Hi L.D., I believe the co-conspirators are still unnamed, but we think we know who they are. I' wondering if Jack Smith plans to move ahead with indictments against these six, and could then try to bring them to trial before the election. I believe Trump will see the election interference trial before or during the November 2024 election time-frame.
Hi L.D., I believe the co-conspirators are still unnamed, but we think we know who they are. I' wondering if Jack Smith plans to move ahead with indictments against these six, and could then try to bring them to trial before the election. I believe Trump will see the election interference trial before or during the November 2024 election time-frame.
You are correct Valerie. Smith would have to obtain a superseding indictment against the co-conspirators, all of whom could then be prosecuted, naming Trump as an un-indicted co-conspirator. Given the pre-trial motions though that we can expect them to then make, any subsequent trial of them would go far past the swearing in of Trump in January, 2025, should he be re-elected. Given that Trump would shut down the case, the more practical federal route would be the issuance of a Grand Jury report before Trump is sworn in. However, if Trump is not re-elected, it would be full speed ahead on the superseding indictment even if the Supreme Court rules that Trump is immune from prosecution. Such immunity would not extend to his co-conspirators.
The Georgia case, however, could still proceed uninhibited by Trump's re-election.
L.D., I am wondering if SCOTUS would be so openly politicized that they would ignore the 11 circuit appeals court impeccably stated rejection of TrumpтАШs immunity claim. My sense is if that happens (SCOTUS ruling immunity), the long awaited indictment of Ginny Thomas will soon come. Tommy Tuberville, Mike Johnson and Ginny Thomas are at the top of my list as conspirators for Jan 6. If Clarence Thomas does not then resign on GinnyтАЩs indictment, I think the American people will protest. IтАЩm only bringing this up as I ponder your statement about the Supreme Court ruling on immunity (something that тАШweтАЩ think is unlikely, but then we now seem to have a majority court that reverse engineers their decisions to see how they can get out of doing the right thing when it opposes Trump). When you say тАШif the Supreme Court rules that Trump is immune from prosecution,тАЩ what would be unlikely in a balanced court becomes a truly possible тАШifтАЩ in this one.
Hi Valere. I am still outraged that Thomas has not only not recused himself but was obviously the 5th needed vote to prevent Smith's case moving forward until the Supreme Court rules on Trump's specious immunity claim, the earliest of which would be in May, thereby giving Trump the added time he needs to stall for time until he thinks he'll be sworn in January.
Not only did SCOTUS do a solid for Trump on this case, but on the Colorado ballot case, as 3 justices noted, the hard-core far right extremists on the Court gratuitously went outside the bounds of judicial impartiality by gratuitously offering their opinion that Trump could not be barred under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment without a Congressional enabling statute. Legally, their opinions, referred to as "dicta", are worthless and are little less than shooting their mouths off to help Trump.
While I don't know if Ginny's complicity in the events surrounding Jan 6 rise to the level of criminal misconduct, they blatantly manifest not only the appearance of a conflict of interest for her husband, but an actual conflict of interest. He must recuse himself! If he doesn't, it is the responsibility of the Chief Justice to see that he does.
Hi L.D., Clarence Thomas is morally weak. Ginny is conniving - and I believe she offered her husband's influence to Mark Meadows and Donald Trump on January 6. She was so anxious to reach them, telling them over and over to 'press on' and 'don't give up.' She went to the January 6th committee (voluntarily after receiving their letter); and had no trouble claiming mea culpa and "I wish I had never sent the text messages." Of course.
Those messages are and were incriminating enough that Jack Smith can call for a Grand Jury investigation and let the Grand Jury decide if she warrants an indictment. Until then, Ginny and Clarence will continue to thumb their noses at us. And drive the motor home to Costco and home.
Your points are well taken, but I think IтАЩd go further on Clarence and call him totally morally bankrupt. WhatтАЩs worse, heтАЩs arrogant and believes heтАЩs untouchable in his lofty position. He knows that while he could be impeached, like Trump, the Republicans need him right where he is and the Senate would never come up with a two-thirds vote to convict.
I must say that I think it would be a stretch to successfully prosecute her. Also, Smith has a lot bigger fish to fry. I think heтАЩs brilliant. ItтАЩs just a shame that Garland waited so long to appoint a Special Prosecutor. I think that heтАЩll be the one going down in the history books as the guy who dropped the ball. LDM
I ageee about Clarence Thomas. He was never qualified as a Supreme Court justice. The fact that he was inserted as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall is an insult to anyone who has ever worked to further social justice. it was a terrible decision then and itтАЩs been horrific for the United States. Indeed, he is horrid and has harmed so many citizens with his pretend conservative votes. HeтАЩs a recipient of affirmative action and has taken that away. He is a minority yet he has come right out and said that he will vote to remove same-sex marriage rights (there is a bill in Hawaii now requesting a change to the constitution to offer protection for their same-sex marriage law simply because Clarence Thomas has been vocal about reversing same-sex marriage at this Supreme Court level. There is nothing concrete on which I can make this kind of suggestion or suspect his motives, but I wonder if heтАЩs working on getting another motorhome with these votes and promises to vote as the conservative puppet masters prefer.Or he may even be angling to get his own island, like Mike Johnson gained after he became speaker with only $30,000 in his bank account. Who could have guessed the value of a тАШpay for play тАШ vote.
