CNN legal analyst says Special Counsel Jack Smith bent rules to get ‘cheap shot’ in on Trump before election

E

ExpressLane

Verified User

CNN legal analyst says Special Counsel Jack Smith bent rules to get ‘cheap shot’ in on Trump before election​


Special Counsel Jack Smith "bent ordinary procedure" to kneecap former President Trump after he failed to try the candidate before the November election, a legal analyst argued in a piece for New York magazine.


In Thursday's "Jack Smith's October Cheap Shot" essay, CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig analyzed Smith's decision to drop a 165-page federal court filing related to the issue of Trump's immunity from prosecution.

According to Honig, Smith successfully received permission from Judge Tanya Chutkan to file a 180-page-long brief — four times the normal maximum.

Honig noted that Chutkan now claims she does not care about the upcoming election despite earlier efforts to expedite Trump's immunity and get it in before Nov. 5. After redacting several names, she complied with Smith's request and made the rest of the brief public.

"The larger, if less obvious, headline is that Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he'll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump's electoral prospects. At this point, there's simply no defending Smith's conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis," Honig wrote.

He added that Smith's "unprincipled, norm-breaking practice" is neither a response nor an excuse to suggestions that voters should have the utmost information about presidential candidates before they cast their ballot.

In standard criminal procedure and under federal rules, a prosecutor first files an indictment, the defense makes a motion and then the prosecution responds to said motions. However, Honig said Smith turned these rules "on their head" when he asked Chutkan to file without a pending defense motion.

"Trump's team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith's request to file first was 'procedurally irregular' — moments before she ruled in Smith's favor, as she's done at virtually every consequential turn," Honig continued.

He stressed that Smith's proactive filing is "prejudicial" to Trump in the legal and political sense, but also ironic because Smith previously complained that Trump's words might taint the jury pool for the case.

Now, Smith is using grand-jury testimony, which often remains hidden at this stage of a case, and has drafted a massive document that "contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination."

Honig also claimed that Smith's conduct violates core Department of Justice principles and policy.


In his words, "If prosecutors bend their principles depending on the identity of their prey, then they've got no principles at all."....
=====================================
Even CNN realizes that unsealing of this document was an underhanded attempt at election interference. Jack Smith is the left's unprincipled political hit man. It isn't going to work.
 
ExpressLane said:

CNN legal analyst says Special Counsel Jack Smith bent rules to get ‘cheap shot’ in on Trump before election​


Special Counsel Jack Smith "bent ordinary procedure" to kneecap former President Trump after he failed to try the candidate before the November election, a legal analyst argued in a piece for New York magazine.


In Thursday's "Jack Smith's October Cheap Shot" essay, CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig analyzed Smith's decision to drop a 165-page federal court filing related to the issue of Trump's immunity from prosecution.

According to Honig, Smith successfully received permission from Judge Tanya Chutkan to file a 180-page-long brief — four times the normal maximum.

Honig noted that Chutkan now claims she does not care about the upcoming election despite earlier efforts to expedite Trump's immunity and get it in before Nov. 5. After redacting several names, she complied with Smith's request and made the rest of the brief public.

"The larger, if less obvious, headline is that Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he'll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump's electoral prospects. At this point, there's simply no defending Smith's conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis," Honig wrote.

He added that Smith's "unprincipled, norm-breaking practice" is neither a response nor an excuse to suggestions that voters should have the utmost information about presidential candidates before they cast their ballot.

In standard criminal procedure and under federal rules, a prosecutor first files an indictment, the defense makes a motion and then the prosecution responds to said motions. However, Honig said Smith turned these rules "on their head" when he asked Chutkan to file without a pending defense motion.

"Trump's team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith's request to file first was 'procedurally irregular' — moments before she ruled in Smith's favor, as she's done at virtually every consequential turn," Honig continued.

He stressed that Smith's proactive filing is "prejudicial" to Trump in the legal and political sense, but also ironic because Smith previously complained that Trump's words might taint the jury pool for the case.

Now, Smith is using grand-jury testimony, which often remains hidden at this stage of a case, and has drafted a massive document that "contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination."

Honig also claimed that Smith's conduct violates core Department of Justice principles and policy.


In his words, "If prosecutors bend their principles depending on the identity of their prey, then they've got no principles at all."....
=====================================
Even CNN realizes that unsealing of this document was an underhanded attempt at election interference. Jack Smith is the left's unprincipled political hit man. It isn't going to work.
Click to expand...
A Trumper complaining about someone doing things that are questionable...things that throw some shade on Trump.

ADORABLE!
Cute as a kitten...and just as sure to elicit a smile.
new-kitten.jpg
 
How quaint. Another thread that ignores the facts. Smith is doing exactly what the SC ordered him to do. Any reference to proximity to the election should be taken up with the S.C. who purposely sat on this for months.

Further, Smith released nothing to the public. He turned in a sealed document to the court. As ordered by the S.C.

CNN is very confused about its identity. They've moved Right in an attempt to get market share. I only serves to alienate its past core viewership, as every panel now contains at least one Right Wing loon. Not a Conservative/Republican who can have sane discussion. A full blown loon who parrots MAGA talking points during serious discussions.

If they thought they were going to absorb some of Fox's viewership, they are wrong.
 
