving deliberate efforts to overturn the results of a free and fair election. So, what he said, what he did, who he spoke with, and the context of every interaction during this time period is likely outlined in the brief, and my understanding is, all of this is supported with corroborating documentation.


I feel, as a country, we are most fortunate to have accomplished and dedicated public servants such as Jack Smith and members of his team who have research this matter and gathered the evidence and testimony about what happened during this time.


Of course, none of this will be decided prior to November 5, 2024, Election day. My guess is this case will go on and on. If the past is any indication, team Trump will submit motion after motion to delay justice. Donald Trump has the financial resources to do this. However, if I were someone who assisted Donald Trump with filing motions to subvert the election, and your name has not yet been revealed, it might be time to come clean about it and avoid more serious consequences before the whole truth comes out..


I'm reminded of what I believe is truly a spiritual law or a law of the universe. What goes around comes around. More of the truth is likely right there in the pages of that brief. It will be interesting to witness what happens in this case. And, I'll end with what I've felt for a very long time, and that is the hope that one day, in the not too distant future, we will see justice done.

Popular posts from this blog

Religiosity and strict boundaries concerning friendship.

Yesterday, I posted, on social media, about how I am reluctant to share with a friend of nearly five decades that I no longer identify as an evangelical Christian and have embraced Quakerism. The comments I received, in response to this, were mostly along the lines of ... if it were a true friendship, it wouldn't matter. On the surface, I agree with that statement, but it's a simplistic response, in my view. So, I wanted to delve more into this in a forum where I wasn't limited to a few sentences, and decided to address it here. I think I can illustrate this best in a life experience I had several years ago. A mother and her daughter and I worked in the same place. I liked them both, immediately, and as the years went by, we shared more of our personal lives, as one does when you get to know and trust one another. These women were also very nice to my life partner, and sought him out quite often when he came to pick me up from work, or joined me there on my lunch break. He
Read more

We either have separation of church and state or we don't.

One of many principles that baffles me about Christians who are also politically conservative is their unabashed effort to try and make the United States into what they term a "Christian nation." This desire is baffling to me since the reason the colonies were founded was to allow for freedom of religion, supposedly, the freedom to worship as one chooses, along with the right to not worship if one chooses, and the freedom of no state religion. The United States founding fathers were so concerned about this, that they incorporated this principle into the United States Constitution as a 1st Amendment guarantee. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This amendment was adopted
Read more

The party of gopers and gropers!

Senate Republicans block bill to protect Americans' access to contraception. These GOPERS are on a roll, don't ya know? In my opinion, they really want to throw women back into the 19th century, or even further back than that, if possible. The Senate vote on the Right To Contraception Act was 51-39, falling short of the 60 votes needed to defeat a filibuster. Republicans said the bill is unnecessary as the use of birth control is already protected under Supreme Court precedent. I believe this to be a lie. Many felt the right to abortion was also protected by SCOTUS precedent, and we all know what happened there, and what has happened in many red states, due to overzealous actions of Republican controlled state Legislatures seeking to control a woman's right to choose, and also allowing insurance companies to decline to pay for contraceptives. People who fail to see this trend in red states, I feel, are complicit in this effort, and should quickly turn their consciences back
Read more