Quote:

---

I would imagine the SOL is tolled while Trump is President.

---

There is no law that says this is the case!

Kavanaugh once advocated for such a law to be put in place.

BREAKING: Cannon has blocked DOJ from releasing Smith’s report until further court proceedings pic.twitter.com/HvRhzN1exo

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 7, 2025

ALSO: The order does NOT bar Trump or his codefendants from sharing aspects of the report, even though they have spent three days reviewing it. DOJ said earlier today that Trump inappropriately shared details of the report in a court filing yesterday.

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 7, 2025

I do not think she has jurisdiction anymore over this case so to have made that decision. She dismissed the case in its entirety and it is with the 11th Circuit appellate court now.

Edit- She also appears to have blocked the entire report, even the volumes unrelated to the classified documents case, which is even more questionable from a jurisdictional standpoint.

But the motion was also filed in the 11th Circuit and they'll re-decide this issue.

Okay, yeah, Kyle Cheney is on the same page. Jurisdiction is questionable and she should have explained why she has it in her order.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

Okay, yeah, Kyle Cheney is on the same page. Jurisdiction is questionable and she should have explained why she has it in her order.

---

Jack smith illegally has access to privileged information. **** him and **** Merrick Garland. .

LOL Jack Smith is ADDING DOJ lawyers to his team to oppose Trump's fight to stop Smith and AG Garland from releasing a report by the (illegal) special counsel.

In addition to Shapiro, Smith just added Mark Freeman, director of appellate staff at DOJ civil division.

Madness pic.twitter.com/yBvzPHFwb6

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 7, 2025

That's not "madness." The Special Counsel attorneys withdrew their appearances on December 30, they're not litigating this anymore. The only attorneys on record for the government were the attorneys from the Southern District of Florida who filed their appearances last week.

But a field office isn't going to handle whether this question of whether the Attorney General himself can release a report. That's something that will be handled at a high level by HQ in DC. Hence, an appearance by a high level attorney from HQ.

My immediate, and vengeful question is, does Smith have to pay for his counsel out of his own pocket?

I REALLY hope so.

It's always amazing how the most "sling it against the wall to see what sticks" attorneys get picked against any conservative. Smith being #2 and Weissman being #1 (meaning he's the worst in DC).

Both of those men have done so much damage to so many innocent people, which probably couldn't have been done without some judicial help, or crappy opposing lawyers, but nonetheless, they both seem to leave so many cadavers in their wake.

And there's not enough stars for your post, Ellis.

pic.twitter.com/kPU3CFRZrz

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 8, 2025

Merrick Garland will release Special Counsel Jack Smith's report on the 2020 election interference case against President-elect Trump, according to a new court filing. The DOJ told the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals today that Garland intends to release "Volume One" of Smith's report to Congress, which covers the allegations that Trump attempted to illegally undo the results of the 2020 presidential election. However, Garland will not release "Volume Two", which covers the classified documents case against Trump, as two defendants in that case still face criminal proceedings. Huh? Cannon said no to the documents case only I guess?

Quote:

---

Huh? Cannon said no to the documents case only I guess?

---

Given the last several years may seem a foreign concept that federal judges only have jurisdiction over cases that are properly before them but yes. Cannon does not have jurisdiction over the DC case.

The principles should be the same, of course but DC federal bench doesn't GAS.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Huh? Cannon said no to the documents case only I guess?

---

Given the last several years may seem a foreign concept that federal judges only have jurisdiction over cases that are properly before them but yes. Cannon does not have jurisdiction over the DC case.

The principles should be the same, of course but DC federal bench doesn't GAS.

---

Cannon's order didn't distinguish between the volumes. They're either proposing to read into it that she didn't bar the whole thing from being released or they're proposing to ignore her order as to the DC case.

I flagged her jurisdictional problems yesterday. I don't know that she has any jurisdiction over the classified documents portion, either. She dismissed the case and it lay with the appeals court.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Huh? Cannon said no to the documents case only I guess?

---

Given the last several years may seem a foreign concept that federal judges only have jurisdiction over cases that are properly before them but yes. Cannon does not have jurisdiction over the DC case.

The principles should be the same, of course but DC federal bench doesn't GAS.

---

Cannon's order didn't distinguish between the volumes. They're either proposing to read into it that she didn't bar the whole thing from being released or they're proposing to ignore her order as to the DC case.

