{"id":1493717,"date":"2024-10-03T15:05:00","date_gmt":"2024-10-03T19:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/?p=1493717"},"modified":"2024-10-03T15:05:00","modified_gmt":"2024-10-03T19:05:00","slug":"trick-or-lame-jack-smiths-october-surprise-is-just-recycled-fake-electors","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/trick-or-lame-jack-smiths-october-surprise-is-just-recycled-fake-electors\/1493717\/","title":{"rendered":"Trick-Or-Lame: Jack Smith’s ‘October Surprise’ Is Just Recycled ‘Fake Electors’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Trick-Or-Lame: Jack Smith’s ‘October Surprise’ Is Just Recycled ‘Fake Electors’ <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

For weeks rumors have been swirling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was going to unveil an ‘October surprise’ against Donald Trump that would upend the 2024 election.<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

On Wednesday, Smith filed a 165-page ‘oversized’ brief<\/a> (normally limited to 45 pages) that turns out to be nothing more than Smith’s regurgitated ‘fake elector’ claims <\/strong>after the Supreme Court ruled in July that Trump has “absolute immunity” for “actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” and “at least presumptive immunity” for all “official acts.”<\/p>\n

The filing is one of the first steps for activist Judge Tanya Chutkan to determine what remains of the superseding indictment Smith filed after the Supreme Court’s decision.<\/p>\n

“Although the defendant was the incumbent President during the charged conspiracies, his scheme was fundamentally a private one,” reads the new brief.<\/p>\n

“Working with a team of private co-conspirators, the defendant acted as a candidate when he pursued multiple criminal means to disrupt, through fraud and deceit, the government function by which votes are collected and counted<\/strong>\u2014a function in which the defendant, as President, had no official role.”<\/p>\n

Writing in his 165-page screed<\/a> about Trump\u2019s legal efforts challenging the results of the 2020 contest, Smith claimed that Trump engaged in criminal activity by, among other alleged actions, \u201cmanufacturing fraudulent electoral votes in the targeted states.\u201d<\/strong> This \u201cplan,\u201d the Merrick <\/a>Garland\u00a0<\/a>appointee contended, was designed to \u201ccause\u201d Trump electors in these states to \u201csign and send to [Vice President Mike Pence], as President of the Senate, certifications in which they falsely represented themselves as legitimate electors who had cast electoral votes for [Trump].\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cUltimately, the defendant and his co-conspirators would use these fraudulent electoral votes\u2014mere pieces of paper without the lawful imprimatur of a state executive\u2014to falsely claim that in his ministerial role presiding over the January 6 certification, Pence had the authority to choose the fraudulent slates over the legitimate ones<\/strong>, or to send the purportedly \u2018dueling\u2019 slates to the state legislatures for consideration anew,\u201d the brief reads. –The Federalist<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Yet, as The Federalist<\/em> further notes, there’s nothing illegal about naming contingent electors<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

In fact, the process conducted in contested states like\u00a0Georgia<\/a>\u00a0parallels a similar endeavor that occurred during the 1960 presidential contest between Democrat John F. Kennedy and Republican Richard Nixon.<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

As The Federalist\u2019s Margot Cleveland\u00a0previously\u00a0reported<\/a>, Kennedy and Nixon electors cast their votes for their respective candidates when a disagreement arose<\/strong> over who won Hawaii\u2019s electoral votes. While the state\u2019s acting governor certified the election for Nixon initially, a legal challenge followed by a court decision ultimately resulted in Kennedy receiving the electoral votes. -The Federalist<\/em><\/p>\n

What’s more, Democrats did the same thing<\/a> in 2016 – <\/strong>with corporate media running “[a]rticles demanding state electors \u2018prevent an irresponsible demagogue from taking office\u2019 and overrule Americans to install Hillary Clinton as president” as part of their efforts to prevent Trump from taking office.<\/p>\n