Ross Dolan said:
A Trumper complaining about someone doing things that are questionable...things that throw some shade on Trump.

ADORABLE!
Cute as a kitten...and just as sure to elicit a smile.
Click to expand...
Rogue Supreme Court sits on a ruling for months to protect trump, and now MAGA cries about court proceedings so close to an election.

How cute.

And absolutely delicious.
 
ExpressLane said:

CNN legal analyst says Special Counsel Jack Smith bent rules to get ‘cheap shot’ in on Trump before election​


Special Counsel Jack Smith "bent ordinary procedure" to kneecap former President Trump after he failed to try the candidate before the November election, a legal analyst argued in a piece for New York magazine.


In Thursday's "Jack Smith's October Cheap Shot" essay, CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig analyzed Smith's decision to drop a 165-page federal court filing related to the issue of Trump's immunity from prosecution.

According to Honig, Smith successfully received permission from Judge Tanya Chutkan to file a 180-page-long brief — four times the normal maximum.

Honig noted that Chutkan now claims she does not care about the upcoming election despite earlier efforts to expedite Trump's immunity and get it in before Nov. 5. After redacting several names, she complied with Smith's request and made the rest of the brief public.

"The larger, if less obvious, headline is that Smith has essentially abandoned any pretense; he'll bend any rule, switch up on any practice — so long as he gets to chip away at Trump's electoral prospects. At this point, there's simply no defending Smith's conduct on any sort of principled or institutional basis," Honig wrote.

He added that Smith's "unprincipled, norm-breaking practice" is neither a response nor an excuse to suggestions that voters should have the utmost information about presidential candidates before they cast their ballot.

In standard criminal procedure and under federal rules, a prosecutor first files an indictment, the defense makes a motion and then the prosecution responds to said motions. However, Honig said Smith turned these rules "on their head" when he asked Chutkan to file without a pending defense motion.

"Trump's team objected, and the judge acknowledged that Smith's request to file first was 'procedurally irregular' — moments before she ruled in Smith's favor, as she's done at virtually every consequential turn," Honig continued.

He stressed that Smith's proactive filing is "prejudicial" to Trump in the legal and political sense, but also ironic because Smith previously complained that Trump's words might taint the jury pool for the case.

Now, Smith is using grand-jury testimony, which often remains hidden at this stage of a case, and has drafted a massive document that "contains all manner of damaging statements about a criminal defendant, made outside of a trial setting and without being subjected to the rules of evidence or cross-examination."

Honig also claimed that Smith's conduct violates core Department of Justice principles and policy.


In his words, "If prosecutors bend their principles depending on the identity of their prey, then they've got no principles at all."....
=====================================
Even CNN realizes that unsealing of this document was an underhanded attempt at election interference. Jack Smith is the left's unprincipled political hit man. It isn't going to work.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

Elie Honig is one hundred percent right.
 
Althea said:
Rogue Supreme Court sits on a ruling for months to protect trump, and now MAGA cries about court proceedings so close to an election.

How cute.

And absolutely delicious.
Click to expand...
YES they did and the American people deserve Justice and they denied it to them.
Justice delayed justice denied, It is time they got around to actually taking this to court and stop putting it off.
There have been too many right wing judges delaying this and if anything those judges delaying it should be called out as Election interference NOT finally getting it to trial.
Have a nice day
 
Tbird19482 said:
YES they did and the American people deserve Justice and they denied it to them.
Justice delayed justice denied, It is time they got around to actually taking this to court and stop putting it off.
There have been too many right wing judges delaying this and if anything those judges delaying it should be called out as Election interference NOT finally getting it to trial.
Have a nice day
Click to expand...
Even person deserves a FAIR trial. Unsealing these documents before a jury is selected taints the jury pool.
 
This violates Justice Dept. guidelines and was meant to affect the election.

Smith should be prosecuted for election interference.
 
Earl said:
Indeed.

Elie Honig is one hundred percent right.
Click to expand...
Bullshit

What Elie is bitching about is the timing, which is ironic given conservatives were perfectly content with Trump’s Supreme Court deliberately stonewalling any case, other than those that effected Trump positively, for months

And the Judge said right up front back in the beginning that the elections were not going delay any decision

Also it is via Fox, not CNN, Fox’s frame of a CNN contributor, a conservative contributor at that
 
archives said:
Bullshit

What Elie is bitching about is the timing, which is ironic given conservatives were perfectly content with Trump’s Supreme Court deliberately stonewalling any case, other than those that effected Trump positively, for months

And the Judge said right up front back in the beginning that the elections were not going delay any decision

Also it is via Fox, not CNN, Fox’s frame of a CNN contributor, a conservative contributor at that
Click to expand...
It is a direct quote from a CNN legal analyst and posted by FOX.

Refute the quote, the CNN legal analyst either said it or he didn’t, Anchovies.

Poor Anchovies.
 
archives said:
Bullshit

What Elie is bitching about is the timing, which is ironic given conservatives were perfectly content with Trump’s Supreme Court deliberately stonewalling any case, other than those that effected Trump positively, for months

And the Judge said right up front back in the beginning that the elections were not going delay any decision

Also it is via Fox, not CNN, Fox’s frame of a CNN contributor, a conservative contributor at that
Click to expand...
So direct quotes aren't good enough for you. :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top