According to Goddard, this announcement "rocked" the election!
So Jack Smith is being "defiant" with the court ruling that provided Trump with partial immunity for his actions as President. I guess there are people out there who thought Smith would give up his case because the court took a chunk out of it? This is one of those straw man deals where they are making up a fictional argument that Smith would pack it in and now Trump must be worried that he decided to rework his charges to be more in line with the USSC decision.
Call me skeptical, but considering this case is not going to be moving forward before the election, I doubt the average voter is concerned with the variational changes of the Trump charges. By not concerned, I am not suggesting that "rocked" is just a slightly overhyped term, I am suggesting that the news went in one ear and out the other. Had Smith announced that he had figured out a way to put Trump on trial prior to the election, well that might be news that might "rock" some people. But otherwise, this is a nothing burger.
Lastly, this is likely the wrong way to deal with the USSC ruling if you are looking to get something done fairly quickly. Smith is stubbornly not changing any of his indictment, but rather he is nitpicking the decision and claiming (dubiously) that the ruling doesn't apply to this case based entirely on his own logic. While this might convince Judge Chutkan, it doesn't stop there. Most legal analysts suggest that once Chutkan rules on the various immunity questions, that her rulings are now open to appeal since all of this needs to be "settled pre-trial". This is not something that the judge can just let go to trial and demand that the defense "appeal" post verdict.
The only way Smith can move this along is by making sure everyone agrees on the questions of immunity since they must be settled prior to trial. By pushing the envelope and not ceding much (if any) ground on this, Smith is opening things up for another appeal that could make it all the way back to the USSC.
“It’s the shrinkflation indictment. It’s the same packaging, just less product inside. What they did is kept the four charges, and they just took out any evidence that clearly would have contradicted the Supreme Court’s decision on presidential immunity. It does not hold together, in my view, very well. I don’t even think it solves the problem,” Turley said.
“For example, he is keeping in, as one of the four main allegations, Trump’s communications with and to Pence. That’s still presumptively protected under the Supreme Court decision. He also includes communications with members of Congress that could also trip a wire,” Turley continued. “The first two main theories deal with state officials and the slates, the alternative slates that Trump’s…