Catching up on the news now that the holiday season is winding down? A few details from Jack Smith's opening brief to the DC Court of Appeals makes for some interesting reading.
The Court has agreed to fast-track Benedict Donald's appeal of Judge Tanya Chutkan's earlier (and correct) ruling that he has no absolute immunity from criminal prosecution, simply because he was President. The hearing will take place on January 9, and Smith filed his brief on Saturday. As you can imagine, it slams the idea of a President, any President, going scot-free for illegal actions. That notion, Smith said, "threatens to license Presidents to commit crimes to remain in office."
He also included a few additional (and scary) examples.
It "would grant immunity from criminal prosecution to a President who accepts a bribe in exchange for directing a lucrative government contract to the payer...who instructs the FBI Director to plant incriminating evidence on a political enemy...who orders the National Guard to murder his most prominent critics or...who sells nuclear secrets to a foreign adversary."
Holy smokes! Is this a sneak preview of Smith's prosecution? Would he dare to put these examples in writing if he didn't already intend to prove them? (They're pretty specific.) And is he setting up the Trumpsters on the Supreme Court, who will surely get the case after the DC Court rules? We can see the headlines now: "SCOTUS Says POTUS Can Sell Nuclear Secrets to Enemies." You have to admit that's clever.
Our admiration for Smith's deftness is tempered by a nagging worry that Vlad Putin, MBS and Kim Jong Un might know a hell of a lot more than they should about our nation's defenses. We cats HISS.
No comments:
Post a Comment