There’s a pretty important word in that CNN report: The immunity being offered by Smith is limited.
In simpler terms, this means he said to a couple of the fake elector participants, “Look, we’ve got you dead to rights. But if you cooperate with us and give your testimony against others up the food chain who are more culpable, we’ll recommend less jail time to the judge for you.”
So it appears that these testifiers won’t get off entirely, and Smith will have good witnesses to prosecute further up the food chain. If the fake elector witnesses fail to testify truthfully, all sentencing options go back on the table – and those likely include significant amounts of prison time.
So far, I’m pretty impressed with Jack Smith. Seems to run a tight ship, and works in a very brisk, businesslike manner. But I suppose when you’re used to working at The Hague you have to keep things clear and no-nonsense.
Limited immunity often means that they won’t use this particular grand jury testimony against them in building their case against the fake electors. It could be more than that. We’ll probably know when they’re cross examined about the “deal” they got.
Yep, Smith is the kind of savvy prosecutor (applies to any litigator attorney, really) who tends not to ask questions he doesn’t already know the answer to when he has a witness under oath.
Please never forget who picked Smith for the job, out of dozens who may have been chosen. Credit for Jack Smith goes to Merrick Garland.
Garland was the perfect pick for someone who would head up the DOJ, to start lowering the country’s temperature and rooting out the corruption within the agency itself.
And no one was better positioned to carefully game out all the different scenarios for how prosecution of a former president and his henchmen in Congress and others holding important offices around the country might play out, all the way up to and including legal precedent that could be established by this SCOTUS.
People who call Garland incompetent or wimpy are simply ignorant of his reputation on the bench and his past record of prosecutions.
Garland picked Smith for 2 reasons: 1) Smith is known as a hard charger and fearless; and 2) Having been out of the country at the Hague prosecuting corrupt leaders from other countries (experience that will surely come in handy now), Smith is beyond reproach as a political pick. He’s as independent and non-partisan as Garland himself.
I have to believe that this man has not forgotten that he was denied a spot on the Supreme Court because of Republican fuckery, and was surely aghast at the shitshow of an administration that donald ran.
Justice moves slowly, but it does move. I frequently tell my clients “court time and real time are not the same thing.” And that’s before you get into the proper pace of the investigations that lead to prosecution.
So I wholeheartedly agree that Merrick Garland is slowly grinding the gears, and that Jack Smith is coming in like a trained assassin, and that one day they will sit together, with their feet up, toasting the successful culmination of years of work that led to total and complete victory. Joe, Barack and Hillary will probably be there too.
Donald John Trump is going to end up in prison.
Unless he dies first. (“Like a dog*,” as somebody likes to say).
I think @Procrustus was pointing out in his usual, kind way that my understanding of the term, “limited immunity,” at the federal level may be erroneous or incomplete. My understanding of the term – at the state level – is that when partial immunity is granted, the potential testifier won’t get off without penalty, only that the penalty will be reduced in exchange for their cooperation.
Oh, I actually think he could take office and issue pardons to himself. But at that point the American experiment in democracy is over, and we’re in an entirely new state of affairs.
Joe, Barack and Hillary are way too politically smart to do that. Even after the fact, it would be taken as proof that Trump was right about “weaponisation” all along.
