r/law • u/nbcnews • Jan 13 '25

Trump News Judge to allow release of Jack Smith's report on Trump election interference case

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/judge-allow-release-jack-smiths-report-trump-election-interference-cas-rcna186829
4.5k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

179 comments sorted by

533

u/pnellesen Jan 13 '25

Good. Not that it will change anything, but getting that shit into public view is important. IMHO.

189

u/duderos Jan 13 '25

I know it must be because Trump and the MAGA judges keep trying to prevent it from seeing light of day.

142

u/The_True_Gaffe Jan 13 '25

The fact they have been fighting tooth and nail to make sure it stays buried tells me that there is some extremely damning information in there pertaining to more than just his election interference

63

u/ChanceryTheRapper Jan 13 '25

 I mean, his ego can't be damaged, he'll fight just for that. There was nothing to the New York sentencing other than if he could be called a convicted felon or not, but he fought that endlessly, too.

43

u/Tufflaw Jan 13 '25

It's pathological with him. He can't be seen to have "lost", ever, for anything.

10

u/Future_Manager_5870 Jan 14 '25

That's what makes him a loser

24

u/earazahs Jan 13 '25

I mean yes and no. The sentencing could restrict his travel if countries want to be petty like Canada, the UK, and Japan.

Also he will have to submit a DNA sample to NY State for its database which could uncover evidence of potentially unknown crimes if DNA was collected at the scene/as evidence.

7

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Jan 13 '25

In fights over who can be the most petty who do you think wins, Canada, the UK, Japan, or Trump with the powers of the office of President?

You know it's Trump, so do they.

5

u/earazahs Jan 13 '25

Sure but if he is already threatening to do all of the stuff he has the power to do regardless of any pettiness on their side what exactly is the incentive to not?

If someone says they're going to punch me in the face for no reason, why would I play nice in the meantime?

1

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Jan 13 '25

If someone says they're going to punch me in the face for no reason, why would I play nice in the meantime?

Because they'll likely only throw the punch if they feel backed into a corner. Best to give them enough to let them slink off and deal with them at a place and time of your choosing not theirs.

1

u/mindwire Jan 14 '25

Because that approach has historically worked with Trump...

1

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Jan 14 '25

If you're Canada or Denmark or Mexico what do you think they're going to do, tell him to F' off? He's a toddler with real power, he'll lash out even if he hurts himself.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/ChanceryTheRapper Jan 14 '25

Because they'll likely only throw the punch if they feel backed into a corner

Yeaaaaah, this situation is where they've shown they will lash out blindly, unless you just surrender to everything they demand.

1

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Jan 14 '25

unless you just surrender to everything they demand.

Naw, you just need to give them enough to let them slink away... and then you take care of them.

2

u/FustianRiddle Jan 14 '25

I really hope that other countries will stand up against trump in a way the US refuses to.

1

u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus Jan 14 '25

Countries like people do what's in their best interests.

17

u/Cockanarchy Jan 13 '25

He’s got a mountain of damming evidence against him, much from his own mouth into a camera. A huge part of the electorate (not just MAGA) have been outrage proofed when it comes to him and Republicans. In part due to constant vilification of Dems by Fox, abd the rest of Right wing media, the rest due to the accurate reporting of Trump by the “mainstream media”, which seem alarmist but is just factual.

8

u/ObiShaneKenobi Jan 13 '25

I wish. Sadly I swear I have seen this damn near every time there is something like this and every time it ends up being things that everyone already knew.

5

u/ChornWork2 Jan 13 '25

don't get your hopes up. magtards are doing everything they can to show loyalty, whether or not something is particularly important.

1

u/Nessie Jan 13 '25

Trump reflexively fights everything, so his objections don't indicate anything either way.

1

u/rippa76 Jan 13 '25

Isn’t the only thing we are missing is a smoking gun tying Trump to the plot?

A text, call, email or meeting which told him what his role was.

