While the Anti-Trumpers claim that the Judge is in the tank for the former POTUS, it looks to me like SCO Jack Smith's failure to do his job as required by law is the cause for the delay.
I love your lucid ( and to this layman, simple) explanation of complex legal issues surrounding the prosecution. Bravo, keep up the good work and thanks for all you do for any held unjustly for January 6th.
It’s so hard to accept that all of our institutions are thoroughly corrupted.
In Sundance’s (TheLastRefuge, pretty sure you know the blog) daily “resistance’ post there is a comment at the ‘top’, the twelve steps of a battered conservative (paraphrasing). The more I see the more I understand the truth of the label.
It must be especially hard for one who took the oath, dedicated your life, strived for excellence, applied a single set of values and principles, to see your life’s work undone by people who don’t know or ignore history.
In our case I see a blend of the Bolsheviks, the French revolutionaries*, Mao’s youth movement…and I guess Mussolini with an actual fascistic structure in place. None of these movements turned out the way the instigators supposedly hoped.
I assert that the striving for, the search for, Utopia is the most dangerous force on Earth.
Thank you for your efforts doing your part to preserve our Republic.
*I recently heard an apt distinction that I repeat as often as I can: the Colonies fought a war of independence, vs the French, who mounted a revolution.
Thanks. Extremely interesting analysis. For most of us, the concept of White House involvement at the outset of this investigation just "really stinks." I appreciate your "exploded view" of the fine legal gears that transmit WH and NARA invovlement into a single extremely specific discovery motion and how it precludes early trial. I suspect other ramifications may arise. I also appreciate the refresher on "prosecution team" rules and how 11th compares to DC. I've been out of crim law and semi-retired for 15 years.
Is there legal ground for protecting the Nominee of the opposition party from being forced to sit in court instead of campaigning, and at what point does that reprieve begin? At six months, daily Intelligence briefings are supposed to begin for the nominee, so that could be reasonable. At some point it reasonably becomes election interference. Likewise, if he were President elect, he would have to build his administration and transfer power. At that point whether he called for dual electors in 2020 will be much ado about nothing.
OK... so, the Florida case won't be going to trial, at a minimum, before the elections and you have argued that the DC case, because it was filed after the Florida case (and Smith pissed off the Florida judge) and Trump couldn't be forced to use his legal team on two competing federal trials, that the FL judge would just keep the trial date in place and slide it as needed so that the DC case can't jump the line and become the controller of the trial calendar.
But now, we have what looks like a more than just a schedule slide in FL, although maybe not, so that opens up the possibility that the DC case could jump the line and get in front of the FL case. But, the DC case is on hold until after the SCOTUS rules on immunity (let alone the 1512(c) challenge), something that will likely not be before the end of June. But, even if it isn't a full finding for immunity SCOTUS could send it back to the lower court to determine private vs public duties (assuming there's a bright line separating them) after which the defense could once again and challenge the rulings.
Since you said in the article that only the NY cases might come close to finishing up in the courts before November... is what I wrote above even close to the reasons why the DC will likely not be able to jump the line and get in front of the FL documents case or, can it?
All that being said, by November the current crop of cases could very well be against the President-Elect, and or President, and... well, heck, that could be the end of it right there, couldn't it?
I’m following all these cases as you are, and pondering the trial date changes due to the SCOTUS decisions, and how many will remain standing. Dems should have started on Inauguration Day.
I noted something similar to Trump, Barr, the Durham investigation. We on the right wanted the cases brought to a finish by election day but, given when they started, the investigational time, the trials, and appeals process there was no way the process could have ended by election day 2020.
These things take time, everyone needs to accept and, if possible, use that information to reach the end in the time we have for the task.
Although, I suspect that the left, ignoring how things might go sideways or south, felt that the process alone was sufficient to give them an edge in the 2024 elections.
At some point it becomes election interference, given that the Nominees need to actually run a vigorous campaign for the Electorate to keep the franchise. I hope SCOTUS is observing the chaos that results from an assumed lack of immunity in the performance of functions he has assumed under oath.
