Image 01 Image 03

Special Counsel Jack Smith Asks Judge for Gag Order Against Trump

Special Counsel Jack Smith Asks Judge for Gag Order Against Trump

“The defendant’s past conduct, including conduct that has taken place after and as a direct result of the indictment in this case, amply demonstrates the need for this order”

Jack Smith, the special counsel going after Trump, has asked a judge to issue a gag order, preventing Trump from talking about him, the judge, witnesses and pretty much anyone else involved.

It’s the latest example of the left reminding us that they have privileges that others don’t possess.

Politico reports:

Jack Smith seeks gag order on Trump

Special counsel Jack Smith is asking a judge to issue a gag order against Donald Trump, prohibiting him from attacking prosecutors, the judge or potential witnesses who may testify in his federal criminal trial stemming from his effort to subvert the 2020 election.

“The defendant’s past conduct, including conduct that has taken place after and as a direct result of the indictment in this case, amply demonstrates the need for this order,” prosecutors wrote, adding that Trump’s past salvos had already resulted in harassment of potential witnesses.

On Friday afternoon, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan unsealed filings revealing the government’s week-old request, arguing that Trump is undermining the fairness of the proceedings through “disparaging and inflammatory attacks” on prosecutors, witnesses and the judge in the case…

Trump lashed out on his social media network Truth Social soon after news of the request broke, writing: “So, I’m campaigning for President against an incompetent person who has WEAPONIZED the DOJ & FBI to go after his Political Opponent, & I am not allowed to COMMENT? They Leak, Lie, & Sue, & they won’t allow me to SPEAK?”

I don’t blame Trump for lashing out. Everyone is sick and tired of this. Mark Levin appears to agree.

You can read the court documents here.

Trump addressed the issue during an appearance last night.

Last word goes to Tammy Bruce.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


OwenKellogg-Engineer | September 16, 2023 at 10:09 am

Mr. Smith,
If you can’t stand the heat……

    Smith seems to be choosing another option besides ‘leaving the kitchen’, namely turning off the source of the heat. Not really very surprising that he would seek a gag order. IMO he is wrong to do so and it shouldn’t be granted. The defendant is a Presidential candidate and attempting to muzzle him during the primary election or in the general election should he ultimately be selected as the GoP nominee is crap. That’s one part of the negative aspects for the DoJ in choosing to bring these indictments during the campaign instead of before now or even after the campaign. They made their bed and they should be forced to lay in it.

      Concise in reply to CommoChief. | September 16, 2023 at 7:00 pm

      Actually, it is never a good time to abuse prosecutorial powers to target political opponents.

        CommoChief in reply to Concise. | September 17, 2023 at 2:24 pm

        No it isn’t I agree but the DoJ having decided to do so should not get any slack nor be able to muzzle an active candidate from criticising them and the administration they are part of. They made their bed here so them complaining that the bed is hard is tough cookies.

        Of course now that targeting of political candidates has been made part of the landscape it is very much in bounds for every local DA, State AG and eventually a future AG under a GoP administration to target their political opposition. If not then the lefty d/prog might get the mistaken idea that this sort of thing is a one way ratchet instead of it being a useful tool for everyone to use as they see fit.

If only republicans controlled the House, then they could defund this out of control hack.

    AF_Chief_Master_Sgt in reply to Concise. | September 16, 2023 at 10:47 am

    GD Republicans don’t control anything, even when they have a majority.

    Give these asshats aa majority in the House, the Senate, and the Presidency and the fûcking Democrats are still in charge.

    The GD Republicans keep feeding voters a shït sandwich stuffed with McCain, Romney, Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush, Cheney and a never ending line of charlatans.

    But they will NEVER support a Republican president that wasn’t hand picked by the Democrats.

    They will NEVER step in to stop the persecution of the American people opposed to Marxism.


    TargaGTS in reply to Concise. | September 16, 2023 at 11:24 am

    One half of Congress can’t defund anything without the cooperation of the other half of Congress…and then the approval of the President, or enough votes in both houses of Congress to override a presidential veto. All these vanity bills that have been introduced the last couple weeks to defund the special counsel are just that, vanity bills, designed to act as fundraising initiatives. They have zero chance of ever becoming law.

      Dathurtz in reply to TargaGTS. | September 16, 2023 at 11:25 am

      They can defund everything with one house of congress.

