To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Jack Smith, the special counsel who investigated former President Donald Trump's alleged mishandling of classified documents and his role in the January 6th insurrection.
What became of the principle that no person is above the law, not even a former president?
Today, the rule of law was thrown out the window — not by Trump but by Special Counsel Jack Smith.
Smith asked a federal judge to dismiss the indictment charging Trump with plotting to subvert the 2020 election.
Smith made a similar filing to an appeals court in Atlanta, thereby ending Smith’s attempt to reverse the dismissal of the federal case accusing Trump of illegally holding on to classified documents after he left office.
Both filings were a grave mistake.
What happened to the rule of law? What became of the principle that no person is above the law, not even a former president? What happened to accountability?
Smith says he had no choice, given the Justice Department’s policy that it’s unconstitutional to pursue prosecutions against sitting presidents.
But he did have a choice. He could have asked the courts to put the cases on hold until Trump is no longer president.
That’s essentially what Judge Juan Merchan did Friday with regard to sentencing Trump on his May conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Sentencing in that case had been scheduled for Nov. 26 but has now been stayed, according to an order issued Friday by Merchan. No new date for a potential sentencing has been set, delaying it indefinitely, although it could be reimposed later.
It’s no answer to say there’s no point in trying to keep the two cases alive because Trump will force his new Attorney General to quash them.
Let Trump do that, so all the world can see him seek to avoid accountability for what he has done. And let Trump’s Justice Department—which will likely be headed by former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi—ask the federal judges involved in the two cases to dismiss them, so all the world can see Trump’s Justice Department acting as Trump’s handmaiden.
Smith should have put the responsibility for avoiding the rule of law squarely on Trump.
In the meantime, Smith should release all the evidence that his team has accumulated about Trump’s plot to subvert the 2020 election and illegally possess highly classified information.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just hours away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Today, the rule of law was thrown out the window — not by Trump but by Special Counsel Jack Smith.
Smith asked a federal judge to dismiss the indictment charging Trump with plotting to subvert the 2020 election.
Smith made a similar filing to an appeals court in Atlanta, thereby ending Smith’s attempt to reverse the dismissal of the federal case accusing Trump of illegally holding on to classified documents after he left office.
Both filings were a grave mistake.
What happened to the rule of law? What became of the principle that no person is above the law, not even a former president? What happened to accountability?
Smith says he had no choice, given the Justice Department’s policy that it’s unconstitutional to pursue prosecutions against sitting presidents.
But he did have a choice. He could have asked the courts to put the cases on hold until Trump is no longer president.
That’s essentially what Judge Juan Merchan did Friday with regard to sentencing Trump on his May conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Sentencing in that case had been scheduled for Nov. 26 but has now been stayed, according to an order issued Friday by Merchan. No new date for a potential sentencing has been set, delaying it indefinitely, although it could be reimposed later.
It’s no answer to say there’s no point in trying to keep the two cases alive because Trump will force his new Attorney General to quash them.
Let Trump do that, so all the world can see him seek to avoid accountability for what he has done. And let Trump’s Justice Department—which will likely be headed by former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi—ask the federal judges involved in the two cases to dismiss them, so all the world can see Trump’s Justice Department acting as Trump’s handmaiden.
Smith should have put the responsibility for avoiding the rule of law squarely on Trump.
In the meantime, Smith should release all the evidence that his team has accumulated about Trump’s plot to subvert the 2020 election and illegally possess highly classified information.
Today, the rule of law was thrown out the window — not by Trump but by Special Counsel Jack Smith.
Smith asked a federal judge to dismiss the indictment charging Trump with plotting to subvert the 2020 election.
Smith made a similar filing to an appeals court in Atlanta, thereby ending Smith’s attempt to reverse the dismissal of the federal case accusing Trump of illegally holding on to classified documents after he left office.
Both filings were a grave mistake.
What happened to the rule of law? What became of the principle that no person is above the law, not even a former president? What happened to accountability?
Smith says he had no choice, given the Justice Department’s policy that it’s unconstitutional to pursue prosecutions against sitting presidents.
But he did have a choice. He could have asked the courts to put the cases on hold until Trump is no longer president.
That’s essentially what Judge Juan Merchan did Friday with regard to sentencing Trump on his May conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Sentencing in that case had been scheduled for Nov. 26 but has now been stayed, according to an order issued Friday by Merchan. No new date for a potential sentencing has been set, delaying it indefinitely, although it could be reimposed later.
It’s no answer to say there’s no point in trying to keep the two cases alive because Trump will force his new Attorney General to quash them.
Let Trump do that, so all the world can see him seek to avoid accountability for what he has done. And let Trump’s Justice Department—which will likely be headed by former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi—ask the federal judges involved in the two cases to dismiss them, so all the world can see Trump’s Justice Department acting as Trump’s handmaiden.
Smith should have put the responsibility for avoiding the rule of law squarely on Trump.
In the meantime, Smith should release all the evidence that his team has accumulated about Trump’s plot to subvert the 2020 election and illegally possess highly classified information.