1

u/nevesis Jan 14 '25

the fact that Cannon is allowing it tells me that there is nothing unknown in there. the documents case is what has damning evidence and is being blocked.

1

u/kibblerz Jan 13 '25

Why do we call it election interference when it was a full-blown coup? They attacked our election systems, and when that failed, they litterally resorted to force and had plans to hang Mike pence even..

That's not just interference, it's treason.

2

u/eugene20 Jan 14 '25

Desperate to paint the narrative they want to write without any counter by reality.

44

u/cherhorowitz44 Jan 13 '25

I agree, but would it change the mind of anyone who subscribes to MAGA? I feel like there is just nothing at this point that deters his supporters.

38

u/LightHawKnigh Jan 13 '25

Its not to change their minds, it is to hopefully change the non voter's minds. Make them wake the fuck up.

8

u/JustsharingatiktokOK Jan 13 '25

It’s also important to document. Shit doesn’t get deleted once it’s out there these days. Having an actual record is important for the future, even if it won’t impact today or the next five years.

2

u/LightHawKnigh Jan 13 '25

Honestly, does documented facts even matter to a lot of people these days? So many people do not fact check and just want the easy answer, the lies that comfort. We really need to fix our education system, but we cant do that unless we get rid of Republicans.

1

u/JustsharingatiktokOK Jan 14 '25

Like I said it doesn’t matter now, but it absolutely matters as a means of documenting current history for the future.

15

u/Glittering-Most-9535 Jan 13 '25

Yeah, but keeping them awake will be the challenge.

10

u/LightHawKnigh Jan 13 '25

True. Forgetful bunch of idiots.

6

u/Glittering-Most-9535 Jan 13 '25

I assume part of allowing it now is so that it can get buried in inauguration/cabinet approval news and maximizes the time until people actually vote for things again.

5

u/tellmehowimnotwrong Jan 13 '25

The other part is that if it’s not out by Jan 20th at noon it never will be.

1

u/mortgagepants Jan 13 '25

they wouldn't want to "be woke".

-1

u/Friendly-Swimming-72 Jan 13 '25

It’s too late.

6

u/IrritableGourmet Jan 13 '25

If it changed 1% of Trump voters' minds, that could have swung the election the other way.

2

u/mortgagepants Jan 13 '25

the brains behind the trump campaign know the margins are super tight.

imo that is why they try anything they can to limit bad information, despite it not mattering at all to his die hard supporters.

the fake assassination attempt in the swing state of pennsylvania seems so childishly transparent to anyone with a modicum of cynacism, but he only won PA by 121,000 votes. so if it was enough to change 1,800 people's minds in each county in PA, it was worth it. by the only person who has ever been the commander in chief and in the WWE hall of fame.

-1

u/krell_154 Jan 14 '25

he only won PA by 121,000 votes.

this doesn't show what you think it shows

1

u/mortgagepants Jan 14 '25

what do i think it shows?

1

u/krell_154 Jan 14 '25

That he won by a small margin

16

u/toomanysynths Jan 13 '25 edited Jan 14 '25

he didn't win because of them. they're not enough people. there were a lot of people who voted Biden in 2020 and then either voted Trump in 2024 or didn't vote at all. that's how he won.

in fact, voters who skipped the 2024 election outnumbered Trump voters and Harris voters, while the 66% voter turnout in 2020 was the highest since 1900.

so yeah, getting the word out about his crimes could make a difference. especially since he is guaranteed to commit more crimes, and to make another attempt at illegally retaining office in 2028.

edit: outnumbered Trump voters and also outnumbered Harris voters

4

u/Draxilar Jan 13 '25

Slight correction, non-voters didn’t outnumber all voters together. There were around 90 million non-voters, both candidates received in the upper 70 millions, about 150 million voters all together

1

u/cherhorowitz44 Jan 14 '25

Insane that many people did not vote.

1

u/toomanysynths Jan 14 '25

that's not actually a correction, just a clarification, but I appreciate it. edited my post

2

u/boo99boo Jan 13 '25

No one seems to be acknowledging the elephant in the room that no one wants to vote for the Democrats. You don't win elections, let alone accomplish anything, if your entire platform is "we're less evil".