Trump described the filing as “falsehood-ridden” on Truth Social.<\/p>\n

For a deeper legal analysis, the Epoch Times<\/em><\/a> opines;<\/p>\n

\n

Legal Implications<\/h2>\n

Smith, in his superseding indictment, removed portions of the original indictment related to Trump\u2019s interactions with the Justice Department. <\/strong>Trump\u2019s attorney, John Lauro, suggested during a status conference on the case with Chutkan on Sept. 5 that she could throw out the superseding indictment for not adhering to the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling.<\/div>\n

Smith\u2019s motion purports to offer a \u201ccomprehensive account of the defendant\u2019s criminal conduct\u201d and requests that the court \u201cdetermine that the defendant must stand trial for his private crimes as would any other citizen.\u201d It states that under D.C. circuit precedent, Trump didn\u2019t enjoy immunity in his capacity as someone seeking office.<\/p>\n

Chutkan ruled against Lauro\u2019s opposition to Smith filing his revised brief after the status conference. In the weeks leading up to the release of the brief, which Trump\u2019s legal team described as \u201coversized,\u201d meaning it was larger than usual, Lauro also accused Smith of pursuing a \u201cfundamentally unfair\u201d approach.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s legal team\u00a0said \u201cthe Court should reject them until threshold legal questions identified by the Supreme Court are addressed and discovery is complete.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

In a Sept. 24 opinion, Chutkan disagreed and said she would grant the motion to file an oversized brief, saying that its \u201catypical sequence and size thus both serve the efficient resolution of immunity issues in this case.\u201d<\/p>\n

Smith\u2019s brief maintained that none of the allegations in the indictment were protected by presidential immunity and that \u201cat its core, the defendant\u2019s scheme was a private one.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Supreme Court\u2019s immunity ruling set up multiple levels of criminal immunity, with some ambiguity over how the lower court should handle allegations related to former Vice President Mike Pence. More specifically, it held<\/a> that Trump was presumptively immune for interactions in which the president and vice president discuss their \u201cofficial responsibilities.\u201d<\/div>\n

However, it noted that the government could attempt to \u201crebut\u201d that presumption and left Chutkan with the task of \u201c[assessing] in the first instance whether a prosecution involving Trump\u2019s alleged attempts to influence the Vice President\u2019s oversight of the certification proceeding would pose any dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.\u201d<\/p>\n

Smith\u2019s brief argued that \u201cbecause the Executive Branch has no role in the certification proceeding … prosecuting the defendant for his corrupt efforts regarding Pence poses no danger to the Executive Branch\u2019s authority or functioning.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

Smith said he intends to present evidence of conversations between Trump and Pence \u201cin which they did not discuss Pence\u2019s official responsibilities as President of the Senate and instead acted in their private capacities as running mates.\u201d<\/p>\n

He said that while some interactions fell within the scope of Pence\u2019s official role, \u201cthe rebuttable presumption of immunity is overcome.\u201d<\/p>\n

Pence and Jan. 6<\/h2>\n

Much of the brief outlines an alleged scheme to organize slates of \u201cfraudulent electors,\u201d which Republicans call \u201calternate electors,\u201d and pressure Pence to not certify the election in his role as president of the U.S. Senate.<\/p><\/div>\n

It alleges that Trump\u2019s team deceived many individuals, including elector nominees.<\/p>\n

\u201cOther electors who participated on the conspirators\u2019 false assurances that their votes were only a contingency were later surprised to learn that they were used on January 6\u2014and would not have agreed to participate if the conspirators had been truthful about their plan<\/strong>,\u201d the briefing reads.<\/p>\n

It states that Trump and his co-conspirators \u201clied to Pence, telling him that there was substantial election fraud and concealing their orchestration of the plan to manufacture fraudulent elector slates, as well as their intention to use the fake slates to attempt to obstruct the congressional certification.\u201d<\/p>\n

Trump, the brief alleges, \u201ccreated the tinderbox that he purposely ignited on January 6.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

While Trump hasn\u2019t been charged with inciting an insurrection, Smith\u2019s brief accuses him of causing allegedly unlawful conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, and attempting to take advantage of the riot that ensued.<\/p>\n

