Special Counsel Jack Smith and Donald Trump's criminal defense attorneys have filed a joint scheduling proposal with Judge Tanya Chutkan regarding their respective suggestions on how to litigate the absolute immunity issue in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's ruling that a president's official acts might be immune from prosecution. Smith informed the judge that he is prepared to file a motion disclosing all of the "unpled" evidence and information of Trump's crimes, meaning evidence that was not disclosed in the first or second (superseding) indictments in Trump's election subversions case in DC. This disclosure is necessary so the judge can fully litigate the issue: which of Trump's crimes and conduct are immune from prosecution and which are not. Jack Smith informed the judge that he's "prepared to file" the brief "promptly at any time the Court deems appropriate." Not surprisingly, Trump's attorneys said in the joint filing that they don't want to litigate the immunity issue any time soon - if at all. Glenn discusses the implications of this new court filing and the next decisions to be made by Judge Chutkan.
If you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at:
/ glennkirschner
If you'd like to support us and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:
https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...
Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/
Follow Glenn on:
Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2
Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/glennkirschner2
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...
See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Have you ever covered a carpet stain with a rug? Ignored a leaky faucet? Pretended your half-painted living room is supposed to look like that. Well, you're not alone. We've all got unfinished home projects, but there's an easier way. Thumbtack is the app that makes it easier to care for your home. Pull out your phone and in just a few taps. Search, chat, and book highly rated pros right in your neighborhood. Download Thumbtack and start caring for your home the easier way. It's time for Justice Matters, with former federal prosecutor and MSNBC analyst, Glenn Kurzmann. [MUSIC PLAYING] A new court filing in Donald Trump's federal 2020 election subversion case shows special counsel Jack Smith is prepared to disclose more evidence of Trump's crimes and conduct on January 6. Here's Glenn with details. So friends, we have a new court filing in Donald Trump's criminal case in Washington, DC. And this one is what's called a joint filing where the prosecutors, Jack Smith and his team, and Donald Trump and his criminal defense attorneys filed a motion jointly. It's unusual for parties to do that in a criminal case, but this was at the direction of the presiding judge, Judge Tanya Chutkin. Because she wanted to hear from the parties in a joint filing how they were proposing the case should now move forward. Now the Judge Chutkin has the case back, and you know why she has it back. Because the Supreme Court issued a truly horrific ruling that a president of the United States can commit all kinds of crimes against the American people. And as long as the president was engaged in official presidential acts, when he was committing those crimes, he should be immune from prosecution. He should get a pass. Let's set aside how in the world a president can commit crimes against the American people and have courts declare that those are official presidential acts. So you can't touch the president for committing those crimes, setting that aside. Judge Chutkin asked the parties to file this joint motion suggesting how they believe the case should move forward from here. Because what Judge Chutkin has to do is decide which of Donald Trump's crimes are official presidential acts such that he can't be prosecuted for them and which are not, which are the acts of a candidate, which are the acts of a private person, which exceed a president's official presidential acts. And that's where we are. Judge Chutkin has to make this decision. So she asked the parties, the prosecutors, the defense attorneys to provide some guidance. How do you think we should move forward from here? And I hope you're sitting down. This will probably shock you, the parties disagree. In fact, they disagree pretty dramatically. So what we're going to do, we're going to start with the new reporting, and then we're going to dig into this new 10-page court filing. I read the whole thing, so you don't have to. But really, it all boils down to one sentence. And how Judge Chutkin rules on that one sentence will determine whether the American voters get more information about the democracy, busting crimes Donald Trump committed to try to unlawfully retain the power of the presidency after he lost the 2020 election. Seems like information the American people need, deserve, are entitled to. Jack Smith has it. The grand jury has it, but we don't yet have it. So let's start with the new reporting. This from CBS News headline, Trump special counsel lay out opposing plans for way forward in federal 2020 election case. And that article begins federal prosecutors and attorneys for former President Donald Trump presented opposing arguments for how special counsel Jack Smith's 2020 election-related case-- friends that feels like a typo