Special Counsel Jack Smith against former President Donald Trump, citing CBS reporter Robert Costa, who referenced insider sources. The evidence reportedly encompasses phone records, memos, diary entries from key witnesses, including former Vice President Mike Pence, and vital eyewitness testimonies from individuals present in the Oval Office during Trump’s tenure.
In contrast to the January 6th Committee, the special counsel’s office possesses subpoena power, enabling a more in-depth exploration of witness testimonies. Costa’s discussions with sources indicated that Smith has meticulously constructed a robust case against Trump, as initially reported by The Gateway Pundit on December 25, 2023.
During a segment on “Face the Nation,†CBS reporter Jan Crawford speculated that the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to rule against Trump’s immunity argument. Crawford suggested that the Court might not grant immunity from criminal prosecution, potentially leading to a unanimous decision.
More Read
Last week, the Supreme Court dismissed Jack Smith’s plea for an expedited ruling on Trump’s immunity argument. Smith had urged the Court for a swift decision, but Trump opposed this, asserting immunity from federal prosecution for actions taken during his presidency.
Trump’s legal team argued that historically, no president has faced criminal prosecution for official acts, adding complexity and significance to the immunity question.
Smith bypassed the appellate court, directly petitioning the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to offer an immediate ruling.
Presently, Jack Smith awaits the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for DC’s decision, with oral arguments scheduled for January 9, 2024. Speculation lingers about the Supreme Court potentially considering the appeal post the appellate court’s decision. However, the likelihood of the case being taken up during the current term remains uncertain.
In support of his claim for presidential immunity, Trump filed his opening brief at the appeals court. The three-judge panel on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, comprising Karen Henderson (George H.W. Bush appointee), Michelle Childs, and Florence Pan (both Biden appointees), holds the authority to determine the outcome.
The ongoing legal tussle suggests that the Supreme Court’s decision on immunity could have far-reaching implications, potentially affecting future prosecutions of presidents for official acts.
The CBS News report underscores the extensive evidence gathered by Special Counsel Jack Smith against Trump, the Supreme Court’s rejection of an expedited ruling on immunity, and the impending appellate court decision that could significantly influence the course of this consequential legal dispute.
As the legal battle ensues, the impending appeal at the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for DC, set for January 9, 2024, adds to the suspense of an already high-stakes situation.
With the legal community eagerly awaiting this crucial juncture, the outcome stands poised to establish a precedent at the juncture of presidential immunity and criminal prosecution, potentially reshaping the future landscape of accountability for former occupants of the nation’s highest office.
Â
Â
