Jack Smith is wrong to drop all charges against Trump

Nov 29

Dr. Rashad Richey National TV Political Analyst, Talk Radio Host, Univ. Prof.

By Straight Arrow News

Special Counsel Jack Smith has dropped all federal charges against President-elect Donald Trump in the Trump v. United States of America case. He cited the results of the 2024 presidential election, where Trump won both the Electoral College and the national popular vote. In his motion to dismiss, Smith stated that the U.S. Department of Justice should not move forward with the case, regardless of the gravity of the alleged crimes. Trump will take office as the next U.S. president on Jan. 20, 2025.

Watch the above video as Straight Arrow News contributor Dr. Rashad Richey contests Smith’s decision and argues that the U.S. Constitution clearly allows for the prosecution to proceed with its charges against Donald Trump.

Be the first to know when Dr. Rashad Richey publishes a new opinion! Download the Straight Arrow News app and enable push notifications today!

The following is an excerpt of the above video:

De facto, both of these gentlemen [Robert Mueller and Jack Smith] are incorrect about the Constitution, about the statutory reality. The Constitution does not make any claim whatsoever that a sitting president of the United States is somehow immune from criminal prosecution. As a matter of fact, the guideline that was given was given decades ago to protect who? Nixon! That’s why the guideline was given in the first place.

But see, a guideline is not a constitutional mandate. There is no constitutional dynamic here whatsoever. He’s [Jack Smith is] citing Department of Justice guidelines. And I will also say this, the DOJ decided to drop the case while Trump is not president of the United States, but only president-elect, meaning even if your argument, Jack Smith, was credible, you would see the irony in the fact that the case is dropped before he’s president of the United States.

And let’s also highlight the reality that statutorily, there is no law that says the president of the United States is, in fact, immune from any kind of prosecution.

Let’s go back to the guideline, because I don’t want people to miss this. If the reason why a president cannot be prosecuted is due to the Department of Justice guideline, who’s in charge of the DOJ now? Ah, the Biden administration! Why is it that they cannot rescind such a ridiculous guideline, that’s not rooted in law and not rooted in [the] Constitution? That is the question.

Matt, Okay, Matt Gaetz, you know, the guy that Donald Trump picked to be the Attorney General of the United States. But that guy, Matt Gaetz, decided to withdraw his you know, candidacy. Matt gates, made a video saying that Donald Trump has been declared not guilty because Jack Smith, special prosecutor,

decided to withdraw the motion for prosecution against Donald Trump. First of all, Matt Gaetz, you likely should be in prison your damn self. Secondly, you are simply happy that nobody is talking about the investigation against you and under age trafficking of a minor. All right,

the reality is this, Jack Smith, special prosecutor, prosecuting Trump, did file two motions to drop the cases against Trump. This effectively ends the Department of Justice and their prosecution against Donald Trump, citing a guideline from the DOJ that says you cannot prosecute a sitting president,

Mueller utilized a very similar approach as a special investigator. De facto, both of these gentlemen are incorrect about the Constitution, about the statutory reality, the Constitution does not make any claim whatsoever that a sitting president of the United States is somehow immune from criminal prosecution. As a matter of fact, the guideline that was given was given decades ago to protect who Nixon, that’s why the guideline was given in the first place. But see, a guideline is not a constitutional mandate. There is no constitutional dynamic here whatsoever. He’s citing Department of Justice guidelines. And I will also say this, the DOJ decided to drop the case while Trump is not President of the United States, but only president elect. Meaning, even if your argument Jack Smith was credible,

you would see the irony in the fact that the case is dropped before he’s president of the United States. And let’s also highlight the reality that statutorily, there is no law that says the president of the United States is, in fact, immune from any kind of prosecution. Let’s go back to the guideline, because I don’t want people to miss this if the reason why a president cannot be prosecuted is due to the Department of Justice guideline. Who’s in charge of the DOJ now? Ah, the Biden administration. Why is it that they cannot rescind such a ridiculous guideline that’s not rooted in law and not rooted in constitution. That is the question.