I flagged her jurisdictional problems yesterday. I don't know that she has any jurisdiction over the classified documents portion, either. She dismissed the case and it lay with the appeals court.

---

However if her jurisdiction is in question then why did Garland file his intention to release the Volume 1 in the 11th circuit which does not include DC? I would think if Garland was not recognizing her jurisdiction in the DC case he would just release it unless Trump got a favorable ruling in the DC Circuit Court?

Quote:

---

I would think if Garland was not recognizing her jurisdiction in the DC case he would just release it unless Trump got a favorable ruling in the DC Circuit Court?

---

Gee, I don't know. Maybe Garland is an idiot, legally speaking?

Trump needs to be talking about obstruction.

Remember that buzzword from 2017 and 2018? Everything Trump said or did was considered obstruction and impeachable. This is a naked attempt to obstruct and cripple the incoming President by a corrupt AG and an illegal prosecutor who never had any legal authority.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I would think if Garland was not recognizing her jurisdiction in the DC case he would just release it unless Trump got a favorable ruling in the DC Circuit Court?

---

Gee, I don't know. Maybe Garland is an idiot, legally speaking?

---

I think I found the answer. If you read Cannon's order she conjoined all the DOJ offices including DOJ HQ in her stay, and were ordered to remain conjoined until three days after the pending cases in the 11th Circuit Court cases are resolved, barring the 11th Circuit doesn't order them separated sooner.


https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25480421-aileen-cannon/

MarkTwain said:

---

TXAggie2011 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Huh? Cannon said no to the documents case only I guess?

---

Given the last several years may seem a foreign concept that federal judges only have jurisdiction over cases that are properly before them but yes. Cannon does not have jurisdiction over the DC case.

The principles should be the same, of course but DC federal bench doesn't GAS.

---

Cannon's order didn't distinguish between the volumes. They're either proposing to read into it that she didn't bar the whole thing from being released or they're proposing to ignore her order as to the DC case.

I flagged her jurisdictional problems yesterday. I don't know that she has any jurisdiction over the classified documents portion, either. She dismissed the case and it lay with the appeals court.

---

However if her jurisdiction is in question then why did Garland file his intention to release the Volume 1 in the 11th circuit which does not include DC? I would think if Garland was not recognizing her jurisdiction in the DC case he would just release it unless Trump got a favorable ruling in the DC Circuit Court?

---

I'm not sure I entirely follow your question, but the defendant Waltine Nauta simultaneously asked the 11th Circuit to block the release of the report (in its entirety), at the same time they asked Judge Cannon to block the report, and the 11th Circuit asked for the DOJ to respond by this morning.

The DOJ said in their response this morning in the 11th Circuit that they planned to release the DC portion, there is no reason for that to be blocked, but would agree to not release the volume of the report that covers the Florida classified document case in which Nauta is a defendant.

MarkTwain said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I would think if Garland was not recognizing her jurisdiction in the DC case he would just release it unless Trump got a favorable ruling in the DC Circuit Court?

---

Gee, I don't know. Maybe Garland is an idiot, legally speaking?

---

I think I found the answer. If you read Cannon's order she conjoined all the DOJ offices including DOJ HQ in her stay, and were ordered to remain conjoined until three days after the pending cases in the 11th Circuit Court cases are resolved, barring the 11th Circuit doesn't order them separated sooner.

---

Yeah, she appeared to block the release of the entire report, including the DC case portion, and also said her ruling would stay in effect for 3 days even after the 11th Circuit rule.

Her failure to distinguish between the Florida portion and the DC portion is the main issue the DOJ appears to have. I don't know if she did that on purpose or just wrote the order hastily, or whatever.

I think DOJ is clearly right. I do not think there is any legal basis for a defendant in the Florida case, who is not part of the DC case, to have the DC portion of the report blocked.

A shorter way of saying that is:

The response was filed in the 11 circuit, because that's where the motion was pending.
You file responses to motions in the same court that the motion is filed in

Pres Trump argues that despite DOJ's contention that Volume One (J6 dead case) and Volume Two (partially dead documents case) are addressed separately, Jack Smith intertwined both cases in the report.

