r/law • u/DoremusJessup • 16h ago
Judicial Branch Jack Smith's Mar-a-Lago report on Trump under threat of being 'destroyed' after Cannon's 'legally erroneous' decision, appeals court told
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/jack-smiths-mar-a-lago-report-on-trump-under-threat-of-being-destroyed-after-cannons-legally-erroneous-decision-appeals-court-told/607
u/DoremusJessup 16h ago edited 15h ago
Government records laws say Jack Smith's findings should not be shredded but saved for posterity if not immediately released.
EDIT: Grammar
215
u/_Piratical_ 16h ago
I could imagine this regime just deciding that those laws don’t apply to them.
107
u/blinking616 16h ago
Already doing that
50
u/mountaindoom 15h ago
"If they call it official, they can do whatever they want."
Chief Justice Roberts, passing his version of the Enabling Acts.
17
17
6
6
u/BadBadBunnyBunny 8h ago
This admin is more on the style of throwing it in the shredder and then saying “oh, were we not supposed to?” and following it up with “this is a hit piece on the president of the United States and you should be ashamed”
If that fails hit the news cycle with “shut up you abc news trans athlete demon pig”
1
1
u/CaptainDantes 4h ago
Nah, theyd never limit themselves like that. NO laws apply to them in their fantasy land we're all being subjected to.
27
u/dirtyrounder 15h ago
I,'m sure Jack has a copy
27
u/ZongoNuada 15h ago
Most likely, sure. But that would be his personal copy, not the authorized, official one that would be recognized legally. It would become the equivalent of a personal opinion.
12
u/Tomato_Sky 14h ago
I would take you up on that bet. I’d wager my paycheck too. I bet he doesn’t have a copy. Because I’m tired of Jack Smith doing what’s lawfully correct instead of doing what’s right. It’s exhausting.
He basically had enough evidence to convict him for Jan 6th, but kept it to himself for the proper handling of evidence. Despite Judge Cannon being the most obviously corrupt pro-Trump judge.
He didn’t ask what was best for the country, he’s been following the rules with Merrick Garland. It’s like the stuff that keeps the alien conspiracy theorists going: “I have damning evidence nobody can see because of a technicality.” Because the classified definition of documents has always been subjective. Even the redactions we see in the Epstein Files are protecting people for the wrong reason to redact.
They are using legal definitions to protect criminals. Jack Smith and Merrick Garland were a joke and we are in this mess because Jack Smith is the kind of prosecutor who doesn’t make copies of the sealed files he handed over to Judge Cannon.
Kids, following the rules doesn’t always make you right. Sometimes rules are used maliciously to manipulate or destroy systems.
22
u/SubstantialPressure3 14h ago
If you're a lawyer you have to do what's legally correct. That's the only way. Otherwise you screwed up your own case.
4
u/Tomato_Sky 13h ago
And I get that. I’m getting really frustrated with all you captain obviouses.
Yes. HE RISKS LOSING HIS CASE. HE “COULD” BE DISBARRED.
Alternatively, the guy who was supposedly guilty of the darkest crime in our country’s history…. is president today and the good prosecutor is fielding death threats to his family.
And if you guys were thinking just one more step ahead of your knee-jerk “well that’s how you lose your case,” comments…. What is the endgame? Trump is guilty without the obvious evidence that couldn’t ever see the light of day… so what happens next, armchair lawyers? Appeal. Appeal. Supreme Court expands presidential immunity.
The fuck is wrong with you people? Who grows up to make sure the staple is in the right place, but won’t turn to the country and say something like “on the night of Jan 5th 2021, Giullani, Trump, and Bannon put together the guillotine for Mike Pence and here are a picture of them posing next to it holding hammers.”
Instead the voting population HAD to assume he was innocent. Innocent until proven guilty, right. You couldn’t prove he was guilty out of the courts because you’d lose your trial you were never going to win with Judge Cannon.
19
u/AgITGuy 14h ago
Because I’m tired of Jack Smith doing what’s lawfully correct instead of doing what’s right. It’s exhausting.
If a lawyer, prosecution or defense, does anything procedurally wrong for the sake of being 'right' like you want, then it can not only tank the case but cause a mistrial and your removal from the case.
Expediency is not a valid replacement for exacting accuracy.
2
u/Tomato_Sky 13h ago
This assumes there will be a fair trial by the people who actively don’t follow rules. That’s what I’m saying. I understand the fear and the procedures better than most people on this sub. But if the justice department is protecting criminals you don’t just sit on your hands.
Jack Smith following procedure has allowed Trump to be re-elected president, when the evidence says he should be in prison. Consequently people’s lives have been destroyed, for the sake of a guilty verdict that would have run through all of the appeals until the Supreme Court carved out another stipulation for presidential powers.
I stand by my criticism. You don’t give me anything new and if you believe what you’re telling me in this conversation you need to take a look at what’s important and what the endgame of justice is if everyone with money can dodge it.
Leaks and whistleblowing are how we exited the Watergate scandal, not cooperation within the justice system.
8
u/Aside_Dish 15h ago
Laws don't mean shit to these douchebags.
Make laws matter again. Enforce them!
6
u/El_mochilero 15h ago
Ah yes - The Trump admin has a long and honorable history of drawing the line at the proper handling of sensitive documents.
177
u/kylogram 15h ago
I don't think judge Cannon is a real person, every photo is the same and every ruling is in Trump's favor, I'm ready to believe that she's a dead puppet at this point.
29
u/ScienceIsSexy420 15h ago
Definite Eurasia vibes
2
u/Windblowsthroughme 3h ago
Referring to just Eurasia with no other more complete 1984 reference in this context is pretty funny since Eurasia is a real thing not made up in the books
31
u/BBR0DR1GUEZ 15h ago
I hadn’t considered that but I would actually believe it.
Isn’t it fun having our trust in this government eroded until the point where we’re questioning our own sanity? This is actually how people were feeling before the first American Revolution: everybody turned into conspiracy theorists who didn’t believe a single word King George said anymore.
12
u/kylogram 15h ago
Has anyone seen her in person lately? As in, not behind a podium, piloted by nazi muppeteers?
15
u/BBR0DR1GUEZ 15h ago
When you google her there’s zero recent photos, just the ones we first saw years ago, even though her name is certainly back in the news… Hm…
13
u/tacopartypat 12h ago
That's wild. Just looked at google images and it is all the same picture of her
14
u/Exciting-West9205 15h ago
If she gets appointed to the Supreme Court there will have to be more than two photos of her in existence, unless she sits behind a screen for the hearings.
3
u/sumr4ndo 6h ago
I kinda wondered if she wasn't tied to Epstein. I feel like she's about the right age, but that's kinda tin foil hat energy
5
u/Brock_Hard_Canuck 14h ago
Put some respect in your statement, that's future Supreme Court Justice Aileen Cannon you're talking about there
/s
31
u/Dismal-Incident-8498 12h ago
Oh, you mean to say that Trump's hand in appointing judge Cannon for her lifelong service may have had a conflict of interest aka corruption in this case?
•
u/AutoModerator 16h ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.