CBS News Legal Contributor Says It’s Not “Far-Fetched” to Argue That Jack Smith’s Hit Piece Breaches Trump’s Right to a “Fair Trial”

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
21,762
42,046
2,290
See what I mean? This was pure desperation by Chutkin.

Chutkin allowed this, she isn't fit to serve on the Federal bench.

She is a partisan, leftoid hack.

This is 100% election interference.




CBS News legal contributor Rebecca Roiphe said on Wednesday that arguing special counsel Jack Smith’s evidence brief breaches former President Donald Trump’s right to a fair trial is not “far-fetched” due to the documents’ level of detail.

During an appearance on CBS News, the former Manhattan prosecutor discussed the “unusual” level of detail in the recent filings by Smith that could interfere with Trump’s constitutional right to a fair trial. The host asked Roiphe to delve into the evidentiary value of the documents now released to the public and explain how this might play out in a jury trial.

“When there are motions, those motions become public. and those motions contain certain factual allegations. I think what is unusual here is the level of detail. Now, of course, this is an important case,” Roiphe explained. “This is responding to a ruling from the Supreme Court that was fairly vague. And so it’s not that the level of detail is inappropriate, but there is a level of detail that one doesn’t normally see in motion filings.”

...

“And so, you know, I think that’s worth pausing and mentioning that the former president’s argument that this was interfering with his constitutional right to a fair trial, you know, it’s not a far-fetched argument to make given how much detail is actually in there,” she continued.

Judge Tanya Chutkan released Wednesday a redacted version of Smith’s detailed brief on the evidence concerning former Trump’s alleged election interference. Dismissing accusations of “bad-faith partisan bias,” Chutkan ordered the 165-page document on presidential immunity to be filed publicly, countering Trump’s legal team’s objections to its release before the election.

In a Tuesday filing, Trump’s legal team accused Smith of political motives for seeking to publicize witness testimony before the election. They argued to Judge Chutkan that while prosecutors will redact names in a significant presidential immunity motion, they intend to leave quotations from sensitive materials unredacted, a reversal from Smith’s earlier stance on protecting such information to ensure justice.


 
See what I mean? This was pure desperation by Chutkin.

Chutkin allowed this, she isn't fit to serve on the Federal bench.

She is a partisan, leftoid hack.

This is 100% election interference.




CBS News legal contributor Rebecca Roiphe said on Wednesday that arguing special counsel Jack Smith’s evidence brief breaches former President Donald Trump’s right to a fair trial is not “far-fetched” due to the documents’ level of detail.

During an appearance on CBS News, the former Manhattan prosecutor discussed the “unusual” level of detail in the recent filings by Smith that could interfere with Trump’s constitutional right to a fair trial. The host asked Roiphe to delve into the evidentiary value of the documents now released to the public and explain how this might play out in a jury trial.

“When there are motions, those motions become public. and those motions contain certain factual allegations. I think what is unusual here is the level of detail. Now, of course, this is an important case,” Roiphe explained. “This is responding to a ruling from the Supreme Court that was fairly vague. And so it’s not that the level of detail is inappropriate, but there is a level of detail that one doesn’t normally see in motion filings.”

...

“And so, you know, I think that’s worth pausing and mentioning that the former president’s argument that this was interfering with his constitutional right to a fair trial, you know, it’s not a far-fetched argument to make given how much detail is actually in there,” she continued.

Judge Tanya Chutkan released Wednesday a redacted version of Smith’s detailed brief on the evidence concerning former Trump’s alleged election interference. Dismissing accusations of “bad-faith partisan bias,” Chutkan ordered the 165-page document on presidential immunity to be filed publicly, countering Trump’s legal team’s objections to its release before the election.

In a Tuesday filing, Trump’s legal team accused Smith of political motives for seeking to publicize witness testimony before the election. They argued to Judge Chutkan that while prosecutors will redact names in a significant presidential immunity motion, they intend to leave quotations from sensitive materials unredacted, a reversal from Smith’s earlier stance on protecting such information to ensure justice.




Jack Smith. What does he look like to you if you didn't know anything about him?
 
See what I mean?
What's the success rate of all your previous weepy conpiracy ravings about Trump's legal problems?

Huh. Would you look at that. You've been completely wrong every single time. Your record of failure is still perfect and unblemished. It's al,most as if you just parrot kook cult propaganda.

You are useful in one way. If you say something, it's almost certain the opposite is true. Thus, we know Trump is in big trouble, and has no way out of it.
 
What's the success rate of all your previous weepy conpiracy ravings about Trump's legal problems?

Huh. Look at that. You've been completely wrong every single time. Your record of failure is still perfect and unblemished. It's al,most as if you just parrot kook cult propaganda.

Well, I'm sure this time it will be different. Good luck with that.


So glad you asked.

Trump won in SCOTUS on immunity, he won in Florida, he'll likely have the absurd civil case in NYC brought by Letitia James reversed. And the Georgia case is basically dead.

