Staff Reports
In a breathtaking display of political gymnastics, the Department of Justice has decided to push for the dismissal of federal charges against President-elect Donald J. Trump, undoubtedly leaving his staunchest critics howling into the void. The DOJ’s reasoning is straight out of a legal playbook that protects sitting presidents from being dragged through the mud of legal troubles while trying to govern. Despite half-hearted attempts to act as though the case against Trump is substantial, the motion to dismiss eloquently underscores the inconvenient truth of constitutional protections that bound the hands of his opponents.
Trump, having secured a resounding victory over Vice President Kamala Harris this past November, is gearing up to take office on January 20, 2025, presenting quite the dilemma for those who would rather see him entangled in courtroom dramas. Special Counsel Jack Smith slapped together this motion, arguing that while the prosecution might have merit, the law stipulates that a sitting president is off-limits for indictment. In a moment that might surprise some, even the DOJ recognizes that dragging a president through the mud of a federal indictment is a one-way ticket to chaos for the nation.
The case, gloriously dubbed United States v. Donald J. Trump, started with some pretty flimsy allegations surrounding his supposed interference with the 2020 election certification process. It’s almost comical to think that those who claim to be stewards of democracy chose to launch an eight-legged octopus of indictments against a leader whose only “crime” was refusing to accept the narrative that they craved. The original charges served up by a D.C. grand jury earlier this year included some spicy felonies like obstruction of an official proceeding and conspiracy to defraud the United States, all rooted in what many have come to recognize as the endless political theater surrounding Trump.
In a plot twist worthy of a daytime soap opera, a Supreme Court ruling earlier in the year established that Trump could not be prosecuted for certain actions taken during his presidency. The ruling effectively acted like a shield, swatting aside the flimsy attempts of political adversaries to entangle him in judicial snares. This clarification led the DOJ to revise their strategy, narrowing charges to include actions supposedly taken after his presidency, further illustrating the lengths to which his opponents are willing to go to score political points.
JUST IN: Jack Smith Officially Concedes, Files Motion To DISMISS Trump Charges 🔥🔥https://t.co/vCAs9P8RYK
— Proud Elephant 🇺🇸🦅 (@ProudElephantUS) November 25, 2024
Smith’s motion conspicuously acknowledges the fascinating, if not fractured, tension between constitutional protocols and the relentless desire from some quarters to bring Trump to justice—whatever that so-called justice might look like. The DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel chimed in, reiterating an age-old stance that prosecuting a sitting president would be as absurd as trying to nail jelly to a wall. The burdens and distractions from such an endeavor would only undermine the critical duties of the president, something even those with the sharpest legal minds can agree upon.
To the glee of Trump supporters, Smith’s motion artfully navigates the tangled web of possible future prosecution. It suggests that if Trump’s enemies are prepared to play the long game, they can always revisit the charges once he vacates the Oval Office. Embracing their procedural hopes, the motion maintains that while this dismissal removes the immediate threat of prosecution, the door remains ajar for legal hijinks down the line. If this all comes to pass, it could make Trump’s return to political life feel like a Shakespearean drama rather than a straightforward political comeback.
