Some Trump critics have urged Chutkan to hold a hearing to assess the effect of the immunity ruling on the evidence Smith intends to present. That proceeding could feature witness testimony from key figures in the case.
Trump opponents hope this “mini-trial” would showcase Trump’s ties to the violence that unfolded on Jan. 6, 2021, and remind voters of the most chaotic day of Trump’s presidency, even if it doesn’t carry the same stakes as a jury trial.
IANAL but if this mini-trial doesn’t have the same stakes as an actual trial, Trump will just claim that, “they didn’t convict me so I’m innocent”. I’m not sure if this is the best gambit.
It’s not a “gambit”, it’s the only logical outcome given what the Supreme Court did. They crafted a new protection for the President out of thin air. They may act like it’s been there all along, but when Smith first filed these charges, these protections (particularly regarding getting any staff testimony at all) didn’t exist.
So the prosecutor made a bunch of charges based on one set of rules, then the SC stepped and said “Naw, use these rules instead”. Of course, Trump will say that these new rules render the entire Prosecution null and void, while Smith wil say that it has little effect. So the judge has no choice but to take in all the evidence and make a ruling. She wouldn’t be doing her job correctly if she didn’t do it this way. It’s kind of like when the judge in the GA trial held a “mini-trial” of the DA and her vacation plans, when assessing whether the DA’s relationship was a problem or not.
The timing may be convenient for Trump’s opponents, having a public airing of charges right before an election (and maybe a bit after his NY sentencing). But let’s not pretend that Trump didn’t purposefully do everything he could to delay his trials until after the election. If this one didn’t get delayed quite far enough, it’s not Jack Smith’s fault. He wanted this trial over with by now.
Not doing something because “Trump will claim it as a win/innocence for himself” is bad. Some things may not be worth pursuing because it won’t convince anyone of anything new, but Trump claims everything is his personal win. He could completely, graphically, undeniably, soil himself in front of everyone and he’ll call it a victory of innocence to pwn the left and his fans will scream for more. Weird.
He has flagrantly lied about objectively provable facts (daily/hourly) and nobody who is voting for him cares.
Weather a trial is high stakes, low stakes, or no stakes, reality is whatever Trump says it is.
Anyone still on the fence should be exposed to as much J6 imagery, rhetoric, and traito® flopping between the rioters being FBI Antifa plants, and also RNC diarama prayer props. True patriots to be prayed over, and who will be immediately pardoned in a second Trump presidency.
The general protest and subversion of Facisim in all its forms should always be endorsed.
IANAL but if this mini-trial doesn’t have the same stakes as an actual trial, Trump will just claim that, “they didn’t convict me so I’m innocent”. I’m not sure if this is the best gambit.
It’s not a “gambit”, it’s the only logical outcome given what the Supreme Court did. They crafted a new protection for the President out of thin air. They may act like it’s been there all along, but when Smith first filed these charges, these protections (particularly regarding getting any staff testimony at all) didn’t exist.
So the prosecutor made a bunch of charges based on one set of rules, then the SC stepped and said “Naw, use these rules instead”. Of course, Trump will say that these new rules render the entire Prosecution null and void, while Smith wil say that it has little effect. So the judge has no choice but to take in all the evidence and make a ruling. She wouldn’t be doing her job correctly if she didn’t do it this way. It’s kind of like when the judge in the GA trial held a “mini-trial” of the DA and her vacation plans, when assessing whether the DA’s relationship was a problem or not.
The timing may be convenient for Trump’s opponents, having a public airing of charges right before an election (and maybe a bit after his NY sentencing). But let’s not pretend that Trump didn’t purposefully do everything he could to delay his trials until after the election. If this one didn’t get delayed quite far enough, it’s not Jack Smith’s fault. He wanted this trial over with by now.
I also ANAL, but I digress
Not doing something because “Trump will claim it as a win/innocence for himself” is bad. Some things may not be worth pursuing because it won’t convince anyone of anything new, but Trump claims everything is his personal win. He could completely, graphically, undeniably, soil himself in front of everyone and he’ll call it a victory of innocence to pwn the left and his fans will scream for more. Weird.
He has flagrantly lied about objectively provable facts (daily/hourly) and nobody who is voting for him cares.
Weather a trial is high stakes, low stakes, or no stakes, reality is whatever Trump says it is.
Anyone still on the fence should be exposed to as much J6 imagery, rhetoric, and traito® flopping between the rioters being FBI Antifa plants, and also RNC diarama prayer props. True patriots to be prayed over, and who will be immediately pardoned in a second Trump presidency.
The general protest and subversion of Facisim in all its forms should always be endorsed.