I've given a lot of thought to this. At DOJ all employment is "At Will". Prosecutors for the most part do not enjoy "Civil Service" protection. Everyone is subject to re-assignment away form the positions they have. It is easy to make them feel "unwanted" and dictate the priorties in such a way as they are forced to do work that doesn't appeal to them.
Re the FBI, it is more a matter of recruiting. To change the workforce you need to start with hiring. The recruitment priorities changed DRAMATICALLY during the Obama Admin. and the FBI workforce today is a reflection of those changed priorities. The correction is easy, but not quick. What would be quick is a complete re-orientation of the mission -- take away from the social justice warriors the part of the parts of the mission that are so important to them.
The management of both institutions decides what the workforce is going to work on. Changing management at all levels is the first step.
Anecdote -- in the 1990s the SF US Attorney's Office was famously dysfunctional. It was an office where good investigations went to die, and nothing of significance ever got done.
The first US Attorney under Clinton was a guy named Michael Yamaguchi -- complete failure.
To shock the office into consciousness, the Clinton WH followed Eric Holder's recommendation (he was Dep. AG) and named Robert Mueller as "interim U.S. Attorney).
After being in the office for one week and evaluating everyone, Mueller sent out a NATIONWIDE email to all DOJ attorneys -- he was accepting applications from anyone interested in being a supervisor in SF. Every existing supervisor in the office had to reapply for their positions, and Mueller considered others from around the country for every spot. My recollection is that only 1 out of 17 supervisors kept their positions. The others all went back to being line prosecutors.
During my 25 years in law enforcement I experienced many occasions where I could “fudge a bit” because I knew that our suspect had committed numerous uncharged previous felonies. Fortunately, I never followed through with the effort because it was just plain wrong. It galls me that that attitude seems to have fallen by the wayside. Thanks, Ship, for your understandable explanation of this complex case.
Very lawyerly but very simple to understand. Your insights and knowledge are much appreciated in helping us get a handle on this ongoing madness. I walk away hopeful as well.
I love your lucid ( and to this layman, simple) explanation of complex legal issues surrounding the prosecution. Bravo, keep up the good work and thanks for all you do for any held unjustly for January 6th.
SWC, the postscript: 🔥🎯
It’s so hard to accept that all of our institutions are thoroughly corrupted.
In Sundance’s (TheLastRefuge, pretty sure you know the blog) daily “resistance’ post there is a comment at the ‘top’, the twelve steps of a battered conservative (paraphrasing). The more I see the more I understand the truth of the label.
It must be especially hard for one who took the oath, dedicated your life, strived for excellence, applied a single set of values and principles, to see your life’s work undone by people who don’t know or ignore history.
In our case I see a blend of the Bolsheviks, the French revolutionaries*, Mao’s youth movement…and I guess Mussolini with an actual fascistic structure in place. None of these movements turned out the way the instigators supposedly hoped.
I assert that the striving for, the search for, Utopia is the most dangerous force on Earth.
Thank you for your efforts doing your part to preserve our Republic.
*I recently heard an apt distinction that I repeat as often as I can: the Colonies fought a war of independence, vs the French, who mounted a revolution.
Thanks. Extremely interesting analysis. For most of us, the concept of White House involvement at the outset of this investigation just "really stinks." I appreciate your "exploded view" of the fine legal gears that transmit WH and NARA invovlement into a single extremely specific discovery motion and how it precludes early trial. I suspect other ramifications may arise. I also appreciate the refresher on "prosecution team" rules and how 11th compares to DC. I've been out of crim law and semi-retired for 15 years.
Is there legal ground for protecting the Nominee of the opposition party from being forced to sit in court instead of campaigning, and at what point does that reprieve begin? At six months, daily Intelligence briefings are supposed to begin for the nominee, so that could be reasonable. At some point it reasonably becomes election interference. Likewise, if he were President elect, he would have to build his administration and transfer power. At that point whether he called for dual electors in 2020 will be much ado about nothing.
Great article.
OK... so, the Florida case won't be going to trial, at a minimum, before the elections and you have argued that the DC case, because it was filed after the Florida case (and Smith pissed off the Florida judge) and Trump couldn't be forced to use his legal team on two competing federal trials, that the FL judge would just keep the trial date in place and slide it as needed so that the DC case can't jump the line and become the controller of the trial calendar.