that may have slipped through the editing process-- seems like it's a 2020 election subversion case, not just an election-related case, all my editorial edition. How special counsel Jack Smith's 2020 election subversion case against Trump will move forward according to court documents filed late Friday. Quote, "The parties recognize the types of motions and briefing anticipated in the pretrial proceedings but have differing views on how the court should schedule these matters and the manner in which they are to be conducted," the joint filing said. Smith argued the court should first and foremost make rulings tied to issues of presidential immunity as outlined by the Supreme Court, indicating the court should promptly move forward with the case. And then friends, the article goes on to quote, what I would call the money line in this new joint court filing, quote, "The government, the prosecutor, proposes that it file an opening brief in which it will explain why the immunity set forth in Trump," meaning the Trump case from the Supreme Court, "does not apply to the categories of allegations in the superseding indictment or additional unpled categories of evidence that the government intends to introduce at trial and will proffer in its brief prosecutors wrote. Friends, put a pin in that. We're going to come back to it. I'm going to translate it from legalese to English. And then we're going to talk about why that one sentence is so important and indeed will determine if the American voters get some more relevant information to whether anybody should ever vote for Donald Trump, the aspiring dictator, because of what he did on and around January 6 to unlawfully retain the power of the presidency. Back to the article. Meanwhile, the former president's legal team urged the court to give the parties more time to go over the potential legal questions and propose a schedule that would bring the case into the spring or fall of 2025, about two years after the charges were first filed. What's the rush, fellas? Trump and company? Why not 2026, 2027? No need to get this criminal case against Donald Trump resolved any time soon. It's not like he's seeking the presidency again and has announced he'll be a dictator on day what? Yes, all my editorial edition. Back to the article. President Trump holds the right to challenge the new indictment and the underlying grand jury process as a matter of law, his team wrote, adding later, we believe and expect to demonstrate that this case must end as a matter of law. The filing responds to US District Court Judge Tanya Chutkin's request for proposals from each side about how to proceed in the wake of July's Supreme Court decision that granted Trump some presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. [MUSIC PLAYING] All the way after the break, Glenn explains what Jack Smith is proposing in his latest filing to judge Chutkin. This is Justice Matters. Achieving a gorgeous grin from home isn't a total mystery with bike-clear aligners. Just don't be surprised if all of your sleuthing friends start asking. What's your secret? Begin by ordering your at-home impression kit today for only $14.95. Bike-clear aligners are doctor-directed and delivered to your door. Treatment costs thousands less than braces. Plus, they offer flexible financing, accept eligible insurance, and you could pay with your HSA FSA. Get 80% off your impression kit when you use code wondering@bite.com. That's BYTE.com. Start your confidence dirty today with bite. Hey, prime members, have you heard? You can listen to your favorite podcasts ad-free. Good news. With Amazon Music, you have access to the largest catalog of ad-free top podcasts included with your prime membership. To start listening, download the Amazon Music App for free or go to amazon.com/adfreepodcast. That's amazon.com/adfreepodcast to catch up on the latest episodes without the ads. [MUSIC PLAYING] Hey, everybody. It's Michael Steele, host of the Michael Steele Podcast. Each week, I discuss key political and cultural issues joined by America's leading activists, experts, and academics for conversations that transcend political boundaries, and that's the point. I want you to join me as we work through real solutions, have honest conversations, just keeping it real, and having a little fun on the side. So listen to the Michael Steele Podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcast, Spreaker, or wherever you get your podcasts on, because you know I love it when you do. [MUSIC PLAYING] In a new legal filing, Special Counsel Jack Smith says he is preparing to disclose all of the unpled evidence in Trump's federal January 6 case. Glenn says the timing is one of the most important aspects of the case. So friends, first of all, this new court filing, this joint submission by Jack Smith and his prosecutors on the one side, and Donald Trump and his criminal defense attorneys on the other, is about 10 pages long. The first 2 and 1/2 pages is Jack Smith pretty succinctly setting out how he believes the case should now proceed. And the remainder of the 10 pages, 7 or 7 and 1/2 pages, is Donald Trump, through his lawyers, complaining, and moaning, and covetching about all manner of nonsense. Donald Trump is considering several challenges. Donald Trump may file this motion. Donald Trump may file that motion, yada, yada, yada. So setting all that nonsense