Eloquence in litigation is an art form. Court motions and pleading that blend eloquence with deliberate and diplomatic snark are masterpieces. Thus, the exceptional nature of President Trump’s response motion to the demands of a gag order by Special Counsel Jack Smith is a master class in linguistic evisceration. I stand impressed.
As some, perhaps more than a few readers here will remember, I have studied the written motions of one specific DC litigator enough to detect his presence, form and style. Please do yourself a favor and read the 25-page response motion HERE and raise a glass.
[Read More]
I am not a lawyer, and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn last night. However, I have spent thousands of hours reading court filings, and one specific style of writing is very familiar to me. If this is not from the ghost pen of Eric Dubelier, then whoever did write it has trained his/her argumentative intellect on the same turf.
Do not cheat yourself out of the joy of reading the full motion. It is awesome. [SEE HERE]
If it’s not Dubes, it’s definitely Dubes-worthy.
In the background CTH is not alone in sending bat signals to the Dubes. I hope, pray, and smile at the guiding possibility.
Wolverines!
I started reading; after 8 pages I booked a room at Holiday Inn Express
😎
I read the first 4 pages, then decided to have a glass (or 2) of wine to read the rest. LOLOL.
Excellent!
“At bottom, the Proposed Gag Order is nothing more than an obvious attempt by the Biden Administration to unlawfully silence its most prominent political opponent, who has now taken a commanding lead in the polls. Indeed, this very Motion came on the heels of adverse polling for President Biden.” Skewered. Clearly.
“If the prosecution does not want criticism for abusing its power, the solution is simple; stop abusing its power. The Constitution provides no other alternative.”
Zing, boom, bah!
Despite its near universal disparegement “the Law” CAN on occasion definetly move into the ART form, I heartily agree with Sundance.
Haven’t read such a beautifully composed argument, since Sidney Powell was fighting for Gen. Flynn.
Comparing this filing by PDJT’S legal team, to the original request by Smith for the Gag order, makes it clear we are seeing a Harlem Globe trotters vs. Jr Varsity local high school type mismatch.
These people are INSANE,…and their insanity and hubris makes them STOOPID.
Yes. Brilliant:
“If the prosecution wishes to avoid criticism for abusing its power, the solution is simple: stop abusing its power.”
I caught that as well.
A line for the ages.
Hate always clouds the mind my friend. They have so much hate for President Trump it clouds their minds. However I’ll never leave out the fact that they are really stoopid as you stated. LOL
I’m wondering if the defense is contemplating requesting a bench trial in the event this exercise in prosecutorial misconduct ever makes it to trial.
A DC jury comprised of mouth-breathing democrats is a slam dunk conviction for Hack Smith.
That would take the spotlight off the corrupt mechanism and absolve both Smith and this hate-filled Marxist judge (forget her name) from any further responsibility. Why not put the onus on HER? Let HER make the call. Let her be the solitary person with the eyes of the entire world (especially the SCOTUS) weighing the evidence.
The morons of the jury can vote to convict and go on their merry way with nothing to risk, but this judge has a career and reputation to think about. . . . . Especially if she’s trying a case involving a sitting president, which could very likely be the case.
Just thinking out loud as a non-lawyer.
My opinion has been that any of the J6 defendants who went to jury trial had ineffective assistance of counsel precisely because a judge has to enter written findings and conclusions. Thus making for a much easier appeal.
“Criticism of their official conduct does not lose its constitutional protection merely because it is effective criticism and hence diminishes their official reputations.” This includes criticism of the Court and the Special Counsel.”🤣
One of the great lines, pages 18-19:
“The United States Constitution may be inconvenient for the Biden Administration, but public speech in response to unfair and widely disseminated attacks is President Trump’s right.”
This is absolutely glorious (from pp. 18-19 of the full motion): “The United States Constitution may be inconvenient for the Biden Administration, but public speech in response to unfair and widely disseminated attacks is President Trump’s right.”
It appears to me that Trump’s attorneys just destroyed the entire SP’s case as well as the “insurrection” narrative in the pre-trial arguments!
This “judge” in this “court” is every bit as crooked as the NY judge that just illegally attacked PDJT’s business entities. We are down to law of the jungle brute force.
Brute force needs to be applied to some of these judges. May be the only thing they understand.
This might sound weird, but personally I think it would be funny whether or not the gag order is enforced if someone would get a PDJT hand puppet – or maybe of someone else – and have DJT record statements, maybe with his voice altered a little, that are then played while one of his aids moves the puppet’s mouth along with the audio while DJT denies it’s actually him saying it. …Just to drive home the ridiculousness of the whole charade.
Without a doubt the govt would go after Trump for “Authorizing” the statements if he did that.
