Tag Archives: Jack Smith

crime news

Prosecutor seeks postponement … good!

If you thought that special counsel Jack Smith was going to railroad a trial through to its conclusion by accepting a judge’s way-too-early court date, well, guess again.

Smith has asked the judge in the case involving Donald Trump and those classified documents to push the trial back to Dec. 14.

You know what it tells me? It tells me that Smith is so confident in the evidence he has gathered that he is willing to wait an extra few months to put his case before the people.

He also is exhibiting an extraordinary level of fairness to Trump and his legal team. There can be no doubt that Smith is playing his strategy out by the book. That he is leaving no room for appeal on any sort of “technicality” that Trump’s team might construe in the event Smith is able to get a conviction on any of the counts on which Donald Trump stands indicted.

As a cheap-seat witness to all of this, I am willing to wait until December to see what the federal government has in its first-ever indictment of a former POTUS.

Let’s allow the judicial process to do its work.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Let’s have that speedy trial

Donald Trump has been characterized as the master of delay, of foot-dragging and one who would employ any tactic necessary to prolong the search for the truth where it involves his alleged criminality.

But wait! He also says the indictments handed down against him — one in New York and the other in Miami — are baseless. They are political witch hunts, he contends.

Here’s an idea. How about we proceed with all deliberate speed and knock these trials out in a “speedy” manner prescribed in the Constitution?

Special counsel Jack Smith, who delivered the south Florida indictment in the case involving those classified documents, said he would work toward a speedy trial.

If the former POTUS is innocent, he shouldn’t object to getting these matters adjudicated in a timely fashion. After all, he has a presidential campaign awaiting him, correct?

The first Republican primaries are just a few months away. Trump says he wants to return to the White House and has promised his supporters that he will be “your retribution.” That, in itself, is a frightening thought. He doesn’t need to say another word about whether he is fit for public office. He clearly is not!

If he is not guilty of the allegations leveled in the hush money case involving the adult film star or in the classified documents case, then let us proceed to a quick disposition of this matter.

You know and I know the same thing. It is that the evidence for a conviction has piled up all around Trump, particularly in the documents matter.  Oh, we still have the 1/6 insurrection probe that will conclude in due course and which likely will produce even more indictments.

Hey, an innocent man would have no reason to delay an outcome … correct?

johnkanelis_92@hotmail

legal news

This isn’t a ‘Law and Order’ world

If only we lived in the world portrayed by “Law and Order,” the TV drama that features police work and high-powered lawyering.

We don’t.

Unlike the characters on the TV drama, we’re in for a long and arduous slog awaiting a trial to determine whether the 45th president of the United States is guilty of the multiple crimes for which he has been indicted.

On “Law and Order,” the cops discover that a capital crime has occurred; they arrest a suspect; the district attorney’s office takes over and in a matter of days (or so it seems) the case goes to trial and a jury delivers a verdict.

Donald J. Trump, I am sad to report, is going to be given ample time to disparage the prosecutors, the grand jury, the Justice Department and anyone else who in any form or fashion criticizes him for the hideous conduct for which the grand jury indicted him.

The evidence appears to be overwhelming. A conviction to my eyes seems damn near inevitable. But when does a trial even occur?

Special counsel Jack Smith, who headed the probe into Trump’s squirreling away of classified documents in his posh Florida estate, has promised a “speedy trial.” I am reminded, though, to pull back on the definition of “speedy.” I am inclined to equate the term with the biblical description of Earth’s creation. The Bible tells us God took six “days” to finish the task, but I believe that the biblical definition of “day” doesn’t involve a 24-hour clock.

This case is going to try our patience. I am preparing my own emotional reservoir for a long haul.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news, political news

My wish? Ban Trump from public office

As strange as it might seem for readers of this blog, I want to declare that I have no burning desire to see Donald J. Trump tossed into prison if he is convicted of the crimes for which he is under indictment.

My stronger wish is to ensure that Trump never again is allowed to seek — let alone hold — public office.

The 37-count indictment handed down by a south Florida grand jury is damning in the extreme. It looks to be ironclad. Special counsel Jack Smith has a mountain of evidence to pore over and present a trial jury eventually.

If Trump is convicted, then I suspect there will be prison time involved. He stands accused of taking classified documents in violation of the Espionage Act; he is accused of obstructing justice and of abuse of power. He is the first former POTUS to be charged in a criminal indictment by the Justice Department.

Dark days lie ahead for this individual.

He never should have been elected president in 2016. But he was. He got the rebuke he so richly deserved in 2020 when he lost to Joe Biden.

I do not want him anywhere near the Oval Office ever again.

You know what? There might be a deal to be had to help this crook avoid prison time. It might involve a permanent ban from seeking public office. I don’t know what Jack Smith is inclined to pursue, nor do I know what Trump is inclined to accept.

But as a red-blooded American patriot, I am fine with ensuring we keep Trump away from any public office. I want him out of public life altogether. He sickens me to my core.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news

Special counsel speaks fundamental truth

Jack Smith, with just a single sentence, today laid out the complexities of our criminal justice system and highlighted his personal integrity.

