Judge Questions Very Special Counsel's Use of Out-of-State Grand Jury to Persecute, I Mean Prosecute, Trump

Lefties who live in leftwing areas get leftwing juries to try their cases.

Righties who live in rightwing areas also get leftwing juries to try their cases.

That's the Unamerican Way.

Judge Aileen Cannon on Monday asked the Justice Department to explain its use of an out-of-state grand jury in the Mar-a-Lago case.

The demand came in response to a duo of filings submitted under seal, which Cannon directed a clerk to strike from the docket.

The Justice Department "shall address the legal propriety of using an out-of-district grand jury proceeding to continue to investigate and/or to seek post-indictment hearings on matters pertinent to the instant indicted matter in this district," she wrote.

While the Mar-a-Lago case is being handled out of her Fort Pierce, Fla., courtroom, much of the grand jury work ahead of the indictment was conducted through a Washington, D.C., grand jury.

The write-up from Axios:

The judge overseeing former President Trump's classified documents case on Monday rebuked federal prosecutors and struck two of their filings.

Driving the news: Florida District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee...

They always point out the Trump appointees.

But David Weiss was picked by Tom Carper and Chris Coons, not Trump.

And Jack Smith was appointed by Biden -- why don't they point that out?

... also demanded an explanation of "the legal propriety of using an out-of-district grand jury proceeding to continue to investigate and/or to seek post-indictment hearings on matters pertinent to the instant indicted matter in this district."

Trump is attempting to get the leftwing judge (who was she appointed by? Don't worry, Politico won't tell you) to agree to dismiss the leftwing DC jury so that he can be tried by his actual peers, where he actually lives.

But no, only leftwingers get that Constitutional right observed.

Donald Trump and his lawyer are touting several arguments for moving the former president's newest -- and most damaging -- criminal case out of Washington, D.C. The judge in his case, Tanya Chutkan, has in recent years rejected all of them.

Who appointed her? Weird how you guys are always Johnny-on-the-Spot to tell us who the Trump appointees are.

Politico will hide it from you so I'll confirm what you've already guessed: She is female black judge from Jamaica appointed by the Obama/Biden Administration.

Trump's arguments center on two claims: that Washington D.C.'s liberal politics would deprive him of an impartial jury, and that the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol stirs an emotional response in Washington, D.C. residents that is unique to the region. His lawyer, John Lauro, said Sunday he intends to survey D.C. residents to back up these claims and present findings to the judge.

Trump's biggest obstacle: Chutkan -- along with nearly every federal judge on the bench in Washington, D.C. -- has already rejected versions of these arguments in the hundreds of criminal cases stemming from the Jan. 6 attack. A review of Chutkan's rulings on these motions suggests Trump is unlikely to fare any better.

At the heart of Chutkan's analysis -- like most of her colleagues' as well -- is a rejection of Trump's premise. Just because a juror is affiliated with one political party -- and even opposes the political views of someone facing charges -- does not mean they are incapable of setting aside those views to judge a case based on evidence and facts.

"People in this country have strong views ... we expect people to have opinions. And one of the things -- it's fine to have an opinion," Chutkan said in September 2022, swatting aside defendant Russell Alford's bid to relocate his Jan. 6 case. "But what I'm going to be instructing the jury is 'can you put aside your opinion and adjudge the defendant based on the evidence?' And it's amazing how, I have found, how seriously jurors take that charge. And what we're looking for is not people without opinions; what we're looking for is people who are able to put aside their opinion and focus their decision solely on the evidence presented in this courtroom."

I keep saying that the GOP must pass a law strengthening defendants' rights to move a trial when political bias is present. Further, they must (if it passes Constitutional muster) pass a law permitting prosecutors to move the trials of leftwingers who committed their crimes in leftwing jurisdictions.

The Constitution is usually much more amenable to granting defendants' additional rights and advantages than to giving prosecutors more advantages. But then, even in leftwing New York City, there are Republican wards within the city limits -- parts of Brooklyn and Staten Island.

But I have a feeling that leftwingers will continue insisting that they can only be tried by their fellow lunatic leftwingers, and their enemies can likewise only be tried by lunatic leftwingers.

In related news, over 1,00 people have been prosecuted by the feds for the four hour riot that occurred on January 6th.

This obviously dwarfs the number prosecuted by the feds for the three months of constant Mostly Peaceful Rioting that took place in 2020.

The Justice Department has charged more than 1,100 people in relation to the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot, and about a third of that number were sentenced to prison time, the Biden administration announced over the weekend.

The DOJ released its latest statistics about Jan. 6 on Sunday, exactly 31 months after rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol to protest former President Trump's election loss.

Of all the charges listed, the majority of defendants -- 967 -- were accused of trespassing on restricted federal grounds. Just over 100 of the people in that group face additional charges for illegally entering federal grounds with a weapon.

The DOJ said 372 people were charged with "assaulting, resisting, or impeding officers or employees." Roughly a third of those were accused of using a deadly weapon against an officer or "causing serious bodily injury" to an officer.

I guess no police officers were injured by BLM when they rioted at the Republican National Convention and after Trump's Inauguration.

...

Monetary losses added up to upward of $2.8 million as of October 2022, the DOJ said.

The BLM riots, sponsored by the Democrat Party, cost $2 billion in insurable losses alone. In many cases, those who had their businesses burned down were only insured for tiny amounts -- a store-owner would get $25,000 just to bulldoze the wreckage left by BLM arsonists. The actual losses for the property fell on him alone.

The "$2 billion in damages" is only the amount of documented losses compensated by insurance. There are billions more of losses that were never compensanted at all.

But oh, the J6 riot cost $2.8 million. That's just terrible. They should all be put in jail for 10 years, huh?

"That amount reflects, among other things, damage to the Capitol building and grounds and certain costs borne by the U.S. Capitol Police," the DOJ said in a statement.

Oh no, a government agency lost some money.

What about the tens of thousands of people made destitute by BLM?

Just sucks for them, huh?

posted by Ace at 12:00 PM

| Access Comments