But if it was done by dozens of random internet commentators each using their own hand puppet, and using AI to speak in Trump’s voice… doesn’t seem like the court could do anything about that, and it would highlight the absurdity even more strongly.
Great idea! Have that VERY good PDJT impersonator reading statements! OMG!! Libtarded heads would EXPLODE!! 😂💥🤣💥😂💥🤣💥👊
Touche!
A quick Google search revealed the Judge in the Russia case publicly rebuked him, but his client won.
During his press conference about the “45 page speaking Indictment”, Jack Smith engaged in the same inflammatory speech that his indictment disingenuously accuses Trump of doing!
It puts in plain terms what makes your blood boil. This is not and will not be America.
Hopefully, in the very near future, some very lucky law students will open their textbooks and find this writing example as part of their curriculum. We can only hope and pray that “young minds full of mush” (RIP Mr. Limbaugh) will be firmed and steadied by such rocket fuel…..
On the Defense side we have the facts, and the law, and common sense. On the Prosecution side we have “Orange Man Bad.” We will see which side the Marxist judge chooses.
That motion was a pleasure to read…. Thanks for posting, Sundance…. Pure Legal Gold!
“If the prosecution wishes to avoid criticism for abusing its power, the solution is simple: stop abusing its power. The Constitution allows no alternative.” 🔥
Did Dubelier just signal he possesses proof of coordinated political hit by prosecution? and others? Did he also just challenge prosecution and its handlers to bring. it. on.? Kill two birds with one stone by spotlighting Citizens United for possible challenge and reversal?
Or am I reading too much into this?
Sadly, judges in D.C. have no moral compass. Truth, Justice and the American Way has been relegated to a footnote in a comic strip. As evidenced by the outlandish behavior at Stanford law school, judges say, act, and do, whatever they want. Constitution be damned.
Any judge who was not corrupt would throw this transparently corrupt hoax immediately out of the court. The judges are as crooked and corrupt as the criminal DOJ and congress. They are engaged in a RICO conspiracy against our president and our nation.
I didn’t need Trump to tell me that they were all crooked criminals and that the 2020 election was stolen. Long before Trump complained about the DOJ/FBI I saw that they were the lowest criminal scum. I was convinced before Trump ever said anything about the election or the criminal nature of the DOJ/FBI.
Well , If PDJT’s well reasoned and documented motion is denied,( don’t care how many pages the denial ruling is ) they should appeal it 6 ways to Sunday ASAP! – Very major constitutional issues are at its core and not just some routine court housekeeping BS ..
It is too bad we can all sign on to an Amicus Brief that our civil rights are being restricted with this gag order. The purpose behind free speech is for us to hear all sides of the cases even if thought Anonymous sources, think of the Federalist Papers!
“In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust any government to separate the true from the false for us.”
Ergo, there is absolutely zero justification in the Constitution or settled case law for ANY government influence or censorship of any so-called misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation. As Sundance says, there is only information we accept or that we reject. We are each our own watchmen.
Someone or whoever wrote this motion must have been working on it for a while knowing that one day a gag order was likely going to be issued and a full broadside salvo response to it could be immediately fired off.
I have only skimmed through it but it is so impressive how every line, word and paragraph is just so well presented, composed and organized in every respect.
It’s the MOAB of all legal filings. Absolutely obliterates Smith and his gang of evil henchmen.
Like you Sundance I’m n0t a lawyer. But I enjoy the reading & writing of the American language, especially its filings and decisions in law.
This is a pretty damned elegant motion. Thanks for the link to its entirety.
No matter how brilliant the legal rebuttal you realize that the Judge is cooked, right? This Judge is going to be hostile to Trump and ensure the desired verdict is delivered. It’s all predetermined.
Thanks Sundance! Without your insistence, I probably would have just read a Reader’s Digest version of the motion. But I said to myself, if Sundance thinks it’s that great, I’m gonna go for it. So I just spent the past hour reading the whole thing, specific footnotes/citations and all. And… BRILLIANT! It really is perfect. On both legal grounds, AND the in-your-face “call a spade a spade” nature of the writing. VERY nice! Thanks again for making me read this, Sundance. 🙂
A powerful opportunity was missed to lay out, line and verse, a.) the prejudicial statements of the special council, b.) to point out the use of projection by the special council to accuse President Trump of the tactics the special council has himself repeatedly employed, and c.) to explain that the injury to administration of justice anticipated by the special council had in fact already been committed by the special council himself. We eagerly await the coming filing that does so.
Therefore, the only remaining remedy available to protect the administration of justice is to dismiss the special council’s charges, and because of this and prior malicious prosecutions by this council, his activities regarding the defendant in the DC courts and grand juries must be halted with prejudice.