But now, we have what looks like a more than just a schedule slide in FL, although maybe not, so that opens up the possibility that the DC case could jump the line and get in front of the FL case. But, the DC case is on hold until after the SCOTUS rules on immunity (let alone the 1512(c) challenge), something that will likely not be before the end of June. But, even if it isn't a full finding for immunity SCOTUS could send it back to the lower court to determine private vs public duties (assuming there's a bright line separating them) after which the defense could once again and challenge the rulings.
Since you said in the article that only the NY cases might come close to finishing up in the courts before November... is what I wrote above even close to the reasons why the DC will likely not be able to jump the line and get in front of the FL documents case or, can it?
All that being said, by November the current crop of cases could very well be against the President-Elect, and or President, and... well, heck, that could be the end of it right there, couldn't it?
I’m following all these cases as you are, and pondering the trial date changes due to the SCOTUS decisions, and how many will remain standing. Dems should have started on Inauguration Day.
I noted something similar to Trump, Barr, the Durham investigation. We on the right wanted the cases brought to a finish by election day but, given when they started, the investigational time, the trials, and appeals process there was no way the process could have ended by election day 2020.
These things take time, everyone needs to accept and, if possible, use that information to reach the end in the time we have for the task.
Although, I suspect that the left, ignoring how things might go sideways or south, felt that the process alone was sufficient to give them an edge in the 2024 elections.
At some point it becomes election interference, given that the Nominees need to actually run a vigorous campaign for the Electorate to keep the franchise. I hope SCOTUS is observing the chaos that results from an assumed lack of immunity in the performance of functions he has assumed under oath.
How do we deal with this takeover of the DOJ and FBI? How does a nation recover from this level of infiltration and corruption?
I've given a lot of thought to this. At DOJ all employment is "At Will". Prosecutors for the most part do not enjoy "Civil Service" protection. Everyone is subject to re-assignment away form the positions they have. It is easy to make them feel "unwanted" and dictate the priorties in such a way as they are forced to do work that doesn't appeal to them.
Re the FBI, it is more a matter of recruiting. To change the workforce you need to start with hiring. The recruitment priorities changed DRAMATICALLY during the Obama Admin. and the FBI workforce today is a reflection of those changed priorities. The correction is easy, but not quick. What would be quick is a complete re-orientation of the mission -- take away from the social justice warriors the part of the parts of the mission that are so important to them.
The management of both institutions decides what the workforce is going to work on. Changing management at all levels is the first step.
Anecdote -- in the 1990s the SF US Attorney's Office was famously dysfunctional. It was an office where good investigations went to die, and nothing of significance ever got done.
The first US Attorney under Clinton was a guy named Michael Yamaguchi -- complete failure.
To shock the office into consciousness, the Clinton WH followed Eric Holder's recommendation (he was Dep. AG) and named Robert Mueller as "interim U.S. Attorney).
After being in the office for one week and evaluating everyone, Mueller sent out a NATIONWIDE email to all DOJ attorneys -- he was accepting applications from anyone interested in being a supervisor in SF. Every existing supervisor in the office had to reapply for their positions, and Mueller considered others from around the country for every spot. My recollection is that only 1 out of 17 supervisors kept their positions. The others all went back to being line prosecutors.
That's how you make changes in very little time.
Thank you for your reply. Gives me a crumb of hope.
If only we had something besides Republicans to work with.
Thank you for your insight and knowledge.
Your work is an absolute good.
Keep fighting, please.
During my 25 years in law enforcement I experienced many occasions where I could “fudge a bit” because I knew that our suspect had committed numerous uncharged previous felonies. Fortunately, I never followed through with the effort because it was just plain wrong. It galls me that that attitude seems to have fallen by the wayside. Thanks, Ship, for your understandable explanation of this complex case.
"THEY DON'T KNOW A DIFFERENT PARADIGM." Succinct and brilliant. Moreover, they are utterly deaf to the possibility of any other paradigm.
Very lawyerly but very simple to understand. Your insights and knowledge are much appreciated in helping us get a handle on this ongoing madness. I walk away hopeful as well.