367

Jack Smith hits back as massive new filing unsealed in Trump's election interference case (www.rawstory.com)

submitted 1 month ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

35 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 67 points 1 month ago

I ran the 165 page PDF through ChatGPT for a summary:

The document you provided is a legal motion filed by the United States government in the case against Donald J. Trump, relating to his alleged criminal conduct in attempting to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Here are the key parts:

Summary of Government’s Argument: The government argues that Trump is not immune from prosecution, despite his claims that his actions were official duties as President. They assert that his efforts to overturn the election were private actions taken in his capacity as a candidate for re-election, not official presidential duties.

Legal Framework: The Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. United States established that while certain official presidential conduct is immune from prosecution, Trump's remaining actions, which were unofficial, are not protected by immunity. The motion outlines how presidential immunity is determined, based on whether the conduct was official and whether it intrudes on the executive branch's functions.

Factual Proffer: The government alleges that Trump engaged in a conspiracy to overturn the election results in seven states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) by lying to state officials, organizing fraudulent electors, and ultimately inciting the January 6 Capitol attack.

Trump's Conduct: The document details how Trump used fraudulent claims of election fraud to pressure state officials and Vice President Pence to invalidate legitimate election results. It also highlights Trump's use of public speeches and social media (especially Twitter) to spread false claims and incite his supporters.

Immunity Analysis: The document argues that none of Trump’s actions related to overturning the election are official presidential duties. His discussions with Pence, aimed at influencing the certification process, are presented as one area where the Court has ruled there may be some presumption of immunity, but the government argues that even this conduct is not immune because it interferes with the constitutional responsibilities of other branches.

This motion ultimately seeks a court ruling that Trump must stand trial for his actions, as they fall outside the scope of presidential immunity.

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

I'll cut to the bottom of the page for you: motion denied, Trump good, do no bad, very good, very bigly. Would you like pubes on your coke can? Cmon baby you know you want it.

[-] andyburke@fedia.io -1 points 1 month ago

https://www.theguardian.com/wellness/2024/oct/02/optimist-cynicism-faith

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

👍

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (14 replies)

this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024

367 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19102 readers

3526 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News