Street Law 101

The legal term is “spoliation of evidence.” That is when one party to a case destroys or fails to preserve evidence necessary to the opposition party. It often results in the court entering a judgment against the party that destroyed the evidence.

That could help President Trump in the federal election case.  We all know that the democrats and deep state wanted an insurrection on January 6, 2021.  It looks like the FBI set up the whole thing.

Last week we learned that Congress and Nancy Pelosi have destroyed all of the evidence that would prove she declined President Trump’s offer of the National Guard to preserve order on that date.  Congress reportedly also has destroyed the videos of Capitol Police waving people into the Capitol, evidence of instructions given to the federal agent who murdered Ashli Babbit, and several other documents, transcripts, and E-mails that would exonerate President Trump.  Some of the destroyed evidence also would prove how the one-sided House committee manipulated and altered the “evidence” they offered during their prime-time hearings.

Because the party prosecuting President Trump, the USA, is the same party that destroyed and failed to preserve exculpating evidence, the court should dismiss the DC criminal case against him, with prejudice.

That would most likely result in his re-election.

——

Along those lines is another little known legal term: “theoretical jurisdiction.” If it sounds complicated, don’t feel badly.  Many lawyers and, according to a recent Supreme Court decision, several federal appellate courts do not understand it either.  It applies when an appellate court may not yet have jurisdiction to decide the ultimate outcome of a lower court ruling but an interlocutory (interim) order is before the court.  Although the Supreme Court has chastised lower courts for liberally claiming theoretical jurisdiction, the Highest Court has done so itself.

This could help President Trump’s team completely resolve his federal cases long before next year’s election.  They should immediately file motions in the lower court in both cases.  In the Florida case claiming the government has interfered with his attorney-client privilege and in the DC case claiming spoliation of evidence.  Then when those issues are heard by the appellate courts, those courts could exercise “theoretical jurisdiction” over the entire case and resolve them in his favor. (Theoretical jurisdiction is only allowed when the ruling on the interlocutory order and the ruling on the ultimate resolution are both in favor of the same party.)

——

As to the forthcoming Georgia case, whatever it is, it should be easy to get dismissed because the chairman of the grand jury, some ugly wokie chick, went on national TV claiming that she told the prosecutor to bring them anything he had and they would return a decision recommending prosecution of President Trump.  Not only does this give the state unclean hands because it is a felony for anybody on the jury to discuss what went on but it also demonstrates her prejudice prior to being presented with any of the facts. I do not see how Georgia can overcome such a blatant abuse of the law.  That case should be easily dismissed.

So there you have it. I solved all of Donald Trump‘s legal problems and it didn’t cost him a penny. I guess he will have to call that an in-kind contribution.

—-

Meanwhile, the corrupt head of the DOJ has been continuing to use his best efforts to cover up the Biden Bribe Factory. Although I disagree with the “experts” that he could only appoint a special prosecutor outside of the government, I agree that he appointed David Weiss to further the conspiracy.  The requirement that the DOJ appoint somebody outside of the government comes from a regulation, not a law.  As the Attorney General, Merrick Garland can overrule a regulation.

The statute, however, clearly directs appointment of a special counsel to avoid a conflict of interest. By appointing somebody inside the government, any investigation of any relative of the president would be an automatic conflict of interest. In addition, a special counsel should have been appointed about five years ago. Garland is doing it now to give Weiss allow the powers he claimed to have given him previously.

I also disagree with all the claims that Weiss is independent because he was a Trump appointment. There are more than 14,000 federal positions that are presidential appointments. It is ridiculous to think the president would know each one of those people.  Similarly, there are 94 federal districts so there are 94 US attorneys. The US attorney in any district must be a lawyer licensed to practice in the state in which the district lies so there were very few people from which President Trump could choose.  Like Christopher Wray, Weiss was picked from a pool, none of the members of which would be acceptable to President Trump in a perfect world.

Weiss is a Delaware politician whose entire career has been tied to the most powerful politician in that state: Joe Biden.

Garland picked Weiss because he already proved he was able to continue the corruption by hiding evidence on the laptop from the IRS investigators and slow-walking the Hunter Biden case to the point that the most egregious felonies are now barred by the statute of limitations.

Weis’s first act as special counsel was to dismiss the existing case.  He is looking to file in a different jurisdiction to get a judge that is much more favorable to the Biden corruption. In most jurisdictions, including Florida, an attorney who practices judicial shopping for a favorable judge is sanctioned by the bar association. Weiss is not worried, however, for the same reason Garland is not worried.  They know the democrat corruption machine is so imbedded that they will be protected.

——

BTW:  Of the thousands of judicial appointments available to each new president, Donald Trump never filled more than 4,000 of the positions because, like all businessmen, he knew they were unnecessary. Joe Biden on the other hand, not only filled every single one of the positions but had most of them “pre-confirmed” by a democrat-controlled Senate before he took office. Sleazy.

——