DOJ conceded yesterday it would only make Volume Two available to certain… pic.twitter.com/dsFQmw1QMm

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 9, 2025

NEW: As we await Bragg/Merchan filing at SCOTUS related to Trump's request for SCOTUS to hold NY proceedings, former AG Meese just filed an amicus brief supporting the stay. As incoming president, Meese argued (as did Trump), prohibition on prosecuting sitting pres apply pic.twitter.com/wRNzGzbXWT

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 9, 2025

NEW: AG Merrick Garland, in what could represent a violation of Judge Cannon's order not to share information about the special counsel report outside the DOJ, sent a letter to Congress about the report.

Lawyers may seek contempt of court relief. pic.twitter.com/lEnPOg19Jh

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 9, 2025

DOJ could ostensibly appeal the 3 day hold but they might not believe it worth the effort.

BREAKING: 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has *DENIED* effort to block Jack Smith's final report.

But Cannon's order keeping a hold in place for three days remains in effect. This means Garland can't release it until Sunday or later. pic.twitter.com/XFr2bYSMtV

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 10, 2025

DOJ has appealed Judge Cannon's order which prevents them from releasing the report for 3 days.

2/ The same reasons DOJ agreed not to release Vol. II should prevent it from releasing Vol I. Release of Vol II will impact due process rights of Trump's co-defendants. Release of Vol I will impact due process rights of Clark, who continues to be target of lawfare.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 11, 2025

4/ Clark points out that he is not only one whose due process rights are impacted: pic.twitter.com/u91JsUYJ3A

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 11, 2025

6/ Of course, as Clark's attorney notes, DOJ is being coy about whether it discusses Clark, but it's difficult to imagine it won't--which would means constitutionally protected advice to president is presented.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 11, 2025

Garland and the Husseinites do not care about the law or Constitution. Everything they do is to harm America and Americans. They'll release it and nothing will happen to them. Jack Smith is probably halfway back to Den Haag by now. Fascist goon.

😆😂🤣DOJ's Emergency Motion just provided Defendants' perfect strategy by noting no appellate jurisdiction if over TRO. A TRO (temporary restraining order) can be entered for 14 days & appellate court lacks jurisdiction over it. 1/ https://t.co/BHeBgQqAVF

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 11, 2025

3/3 And in 14 days, DOJ won't want to appeal it. 💀💀💀Of course, never underestimate the scheming of the Get-Trump Brigade.

— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) January 11, 2025

Translation: Cannon is checking if anything in Smith's report (Vol 1) affects the cases against Olivera and Nauta. If yes, she'll probably block the release. If no, she'll likely dig deeper into that response.

— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) January 11, 2025

NEW: After insisting Vol One of Jack Smith report only deals with Jan 6 case against Pres Trump, DOJ, in response to court order, admits 2 references to classified docs case. pic.twitter.com/fL1qUWEXqp

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 12, 2025

There is no separating Pres Trump from Nauta and De Oliveira in the docs case. All 3 were on the same indictment including conspiracy charges. Nauta handled some boxes the DOJ claimed (but later admitted they couldn't prove) contained national defense files.

Cannon won't buy it pic.twitter.com/rf8v9iAObZ

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 12, 2025

The accusations against Walt Nauta, Pres Trump's personal aide and still the subject of ongoing litigation in the classified docs case, date back to movement of boxes to NARA--which (allegedly) represented the start of the investigation.

The FBI sought--and received--at least 5… pic.twitter.com/t5lOPhgcwV

— Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 (@julie_kelly2) January 12, 2025

Time to prosecute some of the jack-booted thugs at the DOJ. Starting with Merrick Garland and Jack Smith.

Judge Cannon agrees with DOJ that they can release the "January 6" volume of the Special Counsel report. It can be released tomorrow.


Judge says she's going to hold a hearing Friday to decide if DOJ can release the Classified Documents volume to certain members of Congress.

DOJ will likely supplement their current appeal to the 11th Circuit to seek their intervention before Friday, I would think. I wonder if the affected members of Congress will file anything.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25485708-695-cannon-1-13/

JUST IN: Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes has requested that DOJ provide her with Jack Smith's full case file to facilitate her office's ongoing prosecution of Donald Trump's allies in the 2020 election effort. https://t.co/tNm06A84yM pic.twitter.com/lOIGk7KjyI

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) January 13, 2025

The libs are driving themselves insane.