For instance, the special council has maintained the grand jury investigation on an ongoing basis. This is so that as his malicious efforts are exposed and defeated, he can continually create new efforts and new charges, and continually create so-called crimes with which he can make shambles of probable cause. This has been done to President Trump continually since 2015, Gov. Palin before, Tom DeLay of Texas, and Governor McDonald of VA by this very prosecutor.
There are two gems in this filing that need to become centerpieces of a political movement. The first is from page 9:
“[t]he very purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from assuming a guardianship of the public mind . . .
In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust
any government to separate the true from the false for us.”
This audience needs no instruction on how this administration has made unprecedented attempts to become the arbiter of the truth under the force of law.
Second, from page twenty:
the Special Counsel falsely told the press that President Trump “fueled . . . an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,…’
The seat of American democracy is not the gathering place for, or the assembly of, those that exercise the power inherent in a representative republic. Not in any form.
The seat of American democracy is the selection of those people by the free consent and expression of the citizens of the society.
On November 3, 2020, five states in three different time zones took the unprecedented action of near simultaneous halts to the tabulation and recording of the will of the American people. The reasons given for these halts were largely false, at least to the extent this could be evaluated.
Legally required election observers were generally obstructed from performing their duty while tabulation was under way, then evicted from the premises and refused readmission when the halt was declared. In some locations, windows were covered to hide from view the activities inside after the eviction and halt. In one case in Pennsylvania, a sheriff refused a judicial order to readmit the observers.
But in all these locations, the vote tallies were changing while the counting was said to be halted. All major media was complicit. I know of not one mainstream media outlet that called these activities out, let alone demanded entry to the counting facilities. This plot was not possible without this fact.
During that night, the election outcome was overridden. Improper procedures against existing statutes, such as mail in elections, drop boxes, and mules, does not matter. On the election night, the seat of American democracy was smashed behind covered windows and illegal evictions. On this basis alone, the election was indeterminate.
So we may conclude that the representative republic is indeed dead. To disagree requires the acceptance of the premise of the special council, that Donald Trump attacked the very seat of American Democracy and is directly responsible for the January 6th attack. We must not accept this premise. Instead, on every occasion where it is presented the incontrovertible facts of 11/3/2020 must be emphatically, even forcefully, presented if we are to overcome this true attack on the Republic.
Accordingly, we have entered such a time that I could be hunted down and prosecuted for having written and posted this analysis.
Come and get me. You will prove me correct.
Dan Stanfill
Knoxville, TN
I love the (without evidence) aside. Just sticking a fork in the eye of the DC media-political industrial complex.
The judge is already bought and paid for. The audience for this brief response is SCOTUS, and said gag order will not survive scrutiny.
To rule in favor of Smith, the corrupt judge will have to write something that essentially says “yeah, the law, but this is unprecedented, so I am not bound to the law because of blah blah blah “threat to democracy””.
What I have read, each point made, succinct, concise, and factual while backed up by precedence….
A gem on Page 17:
Let’s be clear: the prosecution hopes to create a contempt trap for President Trump and his attorneys
The prosecution may not like President’s Trump’s entirely valid criticisms, but neither it nor this Court are the filter for what the public may hear. Rather, “[t]he very purpose of the First Amendment is to foreclose public authority from assuming a guardianship of the public mind . . . In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust any government to separate the true from the false for us.”
This has to be my favorite but there are lots more to choose from.
Yes, and it as true with Big Tech as it is with this trial. Government doesn’t have a right to censor speech.
This brief took me awhile to read, but I have a happy heart tonight because I did. I think Dutchman noted the following quote as well:
” In this field every person must be his own watchman for truth, because the forefathers did not trust any government to separate the true from the false for us.”
For whatever reason, what came to mind was my Mother. We would spend a long time in our vehicles traveling here for the Christmas holidays. And when we got here, Mom would present us with a bowl of stewed prunes!
That may sound strange, but stewed prunes relieve constipation. I’m thinking Jack Smith and the rest of the “legal runt” in his litter are now so utterly constipated by this legal brief mentally and legally, that they are going to need a lot more than stewed prunes to even respond.
Jack Smith (if that is even his real name) etal, have all been ripped new ones. Sounds like from this excellent brief they don’t have a clue of former legal precedent.
So enjoyed the time it took me to read this through. Thank you Sundance.
That’s good stuff right there
Every precedent to rebut these communist clowns
Lawfare and the propaganda statutes have to be changed and soon
Late reading it….BUT, I LOVED IT!!!
