Earlier this month Special Counsel Jack Smith went to the Supreme Court in an attempt to speed up the prosecution of Donald Trump. Constitutional law professor Jonathan Turley said it was an obvious attempt to put Trump on trial before the election.
The writers of The Bulwark were very obviously anxious to write about the "body blow" Smith had delivered to Trump … so anxious that they missed the Supreme Court telling Smith "no."
"In a U.S. Supreme Court filing yesterday, Special Counsel Jack Smith delivered a body blow to Donald Trump’s prospects for delaying his federal prosecution charging a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election." New from Dennis Aftergut: https://t.co/u1qINNw4UT
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) December 22, 2023
Dennis Aftergut reported:
IN A U.S. SUPREME COURT FILING YESTERDAY, Special Counsel Jack Smith delivered a body blow to Donald Trump’s prospects for delaying his federal prosecution charging a criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election.
Smith’s haymaker came by way of a masterful ten-page brief replying to Trump’s own response to Smith’s petition for an expedited Supreme Court review of a question of national magnitude: Whether Trump is immune from prosecution as a former president for crimes committed while in office.
…
The special counsel has won the battle of Supreme Court briefs. While there’s no safe predicting what the Court will decide, one could do worse than placing their money on Jack Smith.
It's a shame for Aftergut to have put in all that work only to have the SCOTUS ruling destroy his entire article.
The Bulwark has since put up an editor's note:
[Editor’s note: Within hours of the publication of this article on December 22, 2023, the Supreme Court denied certiorari—rejecting the special counsel’s request for expedited review of Trump’s immunity claims.]
Maybe they should have waited until the SCOTUS ruling came down to publish the piece … but they so revere Smith that they thought he had it in the bag.
That correction is the chef's kiss.
— Matt Hay (@MattAHay) December 23, 2023
Unfortunately this did not age too well.
— Bob smith (@grossamer18_bob) December 22, 2023
— This Here Snakeskin Jacket (@SFlipp) December 23, 2023
Why is this post still up?
— Patrick H. 🇮🇱 (@Patrick_am_I) December 23, 2023
— Taro Tsujimoto (@RCannon74) December 23, 2023
— Nick (@NickP13) December 23, 2023
You’re not seriously gonna leave this up are you? Lolololol
— Brian St. Hilaire (@bsainth) December 22, 2023
How’d this work out for you imbeciles?
— Mr. Faversham 💥 (@MrFaversham) December 23, 2023
Trump has already been tried and found guilty in The Bulwark's editorial office, so of course they thought SCOTUS would take up the case.
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member