Smith emerged today to reveal the contents of the indictment issued against Donald J. Trump. The cascade of evidence looks — to my untrained eyes — like a slam-dunk case. If I could predict an outcome, it would be that Trump is going down … hard.

Not so fast, the Justice Department’s special counsel, said today.

Trump, Smith said, “is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”

So, there you have it summed up neatly in a single phrase uttered by a seasoned prosecutor who had been called to duty by Attorney General Merrick Garland. Smith’s wisdom highlights graphically how complicated our system is and how it must always be.

No matter how persuasive the evidence appears to be — and Smith’s 37-count indictment appears to be irrefutable — we have a judicial process that must run its course. Our Constitution provides a guarantee of the presumption of innocence, to which all U.S. citizens are entitled.

Donald Trump usually expresses outward fearlessness of anyone or anything. My own view of the former POTUS suggests he must be trembling in terror at the prospect of Jack Smith prosecuting this case against him.

Smith showed his ethical chops today by declaring his own understanding that in our system of jurisprudence, everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

The special counsel, therefore, has set a high bar for himself, which tells me he has every intention of clearing it.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news

‘No one is above the law’

Merrick Garland has proven to be a man of his word, which some might suggest is a rare thing to behold in this contemporary world of public service.

The U.S. attorney general has told us time and again — and then some more — that “no one is above the law.” By “no one,” he means what precisely he said. No … one!

Not even a former president of the United States.

It is with that I want to salute the AG for signing off on a matter that indicted Donald J. Trump on seven counts relating to his pilfering of classified documents from the White House.

Garland appointed special counsel Jack Smith to complete the probe into Trump’s taking of those documents. Smith and his team found a treasure trove of evidence, starting with the documents themselves and aided with public statements bellowed from the ex-POTUS himself.

Donald Trump in effect sealed his own fate with his careless blathering about what he said he was “entitled” to take. He was entitled to take nothing from the White House. He did anyway. He also lied to the FBI about what he had returned and lied continually about the significance of the documents he had in his possession.

The attorney general has held the former POTUS accountable for his actions, to which I would add … it is about damn time!

As for his being faithful to his pledge that “no one is above the law,” that is worthy of the highest praise I can muster.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news, legal news, national news

‘No-name’ makes history

I would be willing to pay real American money to someone who could prove to me he or she knew who Jack Smith was when Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed him special counsel to examine the charges leveled against Donald J. Trump.

Well, this no-name “tough and dogged” federal prosecutor has made history in a major way by indicting Trump on seven counts related to the ex-POTUS’s squirreling away of classified documents at the end of his term in office.

Roll this around for just a moment. We now have the former commander in chief, the former head of the U.S. government’s executive branch being charged by that very branch of government on felony charges that could put the ex-POTUS in prison for the rest of his miserable life.

The Justice Department’s charges are serious, man. I have no idea what it all means to the political calculus in play as Trump campaigns for the presidency in 2024. The legality, though, is as clear as it gets.

And for crying out loud, spare me the “politicization” argument that is going to come from the MAGA crowd. Trump is going to make this a political case. He is going to accuse DOJ of “election interference.” Imagine, too, the hideously rich irony of Trump claiming election interference … given that he is the King of Election Interference!

Jack Smith has done precisely what Merrick Garland asked of him. He did it with professionalism, steely resolve and a commitment to the rule of law.

He now has become a household name. Who knew?

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

crime news

Will he end up in cuffs and leg irons?

When I hear this chatter from a former president’s lawyers that the ex-POTUS could serve time in prison, my thoughts turn immediately to a friend I haven’t seen in more than two decades.

His name is Peter and he lives in Australia. He has been saying ever since the crap hit the fan on the former president that he truly envisions the sight of the former president being hauled away in handcuffs and leg irons.

That he committed such egregious crimes as president and as an immediate past president that the feds will have no choice but to indict him, put him on trial and then, if convicted, haul his overfed backside off to the slammer.

Peter and I communicate often, discussing the affairs of our respective governments. I concede openly that he is more dialed in to what’s happening here than I am with what is occurring in Canberra. Indeed, the stakes involving the former president would send shock waves worldwide if he is convicted of felonies.

For us, the notion of sending an ex-POTUS to prison is all but anathema. For those around the world, in other democratic nations, it’s happened already.

France has imprisoned a former president; so has Peru. Other leaders of less-free governments have faced criminal charges and have served time as well.

Such a thing would be unfathomable — in many Americans’ eyes — if the criminal defendant is a former president of the United States.

Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed a hard-nosed seasoned prosecutor to take over the twin probes involving Donald Trump’s role in the 1/6 assault on our government and the squirreling away of classified documents he took from the White House as he was preparing to leave office.

The smart money seems to suggest that the special counsel, Jack Smith, has wrapped up his documents investigation. He is going to indict the ex-president soon on serious federal charges that could — if he’s convicted — put the ex-POTUS behind bars possibly for the rest of his life. I mean, he is 76 years of age.

What’s more, none of this involves the state prosecutors’ investigations into his trying to overturn election results in Georgia and his indictment on charges that he misspent campaign funds to keep a porn star quiet about a fling she alleges the two of them had in 2006.

I hope my friend reads this blog. So, to him I want to say: It looks more possible than ever that your wish well could come true.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com