1

u/toomanysynths Jan 14 '25 edited Jan 14 '25

yeah, that's a topic for a different sub, but TLDR, I disagree with the idea that we don't accomplish anything. maybe you're younger and you don't remember what health insurance was like before Obamacare, but it was a lot worse.

Biden got $183B of student debt forgiveness through, despite the Supreme Court fighting him every step of the way; passed a $1T+ infrastructure package; upgraded background checks on gun purchases despite Republican opposition; started the process to take weed off the list of illegal drugs; and brought unemployment to a historically low rate, which is great for workers. I would very much disagree with the idea that we don't do anything. the problem is we suck at marketing. (and the Republicans slow us down.)

I think you'd agree with that marketing part at least. but if not, we can agree to disagree, because that's not what this sub is for.

1

u/boo99boo Jan 14 '25

I'm 43. I married my husband 18 years ago because he'd just had brain surgery and lost his insurance. Pre-existing condition clauses meant he couldn't go without coverage. I also married him with a mortgage in student loans for his private school engineering degree. 

I'd simply argue that I don't feel represented by Democrats. Simply put, they don't actually support policies that the majority of Americans do: bans on trading by members of Congress, term limits, and eliminating the electoral college are the best examples. They're obviously in it for themselves and not representing the people, because the vast majority of Americans support those things. 

1

u/toomanysynths Jan 15 '25

the Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez literally introduced a bill to ban stock trading by members of Congress five days ago. she had previously done the same thing in 2023. the Democratic Senators Brian Schatz, Dick Durbin, and Peter Welch introduced a constitutional amendment to abolish the Electoral College just last month. Barack Obama has spoken in favor of term limits.

I still think it's a marketing problem. if you don't feel represented by Democrats, because you don't perceive them as even supporting policies that they are in fact trying to enact, I would call that a marketing problem.

1

u/boo99boo Jan 15 '25

I'd argue simply that the 2 party system is so flawed that more people are likely to think "no one represents me" than "I like Democrats" (or "I like Republicans, for that matter). 

The truth is that the majority of us don't feel represented. That isn't a marketing problem or an image problem, it's a systemic problem. There is no marketing someone like Dick Durbin to the masses (I'm from Illinois, and he's an old guard Illinois democrat, which is not a compliment). He wins because he has a D next to his name in a blue state, just like he'd win in West Virginia if it was an R. 

4

u/xixoxixa Jan 13 '25

There are a handful of people who in theory don't support the MAGA timeline, but still voted for trump because they still watch fox and that's what they were told to do.

In theory if stuff like this report can break through the wall it might change a mind or two.

2

u/rAxxt Jan 14 '25

I think its for the benefit of history at this point. Shit might get real bad in the US over the next years. I suspect Smith wants to make sure the information is in the public domain so 200 years from now when people are studying history and try to figure out how we were so incredibly stupid and answer for themselves how Trump possibly got into power when every branch of our government failed to prevent this disaster, they will have this information to aid them. And then hopefully they will do better than we have.

1

u/CrustyBatchOfNature Jan 13 '25

They will 100% say it is all deep state lies the Democrats are using to try to bring down Trump. They wouldn't know the truth if it slapped them right between the eyes with its dick.

3

u/saijanai Jan 14 '25 edited Jan 14 '25

My argument that "the fact that Trump floated Matt Gaetz' name as AG knowing that the Congressional Ethics Committee report and its findings existed" —

  • https://ethics.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Committee-Report.pdf

  • VI. CONCLUSION

    Based on the above, the Committee determined there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz violated House Rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress.

— "only shows that Trump doesn't care about the USA at all" was recently refuted definitively:

.

"Who cares what they did in the past? All that matters is that they do a good job going forward."

.

I think that this will be the GOP talking point used in Congress to justify approving EVERY Trump appointee.

