Read Jack Smith’s unsealed redacted motion on Trump presidential immunity

Oct. 2, 2024, 1:16 PM PDT / Updated Oct. 2, 2024, 1:38 PM PDT
By Hayley Miller

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan on Wednesday granted special counsel Jack Smith’s motion to file a redacted motion arguing against presidential immunity for Donald Trump in his federal election interference case in Washington. Smith filed his hefty, 165-page redacted brief on the matter thereafter.

The special counsel filed the brief under seal last week after Chutkan sided with him on his request to file an “oversized” brief addressing the Supreme Court’s July 1 immunity decision. Trump had opposed Smith’s request to file the jumbo briefing.

Read the redacted motion below:

Link:

I guess you go to the bottom of the multipage document and click the square looking thing to see the full size. There should be a pdf somewhere online by now.

a reply to: FullHeathen

Here is the pdf download link. pdf

Still haven't finished reading it yet though.

a reply to: frogs453

Thanks. PDFs look better in my pdf reader than on an online reader.

a reply to: FullHeathen

We can file this at the Trump Presidential Library, in the "Corrupt DOJ Plots Foiled" room.

a reply to: FullHeathen

Without the people’s confidence, this is just a circle of jerks. Knock yourself out.

Grab ‘em by the 😽-DJT

Same butt hurt, different day.

Is this the time where they get him?

*yawn.

originally posted by: SteamyAmerican
Is this the time where they get him?

*yawn.

I hope "they" honestly think so!

Their mental anguish will be that much more severe when Trump-Vance win next month.

originally posted by: Myhandle
a reply to: FullHeathen

Without the people’s confidence, this is just a circle of jerks. Knock yourself out.

Grab ‘em by the 😽-DJT

More of Smith's overreaching charges that always get tossed out or overturned on appeal because he is a hack.

Still voting Trump over the galactic dumpster fire of Harris/Walz.

I think it’s hilarious how quickly they redacted it and sent it out for public scrutiny.
Tell number 1
It’s not even properly redacted.
Tell number 2
I’m sure the democrats will have a redaction key sent out very soon.
Tell number 3

Have you ever seen or heard of the government doing that so fast with anything?

Regurgitated 2nd hand hearsay that will become the desired exit strategy just like the classified documents cases.
😀

CHUCK SCHUMER has introduced legislation to make President Trump eligible for prosecution over the "Election Interference" actions, because the U.S. Supreme Court (obviously?) ruled that DJT is NOT eligible for Prosecution.

Thirty Butt-Hurt (scared?) Dem Senators: www.whitehouse.senate.gov...

originally posted by: Vermilion

I think it’s hilarious how quickly they redacted it and sent it out for public scrutiny.
Tell number 1
It’s not even properly redacted.
Tell number 2
I’m sure the democrats will have a redaction key sent out very soon.
Tell number 3

Have you ever seen or heard of the government doing that so fast with anything?

Smith was ready to argue this case 10 months ago. The Supreme Court returned it to the District Court 3 months ago. You can do a universal search and replace with a word processor in probably less than an hour.

originally posted by: WeMustCare
CHUCK SCHUMER has introduced legislation to make President Trump eligible for prosecution over the "Election Interference" actions, because the U.S. Supreme Court (obviously?) ruled that DJT is NOT eligible for Prosecution.

Thirty Butt-Hurt (scared?) Dem Senators: www.whitehouse.senate.gov...

Your reading comprehension is crappy.

Here's what the Supreme Court actually wrote:

"Taking into account these competing considerations, the Court concludes that the separation of powers principles explicated in the Court’s precedent necessitate at least a presumptive immunity from criminal prosecution for a President’s acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility. Such an immunity is required to safeguard the independence and effective functioning of the Executive Branch, and to enable the President to carry out his constitutional duties without undue caution. At a minimum, the President must be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no “dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.” Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 754. Pp. 12–15.

As for a President’s unofficial acts, there is no immunity. Alhough Presidential immunity is required for official actions to ensure that the President’s decisionmaking is not distorted by the threat of future litigation stemming from those actions, that concern does not support immunity for unofficial conduct. Clinton, 520 U. S., at 694, and n. 19. The separation of powers does not bar a prosecution predicated on the President’s unofficial acts. P. 15."

Special Counsel Smith re-wrote the charges to eliminate reference to any actions that Trump undertook in his official capacity as POTUS and include only those actions he undertook as Candidate Trump.

a reply to: Boomer1947

Butwhatabout all the redacted parts that will lead to dismissal ? 😁

originally posted by: xuenchen
Regurgitated 2nd hand hearsay that will become the desired exit strategy just like the classified documents cases.
😀

I can tell you haven't actually read the document.

So, just so I am clear, a speech to American Citizens, while the duly elected president, is not a duty of the President?

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: xuenchen
Regurgitated 2nd hand hearsay that will become the desired exit strategy just like the classified documents cases.
😀

I can tell you haven't actually read the document.

We don't need to read it to know it's manufactured drivel that is meaningless now and will be meaningless when Trump wins next month.

Prepare yourself for America to be Great Again.

a reply to: Boomer1947

I can tell you are fibbing again, and you are misleading yourself for reasons only you can define.