(“Criticism of their official conduct does not lose its constitutional protection merely because it is effective criticism and hence diminishes their official reputations.”). This includes criticism of the Court and the Special Counsel.
Curse You Villain
Dubenesque
Aside from lauding the potential that Mr. Dubelier was involved in this rebuttal, we should also commend whatever paralegals, associate lawyers, etc., who were involved in the research needed just for the citations alone. This is the work of a true legal team that highlights the ethics of what legal representation is supposed to mean….unlike the hacks (Jack Smithm=m etal.) and Lawfare representation that continues to give the legal practice an unfavorable reputation.
And for some reason, I am unable to edit out the typos….???
MAGA 👊👊🇺🇸🇺🇸❤️❤️🙏🏻🙏🏻
When is the “DC Legal Scholar” Jonathan Turley going to give his opinion?….LOL
Like the corrupt courts give a shit about First Amendment rights …
A beautifully and effectively written legal rebuttal. It beautifully intertwines Constitution Law with many precedents and reminders regarding the court and legal process along with information needed to fight this abuse in the ‘Court of Public Opinion’.
I’m sure many noticed(proven by a plethora of fellow Treeper’s comments) as I did, that many of the legal points made in this rebuttal also refute the Governments current lawfare stance of ‘non-freedom of speech’ in regards to the 2020 election process, the entire J6 event, the handling of Covid-19 and jab debacle, Climate Change regulations, and the ongoing Government/Corporation/Media/Internet partnership to suppress and criminalize what “they view” as dangerous ‘Wrong Think’ information and opinion that might harm ‘Government Institutions’ and ‘National Security’.
The original intent of the Founding Fathers in forming the three branches of Government were intentionally set up to serve one function and one function alone–to make sure the citizens of our Republic are safe and secure in their pursuit of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness and that no citizen shall be denied any of their rights as set forth in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The Constitution was written in a way to limit the government except to serve the people and hopefully provide safe guards to any abuse of citizens by government by dividing it into 3 equal parts to maintain a check and balance on any one part of Government.
Unfortunately, we are now living in times that prove that each branch has been corrupted and usurped from the ‘consent of we the people’.
This excellent legal rebuttal by PT’s lawyers is a good start and foundation for ‘We The People’ to remember and take to heart what the founding father’s set forth and take all the necessary actions to return OUR Republic back into what it should be.
Necessary and appropriate actions will obviously vary from person to person and group to group depending on their viewpoints, vulnerabilities, and capabilities. I hope folks will will unite in overall purpose and goals while being accepting of others’ methods and pathways to achieve our united overall goals.
Some may chose to go ‘kinetic’, some may chose to spread the word, some may go the legal route, some may join protests, some may run for elected office, some may chose financial support, some may do more than one of these, some may chose prayer and prayer alone, and some may chose many other paths of ‘throwing sand in the gears’–so many useful possibilities and pathways can be used in a multi-pronged defense and offence in this battle. I try to be supportive of all and disparaging to none, even those who are not onboard or who wish to remain purposely unaware.
I try my best to focus on my own thoughts and actions while keeping my soul, faith, and integrity intact. As Sundance often says–Live Your Best Life!
Mmmmm…….This ended up being quite a ramble, my apologies, but of course I’ll post it anyway. <smiles>
Well said. I particularly like paragraph 8.
The problem is always the same. The system relies on fairness. An impartial judge and/or jury and even a fair prosecutor seeking justice. We have none of this in any of the attempts to get President Trump.
Thank G od that there exists lawyers who will stand up to fight the governmental bullies of our corrupted justice systems. I will have to revisit this document time and time again to fully enjoy the knowledge to be found within. I have downloaded it for future reference.
I’m up to page 7 … (will read more later.)
But Wowzers! LOVE the directness of this – and 25 pages of it!
Lovely.
Some of you may find this funny, but I don’t. This is another distraction a time waster on our way to Central Bank Digital Currency. They are using DJT to demonstrate to all of us deplorables what will happen if we step out of line once CBDC is complete. It’s not that far away. You can know by how brazen their actions are.
The brazen actions of the leftists indicate how desperate they have become. They have realized that they are losing the majority of the populace by their persecution of DJT. Which further exposes the corruption of the systems in our nation. I think that has been DJT’s plan all along. Not sure what the end game is for Trump, but I pray it involves a balancing the scales of justice for him and all of us.
Well, that went well with my first cup of coffee… ;-D
I read the whole thing. As a retired lawyer myself, I must say: a masterful job created by a master!
Doesn’t Chief Justice John Roberts have a responsibility in rebuking these wayward judges? Doesn’t he have a Constitutional obligation to make sure these corrupt judges are kept in line? Where is he?
Excellent read.