LOS ANGELES.–Special Counsel Jack Smith, 55, got 78-year-old President Donald Trump indictment for obstruction of official government acts related to the 2020 presidential election. Trump’s prior charges were modified pending a review of the July 1 Supreme Court ruling on immunity, extending limited immunity for officials acts. Whatever happened at the Capitol Jan. 6, 2021, either riots or an insurrection, the Supreme Court ruled that Trump had immunity over his Jan. 6, 2021 speech on the Ellipse where House Democrats accuse Trump for fomenting a riot. Trump was actually impeached Jan. 13, 2021 for “incitement of insurrection,” actually acquitted in the U.S. Senate Feb. 13. Yet House Democrats formed their Jan. 6 Select Committee to determine what role, if any, Trump played in the Jan. 6 Capitol riots that Democrats conveniently called an “insurrection.”
House Democrats attorneys found a provision in the 14th Amendment, Article 3, that says that no one participating in insurrection in the U.S. government can run for public office. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that hat would prevent Trump from running again for president in 2024. Even the Supreme Court in the state of Colorado ruled that Trump can be kept from the 2024 ballot because he violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, denying the ballot to insurrectionists. Imagine that, the Colorado Supreme Court, in all the Democrat wisdom, ruled Trump can be kept off the ballot. Then, the U.S. Supreme ruled March 4, saying Trump must be put back on the ballot. But the extremes to which Democrats have gone to deny Trump his due process rights are inexcusable. Now Smith gets his preposterous indictment reinstated claiming Trump tried to obstruct an official proceeding.
Trump is being blamed without facts or evidence, with no probable cause, that he planned and orchestrated the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection, that was no insurrection at all, only a right wing riot planned carefully to pay the government back for allowing months of Black Live riots in the Summer before. But in any case, where the does the government indict Trump based on no facts in evidence, other that facts they make up or fabricate? House Democrats spent a year-and-a-half in their Select Committee trying to prove that Trump planned and orchestrated the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Nothing was ever proved yet Smith continues to insist that Trump, not the lawbreakers on Jan. 6, tried to obstruct the certification of the Electoral College vote. No criminal law under the U.S. Constitution permits indictments based on wild speculation, other that the partisan witch hunts against Trump in Congress.
Jack Smith wants to show that Trump deliberately lied about believing he lost the 2020 election, knew from the get-go he lost fair-and-square, lied to the public and everyone else because he knew he did not win the 2020 election. “The superseding indictment, which was presented to a new grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in the case, reflects the government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions,” said Special Counsel Jack Smith. Showing the grand jury system is broken, Smith gaslights the hapless lay people to believe he has probable cause to indict former President Donald Trump for acts he never committed. Yet if you listen to Smith’s reasoning, he has the right to make up facts to the grand jury. Democrats have thrown the book at Trump to stop his 2024 presidential bid.
Smith bases his facts on wild conjecture about Trump’s motives, something never done before slapping a defendant with charges. “These claims were unsupported, objectively unreasonable, and ever-changing and the Defendant and his co-conspirators repeated them even after they were publicly disproven,” said Smith’s indictment. “These claims were false and the Defendant knew they were false,” knowing there are no facts to support Smith’s charges. If Smith had any real facts that Trump participated in the Jan. 6 riots, he would have charged Trump with trespassing, violence, malicious mischief and destruction of government property. But Smith has no facts but exploits and gaslights a grand jury to make his case against Trump. Smith should be disbarred for letting his loyalty to the Democrat Party supersede his oath of office to the Constitution and rule of law.
Smith has no way to look into Trump’s soul and know his motives for saying the 2020 election was rigged. Whatever his so-called co-conspirators did to get plea deals, doesn’t mean that Trump was guilty of anything. Any defendant in a criminal case has the chance of a plea deal with that’s what they’re offered by government prosecutors. Why a grand jury is so easily buffaloed by Smith is anyone’s guess. You’d think a grand jury has a right to ask for proof, hard evidence regarding the wild claims. Whether Trump considers Jan. 6 rioters patriots or not, it’s irrelevant to whether Smith has a case that Trump planned and organized the Jan. 6 Capitol riots. Government officials, like Smith, walk a slippery slope charging a former president when he was acquitted by the U.S. Senate of essentially the same charges. Smith asks the grand jury to believe he has a degree in mind-reading.
About the Author
John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary on national and global news. He’s editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.
