Cheney argues against delaying the trial until after the November election.
Evidence gathered in government's case against Trump should be presented in court for public hearing.
Liz Cheney urges Supreme Court to reject Trump's immunity claim for January 6 Capitol attack trial.
Trump has access to all testimony obtained by House select committee investigating the attack.
Former Republican Representative Liz Cheney has urged the Supreme Court to reject Donald Trump's claims of absolute immunity from prosecution for his role in the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. In separate op-eds published in The New York Times and CNN, Cheney argued that Trump should not be allowed to delay his criminal trial until after the November election. According to Cheney, Trump has access to all testimony obtained by the House select committee investigating the attack and understands the risks he faces at trial.
Trump is attempting to delay his January 6 federal criminal trial until after the November election. The high court is set to hear arguments in this case later this month. Special counsel Jack Smith has gathered evidence in the government's case against Trump, speaking to witnesses that refused to appear before House lawmakers including Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino. Former Vice President Mike Pence also testified in Smith's investigation.
Cheney believes all evidence gathered during Smith's investigation should be presented in court for the public to hear. She stressed that critical and historic evidence about Trump's conduct on January 6 may never be heard if proceedings are delayed. The Wyoming Republican added that the public needs to fully assess what Trump did on January 6 and what a man capable of such depravity could do if given the power of the presidency again.
The Supreme Court should understand this reality and conclude without delay that no immunity applies here, Cheney said.
Former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney warned of a 'profoundly negative impact' if the Supreme Court does not resolve the presidential immunity case quickly.
Cheney argued that critical and historic evidence in the Trump case may never be heard if proceedings are delayed.
The high court is set to hear arguments later this month in the Trump immunity case.
Special counsel Jack Smith seeks to speed up proceedings so that the matter can be brought to trial as quickly as possible.
Trump has asked the justices to send the case back to lower courts for more proceedings, which would push off a trial for many months.
Cheney wrote that there is 'historic testimony' about Trump’s conduct in the case that should be presented in open court so that the public can fully assess what Trump did on Jan. 6.
Accuracy
Former President Donald Trump seeks to delay his federal trial on election interference charges until after the November 2024 election.
Trump is betting that the conservative majority of the court will grant him legal reprieve.
Trump faces charges of conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into his alleged plotting to overturn the 2020 election result.
The Supreme Court will hold arguments on Thursday morning regarding former President Donald Trump’s claim for presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for alleged election interference.
Trump is betting that the conservative majority of the court will grant him legal reprieve.
Trump faces charges of conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and conspiracy against rights from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into his alleged plotting to overturn the 2020 election result.
Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges in August.
Accuracy
Trump has asked the justices to send the case back to lower courts for more proceedings, which would push off a trial for many months.
Former Vice President Mike Pence also testified in Smith’s investigation.
Deception
(50%)
The article contains editorializing and selective reporting. The authors use phrases like 'most closely watched case this term,' 'highest-profile appellant,' and 'stakes could not be higher' to create a sensationalized tone. They also quote the Special Counsel stating that 'presidents are not above the law' but do not mention Trump's argument for why he should have immunity. This selective reporting favors the perspective of the Special Counsel and creates an imbalance in the article.
The stakes could not be higher – both for the immediate election prospects, and the long-term effect on the presidency itself and the rule of law.
But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as President no longer protects him against this prosecution.
In what may be the most closely watched case this term at the Supreme Court – involving the highest-profile appellant –
On April 25, 2023, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case Donald J. Trump v. United States regarding his presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure.
Trump’s attorneys argue that interference in the 2020 election involved his official duties, which could grant him immunity.
The Supreme Court’s handling of the immunity case has delayed Trump’s federal trial on election interference charges until close to or even after the November 2024 election.
On August 1, 2023, a federal grand jury indicted Trump on four counts related to criminal attempts to overturn the election outcome in 2020 and the January 6 insurrection.
US District Judge Tanya Chutkan denied Trump’s motion to delay the trial until April 2026 and set it for March 4, 2024.
Accuracy
The Supreme Court's handling of the immunity case has delayed Trump’s federal trial on election interference charges until close to or even after the November 2024 election.
Trump has asked the justices to send the case back to lower courts for more proceedings, which would push off a trial for many months.
Trump is betting that the conservative majority of the court will grant him legal reprieve.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an example of a dichotomous depiction and an appeal to authority. It does not contain any formal logical fallacies.
By declining to expedite the process back in December, then taking the case in February just as Trump’s federal trial on election interference charges was about to begin, and then delaying oral arguments for as long as possible, the Court has likely protected Trump from being prosecuted for election interference until close to or even after the November election—which he might win, thereby securing immunity forever.
Bias
(85%)
The author demonstrates ideological and monetary bias in their reporting. The author seems to hold a strong dislike for Trump and his supporters, as evidenced by phrases like 'crafty lawyers', 'dilatory courts', and the implication that the Supreme Court is acting with ulterior motives. Additionally, the author highlights potential political consequences of the case ('Trump’s federal trial on election interference charges') in a way that could be seen as implying that Trump's prosecution is important for maintaining democratic values. The author also seems to imply that the Supreme Court's handling of the case is unusual or suspicious by stating 'By declining to expedite the process back in December, then taking the case in February just as Trump’s federal trial on election interference charges was about to begin, and then delaying oral arguments for as long as possible...', suggesting a conspiracy without providing evidence.
By declining to expedite the process back in December, then taking the case in February just as Trump’s federal trial on election interference charges was about to begin, and then delaying oral arguments for as long as possible...
On August 1, 2023, a federal grand jury indicted Trump on four counts arising from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into criminal attempts to overthrow the election outcome in 2020, culminating in the January 6 insurrection.
the Court has likely protected Trump from being prosecuted for election interference until close to or even after the November election—which he might win, thereby securing immunity forever.
Former Republican Rep. Liz Cheney urged the Supreme Court to reject Donald Trump’s claims of absolute immunity from prosecution for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol.
Cheney stressed that Trump has access to all testimony obtained by the House select committee investigating the attack and understands the risks he faces at trial.
Trump is attempting to delay his Jan. 6 federal criminal trial until after the November election.
The Jan. 6 House select committee released a scathing report of Trump’s behavior, relying on testimony from dozens of Republicans who worked in the White House.
Special counsel Jack Smith has gathered more evidence in the government’s case against Trump, speaking to witnesses that refused to appear before House lawmakers including Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino.
Former Vice President Mike Pence also testified in Smith’s investigation.
Cheney believes all evidence gathered during Smith’s investigation should be presented in court for the public to hear.