      Concise in reply to TargaGTS. | September 16, 2023 at 11:57 am

      I’ve about had it with these lame establishment excuses. The republicans control the House. They control the purse strings. And we’re talking about a 2 sentence rider to stop constitutionally obnoxious lawfare, not an unpopular position. If democrats want to block a popular and salutary provision, let them try. But surrendering in advance without a fight is idiotic, stupid, and cowardly.

        Gosport in reply to Concise. | September 18, 2023 at 8:20 am

        “But surrendering in advance without a fight is idiotic, stupid, and cowardly.”

        And it’s exactly how we got where we are today.

I have long believed that in criminal trials particularly, the judge should be prohibited from ‘gagging’ the defendant and his lawyers. In fact, one of the reasons the Colonialists rose up against the Crown is because the Crown would forbid criminal defendants from speaking out before trial (and sometimes during trial). And yet, here we are, doing it all over again.

The defendant has NO OBLIGATION to ‘protect the integrity of the proceedings’ and in fact, the 1st Amendment was created in part to protect the right of the people to assail the behavior of the government. That DEFINITELY should not be paused when the government is trying to imprison a citizen.

    stevewhitemd in reply to TargaGTS. | September 16, 2023 at 2:28 pm

    I’ll modify this thought a bit — I have no problem with courts enforcing decorum in the courtroom. I have no problem with courts protecting jurors from harassment and so on. And certainly, lawyers (as officers of the court) must abide by the bar association and court rules.

    But a defendant? Speak as you wish, sir. Just remember that your words can be used in court.

    Oh, and Mr. Smith? You’re also an officer of the court. Perhaps you too could play by the rules.

    Concise in reply to TargaGTS. | September 17, 2023 at 12:19 pm

    When dealing with a corrupt banana republic kangaroo court, the rules are a little different for the victim of the proceedings.

    Milhouse in reply to TargaGTS. | September 17, 2023 at 7:20 pm

    The defendant has NO OBLIGATION to ‘protect the integrity of the proceedings’

    That is not true. The integrity of judicial proceedings is vital to a decent society; without it we don’t have civilization. And that means we can’t have people poisoning the jury pool. On either side. The USA allows far too much pre-trial publicity already, without adding to it. Then you pick a jury and you have to exclude anyone who’s been paying attention like a normal person, so you get juries that are either weird or lying. Neither is good for justice.

      Perhaps the problem there is not so much the “poisoning of the jury pool” but the idiotic progressive idea that you can have an uninformed, yet “informed”, jury.

How long do we let this go before we drive the election interference point home?

Trump has a Don Rickles sense of humor. The nice thing about humor is that it gets to the truth – that’s what makes it funny and inspires the humorist to say it in the first place.

They’re not random insults.

Perhaps a matching “gag order” covering the entire federal government, including the White House.

Of course he did. We ALL knew this crap was coming.

The goal is to destroy his campaign and remove him from the ballot.

And certain idiots will still scream that the goal of this insanity is to ‘boost’ Trump.

    Don’t discount the idea that they know this will harden his base, and that they hope to have only his base vote for him.
    I think they’re counting on the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” quandary to play in their favor. If we make Trump the candidate but all of this has turned off non-primary voters, then they win; if we refuse to make Trump the candidate because of all this, then they think they win.

    Let’s make sure that doesn’t happen by supporting candidates on principle, and not just emotional appeal and a cult of personality. If we have a bunch of candidates for whom we’re willing to vote in the general, that makes us stronger.

I have a strange suspiscion that Joe outlives Don.
It is coming, who will be Lee Harvey?


So we are clear… They’re only going after Hunter Biden on the federal gun charges because that’s the only one of Hunter’s numerous crimes that doesn’t tie directly back to Joe Biden. Biden’s DOJ is covering for
him, pretending to take action.
That’s how it works it’s all a show!

retiredcantbefired | September 16, 2023 at 4:25 pm

I would like to know Prof. Jacobson thinks of the motion for a gag order.

Is it possible that the Professor, who has maintained that Donald J. Trump is the author of (a few of) his legal woes, would actually support Jack Smith’s motion?

I certainly hope not, but I find it odd we are not hearing from the Professor on this.

Meanwhile, this site’s propensity to pay as little attention as possible to Missouri v. Biden is ongoing.

The DOJ is already appealing the Fifth Circuit’s recent decision to the Supreme Court. Not a word in these precincts.

I think this is really about the election, not the trial. Gagging Trump keeps him from using the trial as election fuel.

IIRC, one reason cited to not prosecute the Hildebeast was because it would interfere with the 2016 election.