Image 01 Image 03

Trump Indictment: Special Counsel Jack Smith Claims Laws Apply to Everyone, Wants a ‘Speedy Trial’

Trump Indictment: Special Counsel Jack Smith Claims Laws Apply to Everyone, Wants a ‘Speedy Trial’

I want to know when the laws will be applied to Hillary, Eric Holder, Joe Biden, and Hunter.

Special Counsel Jack Smith finally spoke out about the indictment on Trump regarding the classified documents.

He only spoke for four minutes:

“I invite everyone to read it in full to understand the scope and the gravity of the crimes charged,” he said after the 37-count federal indictment of Trump was unsealed Friday.

“The men and woman of the United States intelligence community and armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation, and its laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States, and they must be enforced,” Smith said. “Violations of those laws put our country at risk.”

Trump was charged with “felony violations of our national security laws, as well as participating in a conspiracy to obstruct justice,” Smith said in a statement from his office Friday afternoon.

Smith said our laws apply to everyone, but I don’t hear anything about Hillary, Eric Holder, Joe Biden, or Hunter:

SMITH: “The men and women of the United States intelligence community and our armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation and its people. Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States, and they must be enforced. Violations of those laws put our country at risk. Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice, and our nation’s commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. Applying those laws, collecting facts, that’s what determines the outcome of an investigation. Nothing more and nothing less.”

Smith wants a speedy trial:

SMITH: “The prosecutors in my office are among the most talented and experienced in the Department of Justice. They have investigated this case adhering to the highest ethical standards and they will continue to do so as this case proceeds. It’s very important for me to note that the defendants in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable reasonable doubt in a court of law. To that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter, consistent with the public interest and the rights of the accused.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


“A speedy trial” such as those of the J6 prisoners?

    alaskabob in reply to alien. | June 9, 2023 at 6:26 pm

    That is “equal” justice under the law for him. The Great Coup continues. The conspiratorial list lengthens.

      alaskabob in reply to alaskabob. | June 9, 2023 at 6:27 pm

      Oh…by the way… the way the foreign conspiracy law was written and functioned under Woodrow Wilson, everyone here is guilty.

    This is such a brazen political scam I cannot believe more people are not screaming bloody murder. But it involves Trump, so the GOPe, NeverTrumpers, and Dems are fine with it. Becareful what they wish for, because this crap won’t stop with Trump.

      wendybar in reply to EBL. | June 10, 2023 at 5:14 am

      HEAR!! HEAR!!!

      scooterjay in reply to EBL. | June 10, 2023 at 8:00 am

      I can’t believe NeverTrumpKaren downvoted you.
      Pfft, she is the Tara Servatious of digital media, thin-skinned and haughty.

      MarkS in reply to EBL. | June 10, 2023 at 8:37 am

      yes it will. some corrupt prosecutor will either decline or a corrupt judge will rulle in the Dem’s favor

    Another treasonous swine.

    diver64 in reply to alien. | June 10, 2023 at 6:08 am

    We now have the 4th election in a row that the DOJ is blatantly interfering in

At least he kept a straight face.

Why are you making us listen to this repulsive hack? I have no interest in hearing the point of view of the soviet-esque clown prosecutor defend his abuse of power. What will I learn, the point of view of the police state? I thing that’s plain enough as it is.

    No one is making you do anything. You can always just skip a post if you think it’s not to your (predetermined) liking. But you may want to open your mind a tiny bit and listen to things that don’t conform to your prejudices and emotions. /Just a thought.

      Concise in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | June 9, 2023 at 8:38 pm

      Not sure about the aggressive tone. You do understand that I didn’t literally mean I was being forced to read or hear anything. My comment was simply intended as a somewhat facetious criticism of representing the self-serving garbage of this police state hack as somehow a legitimate effort to pursue justice. But if you feel the police state prosecutor is honestly furthering law and justice, that’s you’re opinion. I dare to disagree with you.

        Heh, cool. Tone is often lost in written comments, but I dig your mockery if that’s what you intended.

        Not just aggressive, but gratuitous for no reason, even if you were being literal. Speaking from firsthand experience. Unprovoked putdowns are uncool.

          Is there anything more boring and useless than a whining whiner who whines? There must be, but I am at a total loss.

          Here’s a bit of advice: don’t bite off more than you can chew. Sniping at me is a bad idea unless you are fully armed for a war of the wits and words, and you, so very obviously, are not. Sit down and lick your wounds, that whining thing you have going will play well with your crowd. The rest of us find you revolting. You are all attack mode until you get hit . . . then it’s “waaaah, you do mean aggressive and unprovoked!” Save it, baby man. We see you.

          I guess I should be grateful for having my eyes opened. Before, I simply dismissed charges leveled by Lavrentiy Beria out of hand. Now I understand I should have been more open. Maybe the guy had some good points.

          They see you, too. You have a platform here. Can’t just refute or ridicule ideas, but make it personal. You did it elsewhere today. It’s not sniping. No one cause you to do it, but you do. Uncalled for. The response shows it won’t stop. It’s actually quite immature. Have the last word.

