Good day all. Javert Smith ginned up an indictment that would be heard in Washington D.C. for one reason. There is no way the Greatest President of the 21st Century, Donald Trump will get any sort of a fair trial. The courts in the district were packed with Obama judges for the sole purpose of protecting the progressive agenda.
The judge who has been assigned to sit on President Trump’s case is already being hammered for her actions towards January 6th defendants. She is the reason that hundreds are languishing in jail without trial or have been slammed with sentences beyond what even the Biden DoJ is asking for. Now information is coming out that Tanya Chutkan may have already decided that President Trump is guilty of whatever she wants him to be guilty of. Here are the details from the Western Journal:
The trial of former President Donald Trump in the District of Columbia isn’t even close to starting yet, but Americans who support the 45th president can already be sure of one thing: The judge has already reached her own verdict.
It’s been clear from the get-go that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan is biased in the case being brought by Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith that accuses Trump of four counts related to the Capitol incursion of Jan. 6, 2021: conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights.
Legal scholars on both sides of the political spectrum, if they have any ethics that is, are saying these charges are utter garbage, and are a violation of President Trump’s own 1st Amendment rights. Any ethical judge, once the proper motions are made by the defense, would throw the case out and sanction the prosecutor for even bringing it. Chutkan isn’t an ethical jurist it seems.
But a review of Chutkan’s handling of Capitol incursion defendants by the website RealClearInvestigations yielded an explosive result: Chutkan is not only biased, she’s tacitly pronounced Trump guilty, in open court, of what are essentially the charges against him.
Hoping over to the Real Clear Politics story:
At her first appearance in the criminal case against Donald Trump for his alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya S. Chutkan repeatedly warned the former president’s lawyers that politics would not be tolerated in her courtroom.
“The fact that [Trump is] running a political campaign has to yield to the orderly administration of justice,” Chutkan said during the August 11 hearing. “If that means he can’t say exactly what he wants to say about witnesses in this case, that’s how it has to be.”
That order appears to be, in my unschooled opinion, a flat out violation of the 1st amendment rights of President Trump and potentially deliberate interference in the 2024 presidential election. Of course, I would expect nothing less from an Obama judge.
But even as she warns Trump about his “inflammatory” language, Chutkan has routinely issued politically charged rulings and made incendiary statements of her own while presiding over some 30 cases involving Trump supporters charged in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, melee at the U.S. Capitol.
A review of thousands of pages of hearing transcripts reveal that Chutkan has repeatedly expressed strong and settled opinions about the issues at the heart of United States v. Donald Trump – the criminal case she is now presiding over.
These include her public assertions that the 2020 election was beyond reproach, that the Jan. 6 protests were orchestrated by Trump, and that the former president is guilty of crimes. She has described Jan. 6 as a “mob attack” on “the very foundation of our democracy” and branded the issue at the heart of the case she is hearing – Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was stolen – a conspiracy theory.
If these statements are in the court records, not only does Chutkan need to be removed from President Trump’s case, but she needs to be removed from the bench and every single case regarding the January 6th protest as well.
Although judges often make comments from the bench, Chutkan’s strident language raises questions about her impartiality in handling the case against the presumptive GOP nominee for president in 2024.
The U.S. code that addresses grounds for recusal states, “Any justice, judge, or magistrate?judge of the United States?shall disqualify himself in any?proceeding?in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” One reason to recuse is if the judge has demonstrated “a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party.”
I would say she has definitely demonstrated that she is not only biased, but probably has prejudged the case as well. Personally, I think these are grounds for impeachment in the house and conviction and removal in the senate for judicial misconduct. Of course, this won’t happen. You might get her impeached in the House, but the Democrats will protect her since she’s doing what they want her to do.
The story goes on to show just how corrupt Chutkan is, especially with her abuse of her authority.
Chutkan accused Matthew Mazzocco, another Jan. 6 defendant, of choosing Trump over the country. In rejecting Mazzocco’s argument that he traveled from Texas to Washington to engage in a legal political demonstration, Chutkan declared at his October 2021 sentencing hearing: “He went there to support one man who he viewed had the election taken from him. In total disregard of a lawfully conducted election, he went to the Capitol in support of one man, not in support of our country or in support of democracy.”
Although Mazzocco only spent 12 minutes inside the Capitol and committed no violence, Chutkun rejected the government’s recommendation of three months home confinement for pleading guilty to “parading” in the Capitol, a Class B misdemeanor, and instead sentenced Mazzocco to 45 days in jail.
Compare this to what happened to the Black Communist Only Lives Matter and Antifa thugs who basically burned several cities, assaulted and killed people who were in their way and looted any business that they wanted to with impunity. Almost none of them were even charged, let alone jailed. As for that nonsense that the 2020 election was fair and honest? We have seen more and more evidence that it was anything but.
Chutkan’s references to the former president aren’t the only area of concern for Trump. Her comments from the bench also suggest that she shares the same view of Jan. 6 as the man prosecuting Trump in her courtroom, Special Counsel Jack Smith.
For those of you who might not be aware, Javert Smith is prosecuting President Trump for stating an opinion as well as seeking redress of grievances from Congress, as is his right under the Constitution of the United States, something that neither Javert Smith or Tanya Chutkan give a damn about.
Throughout the 45-page indictment, Smith repeatedly accused Trump of knowingly promoting falsehoods about the 2020 presidential election. “[For] more than two months following election day on November 3, 2020, the Defendant spread lies that there had been outcome-determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false, and the Defendant knew that they were false. But the Defendant repeated and widely disseminated them anyway – to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense national atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election.”
Chutkan clearly shares that view. On numerous occasions, the judge has insisted the 2020 election was legitimate and fully vetted by the court system – a claim disputed by Trump that lies at the heart of the case she is now hearing.
“He went to the Capitol because, despite election results which were clear-cut, despite the fact that multiple court challenges all over the country had rejected every single one of the challenges to the election, Mr. Palmer didn’t like the result. He didn’t like the result, and he didn’t want the transition of power to take place because his guy lost,” Chutkan also said during Palmer’s sentencing. (When not cryptically referring to Trump, Chutkan often describes the former president as “guy.”)
The article at Real Clear Politics goes on with a litany of comments from the bench by Chutkan. She needs to be removed from this, and frankly all of the January 6th cases.
Many observers believe Trump already confronts a nearly insurmountable task in receiving a fair trial in the nation’s capital, a city that voted 92% for Joe Biden. Further, the Justice Department has a near-perfect conviction rate in Jan. 6 trials. Chutkan’s extensive record of comments suggest the judge presiding over his case will not make it any easier.
I don’t have any idea if this is possible, however President Trump’s defense team should demand that the trial be moved out of the Washington D.C. federal courts and taken away from Chutkan. There is absolutely no way that President Trump can get a fair and impartial jury, and it’s obvious to even legal laymen that the judge is going to do everything she can to railroad Donald Trump. What I don’t think this moron has considered is what might happen next.
I won’t be at all surprised if history records Tanya Chunkan as the judge that triggered the Second American Civil War. There has already been one case of some woman threatening Chutkan. (Dumb, Dumb and Stupid) That individual has from what I’ve read, some mental issues. Threatening a judge is, of course, a criminal offense, (At least it is if you threaten a Democrat Judge. Not so much with a Constitutionalist judge of course) and will be dealt with.
Chutkan needs to be removed from this case. She should voluntarily step aside, which she won’t. She is bound and determined to put the Greatest President of the 21st Century in prison no matter what. Welcome to the Banana Republic of the United States of America.
Thatisall
(4 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...
~The Angry Webmaster~