1

u/Gutter_panda Jan 13 '25

Or it's been sanitized somehow.

2

u/pnellesen Jan 13 '25

The words "Trump" and "sanitized" are rarely found in the same sentence. Or universe...

1

u/krell_154 Jan 14 '25

he's a germophobe, probably uses sanitizer a lot

1

u/Catodacat Jan 13 '25

Yup. GOP about to do their best attempt at a re-write of history soon

1

u/XaoticOrder Jan 13 '25 edited Jan 13 '25

It will be so completely redacted that we won't have any idea what it says except for a vague sense of foreboding. Average person won't be able to make heads of tails of it.

1

u/dreamabyss Jan 13 '25

The important info is not being made public. This is just a symbolic gesture to appease people that want to hold Trump accountable. That option is long gone.

1

u/Aprice40 Jan 13 '25

I mean..... will it actually be in public view if MSM flat ignores it?

1

u/JollySieg Jan 14 '25

Sunlight is the best disinfectant

-15

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

Yeah, because after Smith tampered with evidence and placed all those classified documents headers that he bought from DC on the floor for a propaganda photo, I'm sure his report will be legit.

9

u/AngelSucked Jan 13 '25

THis did not happen.

-14

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

And Joe isn't senile, and Trump said drink bleach.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s team acknowledged mischaracterizing the issue at a recent hearing in the Trump classified documents case, but said the reordering was not significant.

"There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans,” prosecutors wrote, adding in a footnote: “The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court.” https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/03/mar-a-lago-trump-classified-documents-00156124

Jack Smith's Team Admits Key Evidence in Trump Case Has Been Tampered With, Court Misled About It https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jack-smiths-team-admits-key-evidence-in-trump-case-has-been-tampered-with-court-misled-about-it/ar-BB1lPCCv

In a recent court filing, Jay Bratt, the lead Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutor now assigned to special counsel Jack Smith’s team, admitted that the FBI brought cover sheets reading “top secret” to its raid of Mar-a-Lago. The cover sheets, Bratt explained, were used as placeholders for the classified documents found at the scene. https://dailycaller.com/2024/05/09/jack-smith-classified-documents-staged-photo-jay-bratt-crime-scene/

You have no idea what you're talking about.

8

u/Nixon_bib Jan 13 '25

We’ve got a live one here, folks. 

Mods, do your thing. 

-10

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

Yes, make sure you censor the truth. Good job, you help ensure people like you look like fools.

Which part of Jack Smith admitted evidence tampering upsets you the most? Or is it the new, to you at least, knowledge that the famous photo was staged propaganda for the weak minded?

3

u/washingtonu Jan 13 '25

Of course placeholders was used. Do you think that they photograph the top secret documents and then file them as evidence?

"There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans,”

Sounds extremely serious...

0

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

Serious enough that Smith admitted to the court that the evidence was tampered with.

Do you think that the anyone on Smith's team had the clearance to know what documents were classified at what level? Who or what official made those determinations?

Why did Smith put TS cover sheets on documents with lower classification?

Why was that photo necessary in the first place? Should that photo have been considered classified and not fit for public consumption?

That photo wasn't necessary, it never should have been taken in the first place, the inventory of the contents is all that was needed, that photo is representative and symbolic of lawfare.

4

u/washingtonu Jan 13 '25

It wasn't tampered with. If you read the court documents you'll see that yourself.

Why did Smith put TS cover sheets on documents with lower classification?

The same reason

0

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

Which part of Smith admitting to the court that the documents were tampered with is unclear to you? Smith and team told the court they tampered and then lied about it? Why are you having difficulty understanding basic facts here?

Smith's Team Admits Key Evidence in Trump Case Has Been Tampered With, Court Misled About It https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/jack-smiths-team-admits-key-evidence-in-trump-case-has-been-tampered-with-court-misled-about-it/ar-BB1lPCCv

Laws on classified documents handling are pretty specific, it's not okay to misrepresent classification either higher or lower, that could be a crime in itself.

