Harry Litman: 'Federal Judge Makes MAJOR DECISION in Donald Trump Case'

Source:Harry Litman- U.S. Federal District Judge Tanya Chutkan, for Washington, D.C.

"Judge Tanya Chutkan has temporarily pressed pause on all procedural deadlines in the federal election interference case while the appeals court weighs the immunity question. The decision will likely delay the March trial date, but the trial could still wrap before the November election." 

From Harry Litman 

Geraldo Rivera on CNN last night: 

"GERALDO RIVERA, JOURNALIST: Well, I liked them before the election so people could make a more reasoned judgment when they were voting for whoever they're going to vote for. But that's not the issue. The Supreme Court doesn't care whether or not it's fair. It cares whether it's legal.

So, he's being charged with obstruction of the election or conspiracy to obstruct the election. But the issue is, and Trump alleges, that he has absolute immunity for any crime committed when he's president. So, the Supreme Court has decided to litigate that. They're going to decide whether or not Trump has absolute immunity.

I mean, there are other defenses that he has, like double jeopardy and some of the others. But the main one is this absolute immunity. Are presidents absolutely immune from criminal prosecution for acts committed while they are in office? And so far, Trump's been losing on that. But we'll see. 

RIVERA: I -- right now, I think that the Supreme Court is going to look at this statute, this conspiracy to obstruct statute, and they're going to decide whether or not it's constitutional. The case against President Trump is hanging by a thread, I think, right now.

It is -- to get this thing done before election is going to be extremely difficult. The Supreme Court is going to come down with their decision probably in June, then it's going to be July, and before you know it, it's going to be an election. I don't know how they could possibly do it physically before the election.

RIVERA: Well, that may be true, Abby, but the Supreme Court also, one thing Philippe did not mention, is deciding whether or not the very statute under which he is accused in this main case, the Jack Smith case, these four counts in the indictment, whether or not the statute itself is appropriate, whether or not it is constitutional, whether or not you need corrupt intent.

It's not only Trump's case that hangs in the balance right now, Abby. It's hundreds of January 6th rioters. Their cases also hang in the balance. And whether or not the very statute under which they are accused, even -- Philippe may not like Trump. That's not relevant. What is relevant is what is constitutional, what is appropriate.

There's a reason presidents have not been arrested before. There's a reason that they're not indicted. They are impeached. He has been impeached twice. He has also been acquitted twice by the Senate of the United States.

Trump argues, maybe successfully, maybe farfetched, that that is double jeopardy. The court, the original court of jurisdiction, has said no, it's not double jeopardy. But the Supreme Court has now decided that they want to rule on this case.

RIVERA: Is there corrupt intent? I -- Abby, trust me, it is shocking to me as well that the Supreme Court took this case and they are now reviewing the case of whether or not the very statute is constitutional. It is -- they say, their statute requires corrupt intent, not only corrupt intent.

So, was there corrupt intent? You know, that is something that will be litigated, but it is, by no means, a slam dunk. It is nerve-wracking. Ask Jack Smith how he feels tonight that the Supreme Court has taken these cases. 

RIVERA: Who is on the Supreme Court? Hold on. who is on the Supreme Court of the United States right now? Is it not a fact that Trump has managed to put three justices on the Supreme Court and now there's a conservative 6-3 majority? I think your complacency and attitude that this thing is going to go ahead and you'll get it done in a timely fashion.

What people have to grasp is, and with all due respect, I really believe that this issue of corrupt intent will screw up all of the schedules that people have and I believe that it will be physically impossible for the Supreme Court and everybody else to rule in time for the election. I don't believe that that will happen.

It is in Trump's interest." 

From CNN

I'm showing you Geraldo Rivers'a response and opinion on Donald Trump's immunity claim, because he was on CNN's Newsnight With Abby Phillip last night, essentially trying to make Trump World's (or what's left of Trump World) argument for why Donald Trump shouldn't be tried at all right now, at least until he's President again and can just unilaterally throw all these Federal cases out that are against him. 

I think what Geraldo is really doing here, is campaigning to be Donald Trump's attorney attorney, similar to what Alan Dershowitz was doing on his podcast a couple months ago, by making the garbage argument that Donald Trump is immune to all prosecutions against him, simply because he's currently running for President right now. I'm not a lawyer, but I love to see the statue or the section in the U.S. Constitution where it says that presidential candidates are immune from prosecution, or even about the law, simply because they are presidential candidates.

But with Geraldo Rivera, unlike most of his other lawyers like Alina Habba and others, at least he tries to sound intelligent and put a real argument together, unlike Trump's Washington lawyers right now who are literally arguing that there should be a delay here, because it's the holiday season and they need to spend time with their families. Apparently they were asleep in law school on the day when they were told that bering a lawyer, especially a criminal defense lawyer and prosecutor, involves a lot of hard work and personal sacrifice. 

I agree with Harry Litman that this delay with the Trump appeal on immunity, will probably delay the Washington trial by a month or so. But DJT will lose that as well, simply because their argument is ridiculous, (and that might be putting it mildly) because no one is above the law in this country, including former President's and presidential candidates. And that this trial will probably start in April or May, maybe June and DJT will be convicted by the end of the summer 2024.  

You can also see this post on WordPress.