How's that to start with?
 
So glad you asked.

Trump won in SCOTUS on immunity, he won in Florida, he'll likely have the absurd civil case in NYC brought by Letitia James reversed. And the Georgia case is basically dead.

How's that to start with?
Don't hold your breath waiting for straight answer from that left wing klutz.
 
See what I mean? This was pure desperation by Chutkin.

Chutkin allowed this, she isn't fit to serve on the Federal bench.

She is a partisan, leftoid hack.

This is 100% election interference.



CBS News legal contributor Rebecca Roiphe said on Wednesday that arguing special counsel Jack Smith’s evidence brief breaches former President Donald Trump’s right to a fair trial is not “far-fetched” due to the documents’ level of detail.
During an appearance on CBS News, the former Manhattan prosecutor discussed the “unusual” level of detail in the recent filings by Smith that could interfere with Trump’s constitutional right to a fair trial. The host asked Roiphe to delve into the evidentiary value of the documents now released to the public and explain how this might play out in a jury trial.
“When there are motions, those motions become public. and those motions contain certain factual allegations. I think what is unusual here is the level of detail. Now, of course, this is an important case,” Roiphe explained. “This is responding to a ruling from the Supreme Court that was fairly vague. And so it’s not that the level of detail is inappropriate, but there is a level of detail that one doesn’t normally see in motion filings.”
...
“And so, you know, I think that’s worth pausing and mentioning that the former president’s argument that this was interfering with his constitutional right to a fair trial, you know, it’s not a far-fetched argument to make given how much detail is actually in there,” she continued.
Judge Tanya Chutkan released Wednesday a redacted version of Smith’s detailed brief on the evidence concerning former Trump’s alleged election interference. Dismissing accusations of “bad-faith partisan bias,” Chutkan ordered the 165-page document on presidential immunity to be filed publicly, countering Trump’s legal team’s objections to its release before the election.
In a Tuesday filing, Trump’s legal team accused Smith of political motives for seeking to publicize witness testimony before the election. They argued to Judge Chutkan that while prosecutors will redact names in a significant presidential immunity motion, they intend to leave quotations from sensitive materials unredacted, a reversal from Smith’s earlier stance on protecting such information to ensure justice.


Ummmm... What "hit piece"?
 
So glad you asked.

Trump won in SCOTUS on immunity, he won in Florida, he'll likely have the absurd civil case in NYC brought by Letitia James reversed. And the Georgia case is basically dead.

How's that to start with?
Given the election interference case is being litigated, he clearly didn’t win enough at SCOTUS to make his problems go away.
 
See what I mean? This was pure desperation by Chutkin.

Chutkin allowed this, she isn't fit to serve on the Federal bench.

She is a partisan, leftoid hack.

This is 100% election interference.



CBS News legal contributor Rebecca Roiphe said on Wednesday that arguing special counsel Jack Smith’s evidence brief breaches former President Donald Trump’s right to a fair trial is not “far-fetched” due to the documents’ level of detail.
During an appearance on CBS News, the former Manhattan prosecutor discussed the “unusual” level of detail in the recent filings by Smith that could interfere with Trump’s constitutional right to a fair trial. The host asked Roiphe to delve into the evidentiary value of the documents now released to the public and explain how this might play out in a jury trial.
“When there are motions, those motions become public. and those motions contain certain factual allegations. I think what is unusual here is the level of detail. Now, of course, this is an important case,” Roiphe explained. “This is responding to a ruling from the Supreme Court that was fairly vague. And so it’s not that the level of detail is inappropriate, but there is a level of detail that one doesn’t normally see in motion filings.”
...
“And so, you know, I think that’s worth pausing and mentioning that the former president’s argument that this was interfering with his constitutional right to a fair trial, you know, it’s not a far-fetched argument to make given how much detail is actually in there,” she continued.
Judge Tanya Chutkan released Wednesday a redacted version of Smith’s detailed brief on the evidence concerning former Trump’s alleged election interference. Dismissing accusations of “bad-faith partisan bias,” Chutkan ordered the 165-page document on presidential immunity to be filed publicly, countering Trump’s legal team’s objections to its release before the election.
In a Tuesday filing, Trump’s legal team accused Smith of political motives for seeking to publicize witness testimony before the election. They argued to Judge Chutkan that while prosecutors will redact names in a significant presidential immunity motion, they intend to leave quotations from sensitive materials unredacted, a reversal from Smith’s earlier stance on protecting such information to ensure justice.


It was never about a trial. Jack smith is a polltical agenda illegally appointed. This was a desperate attempt after the horrible debate for tampon timmy
 
It was never about a trial. Jack smith is a polltical agenda illegally appointed. This was a desperate attempt after the horrible debate for tampon timmy


Yep, and that Commie Chutkin will one day get her comeuppance.
 

Forum List

Back
Top