reporting to special counsel jack smith will square off in front of a three-judge pam of the court of appeals for the d.c. circuit. at issue whether trump has immunity for conduct he undertook as president or cannot otherwise face prosecution because it would represent double jeopardy. that s the legal issue. but what s most important here is the timing. trial court judge has determined she can t move forward until this issue is resolved. she entered an order on december 13 saying trump s appeal automatically stays any further proceedings that would otherwise move the case toward trial. but that stay could be lifted after the outcome of tuesday s argument. for sure, the losing side is going to appeal to the supreme court after perhaps first asking for the first court of the appellate court to hear the matter on bond. the losing party has 90 days to ask for supreme court review. as i detailed before, smith is eager to get trump tried before the election. trump, on the other ha
he s going to need help from either the court of appeals or the supreme court or the judge. i think there s a good chance jack smith tries one of his cases. but let s keep an eye on the manhattan da s case. the forgotten hush money case, if the case on federal election subversion moves out, there s going to be a gap in the calendar. the da has made clear he s said on the record, i m ready to go. that might not be ideal for those hoping to hang a conviction on donald trump, but that one maybe the first one tried. donald trump is watching and he hopes you re right. when all is said and done, a 7-year-old case based on a porn payoff is the only thing for which he s tried before the election. i wouldn t even oppose it. put us on trial for that. i appreciate it. now for more on trump and scotus, i want to turn to lauren
what do we have? from x, let the people decide if trump should be president. i dislike him, but i dislike biden s policies more. partisan state hacks should not remove candidates from the ballot. i come to the same conclusion, but not through the same logic. that s not the way that i would phrase it. i m in the same category as professor lessig. hence, today s poll question at smerconish.com. i don t think the way for those who want the to defeat trump is to defeat him through the secretary of state of colorado and the supreme court saying we re going to disqualify him from the ballot. can i put the 14th amendment back on the screen. do you have that handy? it s ambiguous at best. no person shall be a senator or representative in congress or a elector of president is and vice president, leave it up there for a second. they articulate senator, they articulate representative, they
Last month I wrote a long post explaining why I could not support Larry Lessig's new lawsuit against journalists and the New York Times for what he referred to as "Clickbait Defamation." Lessig argued that a NY Times headline and lede was false, while I argued that it was a different interpretation, but not "false,"…