          LOL, reminds me of the old days with Milhouse and Robesphere (sp) going at it.

          It does liven things up around here.

          Heh. I miss Milhouse and hope he’s okay.

          The Gentle Grizzly in reply to oldschooltwentysix. | June 10, 2023 at 9:56 am

          @ fuzz “Is there anything more boring and useless than a whining whiner who whines?”

          Yes. When the whiner who whines starts to snivel.

      scooterjay in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | June 10, 2023 at 8:03 am

      That is absolutely true.
      When you post expect pushback.
      Arguing with us in comments?
      ¡No bueno!

“The prosecutors in my office are among the most talented and experienced in the Department of Justice. ” Great recommendation for a Soviet style trial.

I wonder how soon he got off camera before he broke out laughing?

    The Gentle Grizzly in reply to Whitewall. | June 9, 2023 at 8:22 pm

    It would be great if someone has phone phootage of such a thing, like Bill Clinton laughing at funerals until noticing the cameras.

Off with his head!

The laws apply to everyone even if we have to make up the laws.

TY Mary.. Many of us are wondering the same thing..

Kinda like the old saying.. everyone is equal, it’s just some are more equal than others… The laws are applied equally, just more equally to 45.

Everyone huh?
Do Sundowner, Hillary and Barky next then

Suburban Farm Guy | June 9, 2023 at 8:10 pm

That’s hilarious. Trump can’t even get lawyers because antifa will burn their houses down but this guy goes full Stalin and gets a gig on CNN.

I think my question just answered itself.

2smartforlibs | June 9, 2023 at 8:33 pm

The law doesn’t apply to everyone. It only applies to those, not in the loop.

Trump has known for years that they really were out to get him. To have hung onto a single shred of these papers is unbelievable. Given that Hillary’s and Biden’s offenses seem to have been far more serious, his best hope may be a hung jury – someone who decides “No way I will convict him if those others are running free.” In other words, we get “equal protection under the law” from the jury.

    wendybar in reply to jb4. | June 10, 2023 at 5:18 am

    I can’t believe there are actually idiots downvoting you for writing the truth.

      MarkS in reply to wendybar. | June 10, 2023 at 8:40 am

      Trump is not a conform or else kinda guy,…that why we like him

        CommoChief in reply to MarkS. | June 10, 2023 at 11:47 am

        With full knowledge that the Biden admin and the ideological DoJ goons would use every possible option, every means fair and unfair, every heavy handed dirty trick to go after him, he refused to alter his tactics and here we are.

          BoboPhat in reply to CommoChief. | June 10, 2023 at 1:35 pm

          Knowing that he will be persecuted doesn’t require doing nothing, but rather only to take care… and as has been shown repeatedly, Trump has been careful for as long as he has been talking about running for the presidency… decades. It’s (part of) why the government can’t nail him on anything. To believe that he has just recently carelessly committed a crime, while aware that he is being persecuted, and with spectacularly good advisors (as demonstrated by the fact that not a single attack against him has worked), is just plain silly.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | June 10, 2023 at 6:38 pm

          The part in the indictment where Trump:
          1. Admitted his possession of info that he did not declassify
          2. Invited someone, yet unnamed, to ‘take a look at this’; the not declassified doc

          If true, that wasn’t taking care, it was hubris.

        Danny in reply to MarkS. | June 10, 2023 at 4:43 pm

        When the FBI says you will be arrested if you do not return documents you are not entitled to have only a true idiot would refuse to hand them back.

        The law was crystal clear that he should have returned all of the above requested.

        That he didn’t was an extreme error in judgement.

    inspectorudy in reply to jb4. | June 10, 2023 at 4:41 pm

    I am puzzled by some of the new pictures showing stacks of boxes in his bathroom and shower. If this turns out to be real and not the DoJ’s usual gaslighting, then he may truly have an issue. Trump has a personality that automatically refuses to comply with authority. Having been POTUS it got even worse. I hope there is an explanation for this but if he truly asked his employees to lie and hide things, he is really in trouble. All of the guff about classified material can be debated but open obstruction has only one way to go. I truly hope this is not the case.

Yeah he really wants a ‘speedy trial’.

That’s why they waited YEARS to finally bring this crap, conveniently right at the start of the election season.

And by the way, they’re claiming he can face ONE HUNDRED YEARS in prison.

Meanwhile an insane radical DA just let a 17 year old triple murderer off with 7 years in juvenile hall.

Our justice system is broken, and Democrats have broken it.

    The Gentle Grizzly in reply to Olinser. | June 10, 2023 at 10:10 am

    The 17 year old misunderstood youth will serve in Juvie until either 18 or 21, then go to the Big House. There, he will learn how to refine his skills.

    Remember his name. In 7 years or less, he will be out, and within in a month will commit more felonies.

    inspectorudy in reply to Olinser. | June 10, 2023 at 4:42 pm

    400 years!