aside, let's focus on really one of the most important aspects of this case and where it stands and how it should proceed. And I think one of the most important aspects is timing. So let's turn back to what I think is the most important and the most telling sentence in the entire 10 page brief on the question of timing. On page 2, Jack Smith says, the government, meaning the prosecutor, proposes that it file an opening brief in which it will explain why the immunity set forth in Trump, the Supreme Court opinion, does not apply to the categories of allegations in the superseding indictment or additional unpled categories of evidence that the government intends to introduce a trial and will proper in its brief. Friends, what does that mean? Let me translate that from legalese to English. First of all, in the superseding indictment, the new 36 page indictment that the grand jury just handed down against Donald Trump, and can I please urge everybody to read that 36 page indictment because it details much of Donald Trump's crimes and his conduct, trying to steal the 2020 presidential election, please read it before you go to the polls on November 5th. So what Jack Smith is saying there is that new indictment has lots of information about Donald Trump's crimes and conduct. However, much of the information Jack Smith has about Donald Trump's crimes and conduct is, quote, unpled. What does that mean? It's not contained in the indictment. We don't know anything about it yet. The Republican witnesses testified about it before the grand jury. The witnesses know, the grand jury knows. Jack Smith knows about that other unpled evidence of Donald Trump's crimes and conduct, but we the people the American voters don't know about it yet. So Jack Smith says, "I will put that other information and evidence about Donald Trump's crimes and conduct that is presently unpled, not in the indictment. I will put it all in the motion." And I'll file the motion because you, presiding judge, Tonya Chutkin, need that information so you can rule on what's official conduct, what's unofficial conduct, what conduct should have some level of immunity and what conduct should not have any immunity." So that's what Jack Smith proposes to do, put all the, as of yet unpled information about Donald Trump's crimes and conduct in a motion that will be publicly filed. So the court can make an informed decision about all of the evidence that Jack Smith has, that he intends to use at Donald Trump's prosecution. And friends, when does Jack Smith want to file this necessary motion? So Tonya Chutkin can do what she needs to do? Well, he says, "The government is prepared to file its opening immunity brief promptly at any time the court deems appropriate." And what do Donald Trump and his lawyers say in this joint submission about when those briefs should be filed so they can litigate this issue? Apparently never because they propose a schedule in this joint filing that takes us all the way through Spring-Fall of 2025, but they don't say a single word about filing the necessary briefs. So Judge Chutkin can litigate the exact issue. The Supreme Court returned the case to her to litigate the presidential immunity issue. Trump and his lawyers say nothing about that in this joint submission, which was designed to set the schedule to litigate this issue. Friends, that's why I say the seven and a half pages of this joint submission from Trump and his lawyers are nonsense. Now, one of the remaining questions is, okay, special counsel, Jack Smith said he is prepared to file this motion with this information in it. So Judge Chutkin can begin the litigation, the Supreme Court told her to conduct. He is ready to do it at the court's discretion whenever the court tells him to submit the brief. So when will Judge Chutkin direct the parties to submit further briefs? Will it be early September, mid-September, late September, early October? When will it be? Thus far, Donald Trump and his lawyers, as ably assisted by a corrupt radical right-wing block of the Supreme Court, have managed to keep all of this evidence buried from the American people from the voters about the totality of the evidence of Donald Trump's crimes designed to steal the 2020 presidential election? Will that evidence continue to remain buried, secret, hidden from the view of the American voters? You know, if it does remain hidden, what an enormous benefit Donald Trump will gain in the upcoming election? Does that feel right? Don't you think the American people are entitled to know the information that the government has that the witnesses have that the grand jury has about the crimes Donald Trump committed to try to unlawfully retain the power of the presidency? Doesn't this have echoes of what Donald Trump did in New York? Committed 34 felony crimes, falsifying business records to cover up deeply damaging information and deprived the American voters in 2016 of that information, about his suitability, his unsuitability to be president. How many times will we let this abject criminal politician fool us? I don't think we should let him fool us anymore. Because justice matters. Friends, as always, please stay safe, please stay tuned. And I look forward to talking with you all again tomorrow. - For more on Glenn, go to Glenn Kershner2 on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. This is Justice Matters. You