Hi L.D., I believe the co-conspirators are still unnamed, but we think we know who they are. I' wondering if Jack Smith plans to move ahead with indictments against these six, and could then try to bring them to trial before the election. I believe Trump will see the election interference trial before or during the November 2024 election time-frame.
You are correct Valerie. Smith would have to obtain a superseding indictment against the co-conspirators, all of whom could then be prosecuted, naming Trump as an un-indicted co-conspirator. Given the pre-trial motions though that we can expect them to then make, any subsequent trial of them would go far past the swearing in of Trump in January, 2025, should he be re-elected. Given that Trump would shut down the case, the more practical federal route would be the issuance of a Grand Jury report before Trump is sworn in. However, if Trump is not re-elected, it would be full speed ahead on the superseding indictment even if the Supreme Court rules that Trump is immune from prosecution. Such immunity would not extend to his co-conspirators.
The Georgia case, however, could still proceed uninhibited by Trump's re-election.
L.D., I am wondering if SCOTUS would be so openly politicized that they would ignore the 11 circuit appeals court impeccably stated rejection of TrumpтАШs immunity claim. My sense is if that happens (SCOTUS ruling immunity), the long awaited indictment of Ginny Thomas will soon come. Tommy Tuberville, Mike Johnson and Ginny Thomas are at the top of my list as conspirators for Jan 6. If Clarence Thomas does not then resign on GinnyтАЩs indictment, I think the American people will protest. IтАЩm only bringing this up as I ponder your statement about the Supreme Court ruling on immunity (something that тАШweтАЩ think is unlikely, but then we now seem to have a majority court that reverse engineers their decisions to see how they can get out of doing the right thing when it opposes Trump). When you say тАШif the Supreme Court rules that Trump is immune from prosecution,тАЩ what would be unlikely in a balanced court becomes a truly possible тАШifтАЩ in this one.
Hi Valere. I am still outraged that Thomas has not only not recused himself but was obviously the 5th needed vote to prevent Smith's case moving forward until the Supreme Court rules on Trump's specious immunity claim, the earliest of which would be in May, thereby giving Trump the added time he needs to stall for time until he thinks he'll be sworn in January.
Not only did SCOTUS do a solid for Trump on this case, but on the Colorado ballot case, as 3 justices noted, the hard-core far right extremists on the Court gratuitously went outside the bounds of judicial impartiality by gratuitously offering their opinion that Trump could not be barred under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment without a Congressional enabling statute. Legally, their opinions, referred to as "dicta", are worthless and are little less than shooting their mouths off to help Trump.
While I don't know if Ginny's complicity in the events surrounding Jan 6 rise to the level of criminal misconduct, they blatantly manifest not only the appearance of a conflict of interest for her husband, but an actual conflict of interest. He must recuse himself! If he doesn't, it is the responsibility of the Chief Justice to see that he does.
Hi L.D., Clarence Thomas is morally weak. Ginny is conniving - and I believe she offered her husband's influence to Mark Meadows and Donald Trump on January 6. She was so anxious to reach them, telling them over and over to 'press on' and 'don't give up.' She went to the January 6th committee (voluntarily after receiving their letter); and had no trouble claiming mea culpa and "I wish I had never sent the text messages." Of course.
Those messages are and were incriminating enough that Jack Smith can call for a Grand Jury investigation and let the Grand Jury decide if she warrants an indictment. Until then, Ginny and Clarence will continue to thumb their noses at us. And drive the motor home to Costco and home.
V
Your points are well taken, but I think IтАЩd go further on Clarence and call him totally morally bankrupt. WhatтАЩs worse, heтАЩs arrogant and believes heтАЩs untouchable in his lofty position. He knows that while he could be impeached, like Trump, the Republicans need him right where he is and the Senate would never come up with a two-thirds vote to convict.
I must say that I think it would be a stretch to successfully prosecute her. Also, Smith has a lot bigger fish to fry. I think heтАЩs brilliant. ItтАЩs just a shame that Garland waited so long to appoint a Special Prosecutor. I think that heтАЩll be the one going down in the history books as the guy who dropped the ball. LDM
I ageee about Clarence Thomas. He was never qualified as a Supreme Court justice. The fact that he was inserted as a replacement for Thurgood Marshall is an insult to anyone who has ever worked to further social justice. it was a terrible decision then and itтАЩs been horrific for the United States. Indeed, he is horrid and has harmed so many citizens with his pretend conservative votes. HeтАЩs a recipient of affirmative action and has taken that away. He is a minority yet he has come right out and said that he will vote to remove same-sex marriage rights (there is a bill in Hawaii now requesting a change to the constitution to offer protection for their same-sex marriage law simply because Clarence Thomas has been vocal about reversing same-sex marriage at this Supreme Court level. There is nothing concrete on which I can make this kind of suggestion or suspect his motives, but I wonder if heтАЩs working on getting another motorhome with these votes and promises to vote as the conservative puppet masters prefer.Or he may even be angling to get his own island, like Mike Johnson gained after he became speaker with only $30,000 in his bank account. Who could have guessed the value of a тАШpay for play тАШ vote.