Sure, the law as written applies to everyone, but it is only enforced against the regime’s political opponents.

FWIW, the way to fight back is for Republicans to start real impeachment inquiry directed to Biden. Tit for Tat. It’s not like there isn’t a basis.

He kinda looks like a mis-formed Muppet character? Grover?

We could have a cast of character – Beetlejuice, Grover, Raggie Ann…….

If the Commander in Chief aka the POTUS, has the right to unclassifiy any document(s) and Congress has no ability to block his rights via law, then would not the same power of the Executive Branch extend to military documents? If this is the case, Smith’s statement: “Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States, and they must be enforced.” may not apply to the POTUS past or present.

    Danny in reply to IanM. | June 10, 2023 at 4:49 pm

    1. Declassification requires an order. To issue any kind of change anywhere someone not yourself has to know it has happened. You can’t declassify by thought alone. Trump never declassified those documents.

    2. Former presidents do not have a right to keep sensitive documents. If they as president did not declassify them they are to be kept by the government not the former president

    3. POTUS is a job. Once your term is ended you are no longer the president.

    Classified military documents are most definitely not permitted to be taken by a former president.

    There are people in prison right now for exactly this crime. It was extremely stupid of Trump to do this, and even dumber not to cooperate when the government tried to get the documents back.

inspectorudy | June 10, 2023 at 4:50 pm

As I read all that appears about this indictment, it becomes obvious to me that obstruction is the main crime they will focus on. The classified material has precedents from other POTUSs like Bill Clinton and his “Personal” tape recordings of national leaders discussing national secrets and security measures. He kept them in his sock drawer and was allowed to keep them by a federal court. That would have probably been enough to get him off of that claim but obstruction is another matter. If they have turned an employee or counsel against him, he is in serious trouble. As we have all heard many times about DC, “The coverup is worse than the crime”.

    Danny in reply to inspectorudy. | June 10, 2023 at 8:26 pm

    The classified material most definitely DOES NOT have any precedent from prior presidents. It has precedent but the only case of this not resulting in arrest and conviction is Hillary Clinton.

    1. This is from the case you are talking about

    “According to plaintiff, President Clinton enlisted historian Taylor Branch to assist him in creating “an oral history of his eight years in office.” Compl. ¶ 8. In 2009, Branch published a book entitled, “The Clinton Tapes: Wrestling History with the President,” based upon extensive conversations with President Clinton during his tenure in the White House and the events Branch observed when he was in the President’s office. See Joe Klein, “Book Review: Bill Session,” N.Y. Times (Sept. 25, 2009), http:// www. nytimes. com/ 2009/ 09/ 27/ books/ review/ Klein- t. html. In 2010, plaintiff filed this action. [Dkt. # 1]. Plaintiff avers that from January 20, 1993 to January 20, 2001, Branch recorded seventy-nine audiotapes that “preserved not only President Clinton’s thoughts and commentary on contemporaneous events and issues he was facing as president, but, in some instances, recorded actual events such as presidential telephone conversations.” Compl. ¶ 9.”

    As you could see from the opening of the decision summarizing plaintiff claims you have been lied to by whoever told you it had something to do with world leaders, it didn’t.

    The Clinton case has no overlap at all with the Trump case.

    First your claim that it was national leaders is a lie. Here is the case decision here as you could see the tapes in question were NOT world leaders but a journalist who used it as the basis for the book “The Clinton Tapes” which you could buy on Amazon.

    Bill Clinton at the time classified them as personal documents, the National Archive agreed with that designation. It was Tom Fitton who sued demanding the national archives take them and it was ruled he had no standing and no case.

    NOTHING on those tapes were even alleged to be classified, and Bill Clinton had always made an assertion about what those were.

    You could read the case decision yourself, plaintiff never even alleged any classified information.

    2. The reason there are no earlier examples of presidents doing this is because of how utterly stupid it is. Wanting to keep classified documents….for an earlier president it was either declassify or don’t do it.

    3. The normal procedure actually is if you turn over all documents requested and cooperate with law enforcement in return of the documents after the issue is brought to your attention you aren’t prosecuted, if you instead obstruct in these cases you got the book thrown at you as people ranging from former naval reservists to former computer experts have found out.

    Trump did something incredibly stupid in terms of these documents both by taking them without declassifying them (which again I just quoted from the case you mentioned establishing Bill Clinton was never even alleged to have done anything remotely similar) and by refusing to turn them over when told to.

    That is why this is nothing like the Alvin Bragg case. Jack Smith actually has an extremely strong case which is why he is willing to bring it in southern Florida areas that usually go red.

If Jack wants a speedy trial he will get one soon after Jan 20,,2024.

    Danny in reply to kjon. | June 10, 2023 at 11:42 pm

    A trial for what exactly?

    Lunatic comments should cease being the window dressing of our movement. Jack Smith has done nothing illegal, and has put together a very strong case made possible by Trump’s own stupidity.

Is this Rasputin eyed Schmidt from the same beer hall as Robert Müller?
He has a prior record of election interference