Pence repeatedly denied having the power to go along with Trump\u2019s alleged scheme. Trump, at one point, told Pence that people would hate his \u201cguts,\u201d think he\u2019s \u201cstupid,\u201d and that the former vice president was \u201ctoo honest,\u201d according to the brief.<\/p>\n

Allegations of Deceit<\/h2>\n

The filing comes roughly a month before the 2024 presidential election and offers details about communications between Trump, Pence, and his campaign staff.<\/p><\/div>\n

Smith\u2019s filing alleges that Trump repeatedly said things he knew were lies, including allegedly fabricating information about noncitizens voting.<\/p>\n

\u201cAt trial, the Government will introduce several instances of this pattern, in which the defendant and conspirators\u2019 lies were proved by the fact that they made up figures from whole cloth<\/strong>,\u201d Smith\u2019s brief reads.<\/p>\n

It states that one of Trump\u2019s campaign advisers told him his claim of a large number of dead people voting in Georgia was false, as well as that a campaign attorney verified that the number was \u201caround 12 and could not be outcome-determinative.\u201d<\/p>\n

One campaign employee, identified as \u201cP5\u201d in the brief, was allegedly contacted by a colleague at the TCF Center in Detroit who said that they thought a batch of votes was in former Vice President Joe Biden\u2019s favor. According to the brief, the employee responded, \u201cFind a reason it isn\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen the colleague suggested that there was about to be unrest reminiscent of the Brooks Brothers Riot, a violent effort to stop the vote count in Florida after the 2000 presidential election, P5 responded, \u2018Make them riot\u2019 and \u2018Do it!!!<\/strong>\u2019\u201d Smith\u2019s brief reads.<\/p>\n

Trump also mocked his former attorney Sidney Powell in November, according to Smith\u2019s filing. At one point, he placed her on mute, mocked her to others, \u201ccalled her claims \u2018crazy,\u2019 and made a reference to a science fiction series Star Trek when describing her allegations.\u201d<\/p>\n

It states that Trump had agreed with someone identified as \u201cP9\u201d that Powell\u2019s claims were \u201cunreliable and should not be included in lawsuits.\u201d Trump\u2019s attorney Rudy Giuliani issued a statement on Nov. 22 distancing the campaign from Powell.<\/p>\n

\u201cShe is not a member of the Trump Legal Team. She is not a lawyer for the President in his personal capacity,\u201d Giuliani said.<\/p>\n

Smith\u2019s filing notes that in the following days, Trump promoted lawsuits filed by Powell.<\/p>\n

\u201cNonetheless, the defendant continued to support and publicize [Powell\u2019s] knowingly false claims,\u201d the filing reads.<\/p>\n

*\u00a0 *\u00a0 *
\nTrump’s legal team, meanwhile, has asked to file a similarly excessive response:<\/strong><\/p>\n

A bit of tit for tat:<\/p>\n

Last night, Trump\u2019s lawyers filed a motion asking Chutkan to allow them to file a similarly excessive response to Jack Smith\u2019s behemoth of an \u201cimmunity motion\u201d and to extend deadline for filing.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s response to Smith\u2019s 165-page dossier is due Oct 17. pic.twitter.com\/x4QTHgOWkT<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Julie Kelly \ud83c\uddfa\ud83c\uddf8 (@julie_kelly2) October 3, 2024<\/a>\n<\/div>\n

Tyler Durden<\/a><\/span>
\nThu, 10\/03\/2024 – 11:05<\/span><\/p>\n

\u200bhttps:\/\/www.zerohedge.com\/political\/trick-or-lame-jack-smiths-october-surprise-just-recycled-fake-electors<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trick-Or-Lame: Jack Smith’s ‘October Surprise’ Is Just Recycled ‘Fake Electors’ For weeks rumors have been swirling that Special Counsel Jack Smith was going to unveil…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":1493718,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1493717","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","wpcat-1-id"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pbimBl-6gAd","jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/10\/trump20smith1_2-cDn8RP.jpeg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1493717","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1493717"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1493717\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1493718"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1493717"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1493717"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bugaluu.com\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1493717"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}