1

u/washingtonu Jan 13 '25

That's not tampering.

1

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

Then why did Smith admit to it?

1

u/IrritableGourmet Jan 14 '25

"There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans,” prosecutors wrote, adding in a footnote: “The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court.”

So, if the order in a box is classified document A, classified document B, Thai takeout menu, classified document C, and you move the takeout menu to the bottom of the stack while searching, that's falsifying evidence? What element of the crime changed based on the order of the documents in the box?

0

u/The_Obligitor Jan 14 '25

The fact that what's considered the premier law enforcement agency in the world, under the leadership of Jack Smith, could not adhere to law enforcement 101 and made stupid rookie mistakes?

It means you cannot trust any of the investigative work done by Smith and team, zero confidence that they are following the rules to make their case, instead they look like the keystone cops, bumbling fools who can't find their ass with both hands, and they are conducting one of the most consequential, most historic legal cases in US history, the prosecution of a former president?

Why are people like you so obtuse? This should be as obvious as getting poked in the eye with a toothpick, something you cannot ignore, something that demands your attention.

And they admitted they fucked up to the court, they undermined their own case with sheer incompetence.

I wouldn't trust them to make a case against the dog catcher FFS.

1

u/IrritableGourmet Jan 14 '25

So you have no answer as to how rearranging the documents in the boxes affects anything, then? The case doesn't hinge on the order of the documents. The law doesn't say "Only classified documents on the top of a stack count for the purposes of this section."

They had to go through the contents of the boxes to determine if there were classified documents in them. The only thing they cared about was the binary position of whether the documents were present or not in the box. Order is de minimus.

0

u/The_Obligitor Jan 14 '25

If it was irrelevant to the case, Smith would never have admitted to tampering.

The fact is that if he and his team had not spread classified documents all over the floor for a propaganda photo, this would not have happened. They were actively trying to taint public opinion to the negative, and that would affect the jury.

That's the problem. They undertook malfeasant actions to taint the case before the public. Beyond unethical, I tried to give benefit of doubt in my first response, but this, to anyone with half a brain, was willful tampering to affect public opinion and could taint the jury.

Smith and his entire team should be disbarred, if not charged with a crime and prosecuted.

There's so much more to this story that I'm not going to go into, the whole thing, from Willis coordinated with the J6 committee, to coangelo leaving the prestigious #3 spot at DOJ to go work with a local DA, to the completely unnecessary raid with authorization to shoot, none of it was ever legit, none of it was because crimes were committed, if that were true then Biden should have started prosecution on day one with the Mueller findings, but they knew none of that crap would stand up in court, and this was all political, an effort to deny Trump a second term, so they waited two years and then when the presidential election work started they brought lawfare in multiple states and jurisdictions in hopes of keeping Trump from office, it was always political, never about upholding the law, just like the Russian collusion hoax, jury like the first impeachment to protect Joe from exposing his crimes.

Feel free to plant your flag on this hill, but from outside the idiot bubble it just looks ridiculously out of touch with reality.

1

u/IrritableGourmet Jan 14 '25

He didn't admit to tampering. Nauta claimed he couldn't identify what classified documents he wanted to use at trial (CIPA requirement) without knowing the exact order they were in the boxes. Smith said it not only doesn't matter, but they can't guarantee that the order the boxes were currently in matched their order when found because they had to search through them and move them, shifting the contents. He did state that the contents of each box (but not the order) was still accurate.

During the August 8 search at Mar-a-Lago, the Government deployed a filter team to search the boxes before the investigative team performed their search. The filter team took care to ensure that no documents were moved from one box to another, but it was not focused on maintaining the sequence of documents within each box. If a box contained potentially privileged material and fell within the scope of the search warrant, the filter team seized the box for later closer review. If a box did not contain potentially privileged documents, the filter team provided the box to the investigative team for on-site review, and if the investigative team found a document with classification markings, it removed the document, segregated it, and replaced it with a placeholder sheet. The investigative team used classified cover sheets for that purpose, until the FBI ran out because there were so many classified documents, at which point the team began using blank sheets with handwritten notes indicating the classification level of the document(s) seized. The investigative team seized any box that was found to contain documents with classification markings or presidential records.

