|
 |
Jack Smith kicked off his testimony on the Hill today like this: “I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including my decision to bring charges against President Trump.” He told senators that his investigations developed “proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in serious crimes against our nation.” He said, “I will not be silenced by continued threats of prosecution from the president or others.”
Then, as Alabama Senator Katie Britt looked on with dawning horror, Missouri Senator (and former prosecutor who apparently never learned the lesson that you don’t ask a question you don’t know the answer to) Eric Schmitt made a fool of himself while attempting to set a perjury trap for Smith.
 |
Schmitt thought, based on texts from Smith’s team that he’d acquired, that Smith was in Atlanta watching a Hawks game the day after Fani Willis’ affair with her co-counsel came to light, setting off alarms the Trump camp used to cast doubt on her prosecution of him. Schmitt made the inferential leap that if Smith was in Atlanta, it must have been to meet with Willis; it must have been part of the grand conspiracy the Republicans are still searching for evidence of.
 |
But it turned out that Smith had been to the game between the Maryland Terrapins and the Iowa Hawkeyes to see Caitlin Clark play. Amy Klobuchar used Minnesota nice to wind Schmitt up and he doubled down on his claims long after it was clear to everyone else in the room that he was wrong. Schmitt was left looking like a clown, telling Smith he thought he’d committed perjury when he denied being at a Hawks game in Atlanta. And best of all, he was smirking like he thought he’d scored. That’s the best that they’ve got.
 |
And the government filed its response in the Kennedy Center Case. Arguing that the plaintiff, a member of the board at the Kennedy Center, lacks standing and that putting Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center doesn’t violate the law that clearly prohibits it, the government asked the court of appeals to let it rename the Kennedy Center, making a truly embarrassing argument, even for this Justice Department.
 |
The justification for putting Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center? Trump’s lawyers at DOJ say it’s financial issues and the Center’s state of disrepair. Given that the Center’s financial issues stem from Trump’s efforts to impose his name on it and that a whistleblower reports building safety concerns are a result of the administration's failure to make repairs with funds appropriated by Congress, the government’s position borders on frivolous. “Plaintiffs alleged harms,” the government writes, “pale in comparison to the real harms on the other side of the ledger. For one, the absence of a recognition to President Trump threatens to impede the Center’s fundraising efforts and contribute to the financial decline of the Center.” Pretty sure that’s not the case. Not even close. That one will be hard to maintain in court with a straight face. The brief goes on to recite “the President has been a central force in the Center’s current fundraising efforts, but his supporters will be deterred from contributing to the Center if his name is removed.”
 |
Maybe the administration can find a national security justification for putting Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center. But until then, they’re just intent on violating the law and dishonoring a slain president.
Overnight, lawyers for CNN, MSNOW, and Politico filed an expected motion, asking the court to enter a preliminary injunction guaranteeing them the same access they had at the White House before Trump announced his ban. If the court grants the request, it would go into effect once the temporary 14-day injunction the court granted last week expires.