Trump Criminal & Civil Cases | Smith Report on J6 Case Released

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 619
  • Views: 16K
  • Politics 
Why don't more people sue Trump for defamation? Merchan could, and he would win, because calling someone corrupt and crooked is, IIRC, defamation per se.

From what I've seen, suing Trump and his coterie seems to be a fairly easy way to make a lot of $$.
 
superrific said:
Why don't more people sue Trump for defamation? Merchan could, and he would win, because calling someone corrupt and crooked is, IIRC, defamation per se.

From what I've seen, suing Trump and his coterie seems to be a fairly easy way to make a lot of $$.
Click to expand...
Fairly easy way to get judgments for a lot of money, but how much has really been collected? And not just from Trump. Rudy continues to dodge paying what he owes and for the most part succeeding. Running out the clock until his liver fails.
 
nycfan said:
Fairly easy way to get judgments for a lot of money, but how much has really been collected? And not just from Trump. Rudy continues to dodge paying what he owes and for the most part succeeding. Running out the clock until his liver fails.
Click to expand...
Well, that's a problem for Ruby Freeman's lawyers (I don't remember the other woman's name). I'm confident they will collect. It will be easier when Rudy kicks the bucket.

Trump will eventually have to pay up.
 




“… In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garlandsent Monday, Trump’s lawyers said they were allowed to review Smith’s report in the criminal case in which Trump was charged with conspiring to keep classified documents after he left office.

They threatened legal action if it is released, noting Smith’s findings include strongly worded allegations that Trump “engaged in an unprecedented criminal effort” and describe him as “the head of the criminal conspiracies.”

Trump’s lawyers argued Smith’s report amounts to little more than a “politically-motivated attack” and that making public his findings in the classified documents case or an election interference case Smith also pursue would illegally interfere with Trump’s presidential transition.

… To that end, they said Smith’s findings contain “baseless attacks on other anticipated members of President Trump’s incoming administration, which are an obvious effort to interfere with upcoming confirmation hearings.” …”
 

Trump seeks to stop Smith releasing final report​


“… Smith responded in a court filingTuesday that it will be up to Garland to decide whether any part of the report will be released to the public.

  • While Garland has not yet reached a decision, if he does chose to release any part of the report pertaining to the classified documents case, he won't do so before Jan. 10, Smith wrote.
  • Smith added that he wouldn't submit his report to Garland until later Tuesday and would file a response to the defendants' motion Tuesday evening.
Driving the news: Both Trump's attorneys and lawyers for Nauta and De Oliveira wrote in the Monday letter that they reviewed a two-volume draft report in a conference room at Smith's office in Washington, D.C., from Friday to Monday. …”

IMG_4453.jpeg
 
Basically, Trump’s attorneys are threatening the outgoing AG with criminal prosecution by the incoming AG.
 
For the record, federal regulations address this very issue squarely and directly:

CFR 600.8: "At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel."

CFR 600.9: "The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest,"

I don't even know what Trump's lawyers are arguing. Probably nothing -- just more of their sound-and-fury litigation nonsense that, in a sane world, would end with their disbarment.
 
Will be just like the Mueller report, one sided without due process cross
Nothing on the planet Earth has been more comprehensively explained than Jack Smith’s charging decisions
And he is a legally disqualified special prosecutor regarding trump
Pure politics
 
Last edited:
In an extraordinary development, the Appellate Division, First Department, scheduled oral argument at 12:30 p.m. on President-elect Trump’s appeal of Judge Juan Merchan’s rejection of his immunity claims and order that Trump be sentenced this Friday afternoon.
 
We are talking about the stolen documents case right? The one sure case that should have been prosecuted quicker, and easily provable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top