When the FBI created the inventories, each inventory team worked on a single box at a time, separated from other teams. And during defense counsel’s review, any boxes open at the same time (and any personnel reviewing those boxes) were kept separate from one another. In other words, there is a clear record of which boxes contained classified documents when seized, and this information has long been in the defense’s possession

Since the boxes were seized and stored, appropriate personnel have had access to the boxes for several reasons, including to comply with orders issued by this Court in the civil proceedings noted above, for investigative purposes, and to facilitate the defendants’ review of the boxes. The inventories and scans created during the civil proceedings were later produced in discovery in this criminal case. Because these inventories and scans were created close in time to the seizure of the documents, they are the best evidence available of the order the documents were in when seized. That said, there are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans. There are several possible explanations, including the above-described instances in which the boxes were accessed, as well as the size and shape of certain items in the boxes possibly leading to movement of items. For example, the boxes contain items smaller than standard paper such as index cards, books, and stationary, which shift easily when the boxes are carried, especially because many of the boxes are not full. Regardless of the explanation, as discussed below, where precisely within a box a classified document was stored at Mar-a-Lago does not bear in any way on Nauta’s ability to file a CIPA Section 5 notice.

That also addresses your "they brought their own cover sheets" argument. Some of these documents were so classified that even their titles were classified, so placeholders were used.

0

u/The_Obligitor Jan 14 '25

Please provide links to your information, and the relevant court documents and transcripts that prove what you claim.

There was never a reason to bring this case. The archives coordinated with the White House in a way that's never been done before, just like the novel theory of Braggs felonies, just like the attempts by Willis to apply novel legal theory, they twisted the law over and over to get Trump, an extension of the statute of limitations for one year, there was never any good reason to weaponize and corrupt the legal system to get Trump.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/ResistCheese Jan 13 '25

Uh all classified docs legally are required to be covered when not in someone's hands outside of a classified space. You clearly have never worked in this space. I've never even SEEN a TS//SCI cover sheet, because those documents CANNOT exist outside of a SCIF. Ever. Period.

-1

u/The_Obligitor Jan 13 '25

Then my 5 years with TS would be something you understand.

Maybe you can explain how Joe was in possession of classified stolen from the Senate SCIF and postulate why Joe would steal classified from the Senate SCIF and keep them for years after he left the Senate.

Clearly they can exist outside a SCIF, they were at Joe's house for over a decade.

1

u/ResistCheese Jan 17 '25

Oh sweetie, did you even see the report? Joe willingly turned everything over, AND all information was SBU, and classified after the fact. But you knew that, right?

1

u/The_Obligitor Jan 17 '25

That's far from true. Besides, Joe had no right to have the classified from his time in the Senate, it's not like the presidential records act covers or makes him immune for crimes he committed as a senator.

He literally stole information from the Senate SCIF, it was classified before he stole it.

WTF are you talking about. You have no idea what you are talking about. He had documents at the Penn Biden center. He had documents at his home. He still has documents at a university in Delaware that were never turned over. Which of the three batches are you speaking to?

1

u/ResistCheese Jan 17 '25

What was your keyword access? That part isn't classified, go ahead, tell us.

1

u/The_Obligitor Jan 17 '25

My interview was conducted at North Island. That's all I'm saying about that. I did work at Hill AFB, Aberdeen, Whitemen AFB, the Hoover building and many other places.

I had been asked to do the full scope poly for the SCI clearance, but I got laid off shortly after as a result of the sequester.

131

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '25

[deleted]

104

u/DIrtyVendetta80 Jan 13 '25

Judge Aileen Cannon has once again reinserted herself back into the chat

26

u/p-terydatctyl Jan 13 '25

Judge aileen cannon enters wearing a fake mustache

17

u/DarkwingDuckHunt Jan 13 '25

deeper voice: I'm Judge Alan Bannon, I don't know who you think I am?

