Sunday, June 11, 2023

Through A Glass, Darkly

What if they gave a war riot and nobody came? At least he’s honest about his goal. "Alpha." Heh. "I am important! I really am important! I am!” Nancy Mace is was one of the sensible ones. He’s from Florida! What is this, epic flop sweat? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. What is the argument that Presidents are a special class who cannot face criminal trials? And worse, that political candidates can only be judged by the electoral college, but never by a jury of their peers? Yeah, until a court starts endorsing that nonsense, I’m through with it. Reports are Trump’s counsel will challenge the evidence from Trump’s former lawyer because of attorney-client privilege. Which was pierced by a D.C. judge, but not a Florida judge. It’s a colorable argument, but also an opening to invoke the federal recusal statute. I.e., does the ruling betray bias, based on the Judge’s previous handling of these very issues (where the 11th Circuit ruled Cannon literally had no jurisdiction, meaning all her rulings were null and void)?

I don’t know the case law on the recusal statute. That could determine the outcome of any appeal to it. The plain language of the statute is not the analysis that works here.

So will the DOJ invoke the statute? Not without reason. Just raising it because Cannon drew the case would get it tossed instanter. There (I’m fairly sure) needs to be grounds in this case. How much grounds would be enough? The DOJ has better insight on that than we do.

More idle legal speculation, IOW, from people who don’t know anything. Maggie Haberman said it best when the indictment dropped and she compared reporting prior to it to looking through a keyhole. Most if are closer to looking through a glass darkly. Even what we see we don’t understand.

DOJ is really very good at this stuff. We not only should leave it them, we have no choice not to. The more pertinent question is the quality of Trump’s counsel. They are said to be looking for a CIPA expert. That might slow down Jack Smith’s 70 day timeline, but it’s no replacement for a national security expert attorney. And Trump is still shooting his mouth off, and still has no defense. And it’s still over 16 months to November 2024. 

A CIPA expert might help. But Trump is in very deep waters, and he doesn’t have so much as a sextant to navigate with.

Time enough to try the case. Now I’m wondering if Smith was subtly indicating he needs to dispose of this case so he can get to the next one by that first Tuesday in November of next year.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)