Comments (95)
To leave or reply comments, please download free Podbean iOS App or Android App.
Why the Biden Whitehouse, DoJ amd aĺl prosecutions v Trump are always right
Trump is on a legal fishing expedition. He’s filing these legal claims so he’ll delay the inevitable trial, but more urgently to find out what evidence Jack Smith has against him and how to further delay things. That’s all he’s doing.
Since Hope Hicks provided Congressional testimony that was heard during the televised hearing and is essentially public information, is that any other such testimony inadmissible according to the Supreme Court’s immunity ruling?
Explains why the government is always right in Trump cases and can never be wrong.
When can a conspiracy be legally charged? There is Project 2025 that shreds the Constitution, at rallies and interviews the Republican nominal nominee explicitly states that ’if elected, my Christian friends, we’ll get it done and in four years you won’t have to vote again!’ (paraphrasing). I understand free speech, but when does advocating the overthrow of the Constitution become a criminal conspiracy?
I’m a Childless Cat Woman... I guess we are now the group that will be considered 3/5 of a person? Maybe the Republicans will impose a poll tax on us as well. Women aren’t the only ones who haven’t had children! The really scary thought is the fact that there are people like J.D. Vance and Trump who are allowed to procreate at all!
I’ve read Judge Cannon’s ruling and the applicable provisions of law and AG rules on Special Counsel appointments, and I thought her ruling was weak as well, and that her argument against such an appointment went counter to the ”Deep State” narrative. That said, this should appealed. AG Garland did make 1 mistake: He should have refused himself prior to appointing Ms. Smith. That was Smith would have an open hand to prosecute Trump as he pleased.
My favorite podcast! Best regards from your possibly biggest fan in Norway without the slightest knowledge about law that I haven’t learned from you! ( Former hospital laboratory worker)
1. Justice Thomas, in his concurrence with the Court, was definitely trying to lay the groundwork for Spec.Counsel Jack Smith being thrown off the classified documents case. 2. 18 USC 1512(c) is a 2-part provision. The -OR- -- a conjunction-- is a separator that provides and option, i.e., either this OR that. (SCOTUS didn’t pay attn to Schoolhouse Rock. 😏😉)
I love listening to Andrew and Mary because they explain things so well, but when this episode’s guest arrived the discussion went so far into the weeds that I
On the issue of direct presidential communications being Advisors not being admissible as evidence, Congress/DoJ could still obtain other forms of communication between ”Advisors” provided exec. privilege isn’t invoked. But there is the rub. SCOTUS made it far more difficult to fully investigate the potential criminality of a sitting POTUS (or once such becomes a FPOTUS).
SCOTUS basically pretzel noted this ruling on absolute presidential immunity. By ruling that communications and motive can’t be questioned except by Congressional subpoena AND a POTUS can now claim executive privilege over ”private records”, they’ve tied Congress’ 🤲 to investigate a president’s potential criminality.
Special Counsel appointments for President Biden and his son are important points to counter the alleged unlawful/unconstitutional appointment of Jack Smith in the Trump classified docs and fake electors plot cases. If those Spec. Counsels weren’t thrown out, why should Jack Smith?
A question. If Trump wins the election yet is tried and convicted in the Jan 6 case before taking office, what happens?