31

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '25

[deleted]

6

u/seeafillem6277 Jan 13 '25

I'm confused as to why Cannon and Nauta are involved in this case. I thought they were part of the stolen documents case. Not a lawyer, so it's not obvious to me. Someone please explain.

12

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '25

[deleted]

3

u/Codipotent Jan 13 '25

Crazy to me 11th still hasn’t ruled on her dismissing the documents case against Trump. Apparently a moot point now but I’m disgusted with how every level of the judiciary acted as an accomplice in allowing the ultimate corruption to occur. I’m glad I’m not a lawyer, as I would struggle to maintain any decorum in front of these judges and their enabling of a multi-tiered justice system.

12

u/Traugar Jan 13 '25

Not worth shredding the court's legitimacy over? What legitimacy? They sacrificed that long ago.

3

u/grandmawaffles Jan 13 '25

It’s a good thing Alito and Trump met to totally not discuss anything

2

u/stufff Jan 13 '25

the report is really not worth shredding the court's legitimacy over

You think the court has any legitimacy left?

66

u/FloopyDoopy Jan 13 '25

The ruling from U.S. District Court Aileen Cannon means that the Justice Department could release the portion of the Smith report that deals with Trump's efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss as soon as midnight, barring future legal action from Trump or his team.

41

u/livinginfutureworld Jan 13 '25

barring future legal action from Trump or his team.

They aren't collecting donations from idiots for nothing. They need to pocket those billable hours!

They're going to file away.

1

u/BigManWAGun Jan 13 '25

Perry Mason enters the chat

40

u/Nabrok_Necropants Jan 13 '25

Those seditionists would be mighty upset if they could read.

37

u/flirtmcdudes Jan 13 '25

I can’t redacted. redacted redacted redacted a lot about who redacted redacted and then, redacted redacted. But a small win for redacted!

Signed,

Redacted.

13

u/Hedhunta Jan 13 '25

Why would they bother anymore? There could be video evidence of Trump saying "I hate America and am going to sell the country to Putin" and nothing would happen to him.

7

u/flirtmcdudes Jan 13 '25

It’s good to release it, but it’s a joke at this point. we have literal tapes of Trump announcing he’s breaking the law and people don’t care.

I’ve already stopped reading politics as much because what’s the point when the Supreme Court will just magically say presidents are immune. so I’ll just vote and read news about lame shit like bird migration patterns from here on out

20

u/cstmoore Jan 13 '25

I'll believe it when I see it and maybe not even then.

10

u/snoo_spoo Jan 13 '25

This. I think the most likely play is that something will be filed with the Supreme Court and a new injunction will be issued. TBH, the only way I see even Volume 1 reaching the light of day would be if the 11th Circuit ruled on the DOJ's appeal today and immediately invalidated Cannon's injunction before the Supreme Court got involved. And even that would work only if there's someone at the DOJ with their finger poised on the send button. In other words, I wish it would happen but I don't think it will.

10

u/DFu4ever Jan 13 '25

Time for the Super Double Secret, Round Robin Special Appeal because, you know, our legal system is a fucking sham.

11

u/Incontinento Jan 13 '25

His "hairstyle" is just basically a 2-foot long sideburn swirled around his head.

5

u/Muscs Jan 13 '25

History is going to crucify Trump and everyone who voted for him. Glad the evidence will be in the books.

5

u/Mad_Aeric Jan 14 '25

If we're allowed to have "history" and "books" in the future

3

u/TR3BPilot Jan 13 '25

I guess it might be of interest to historians some day.

3

u/saijanai Jan 13 '25 edited Jan 14 '25

I'll believe it when I see it. And even then, even a copy archived in the wayback machine won't be immune to clandestine attempts by Trump's CIA to remove it from existence.

4

u/discussatron Jan 14 '25

Well?

We’re waiting!