This actually surprises me, but I'm good with it.
Special counsel Jack Smith used a routine legal filing Friday to offer a forceful public rebuttal against Donald Trump’s claims that his criminal prosecution for allegedly hoarding classified documents has been infected by politics and legal impropriety.
[...]
“It is necessary to set the record straight on the underlying facts that led to this prosecution,” the prosecutors argued. “The government will clear the air on those issues … because the defendants’ misstatements, if unanswered, leave a highly misleading impression.”
What followed was a lengthy recitation [68 pages] of the events that led prosecutors to suspect Trump had been squirreling reams of classified records at his Mar-a-Lago estate.
[...]
The approach taken in the legal brief is somewhat unusual for the Justice Department. Though the filing was submitted to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, at times it sounded like an opening argument to a jury Trump could face in the future or the first chapter of a report meant to detail investigative findings to the public.
Politico
It may well also be that.
It’s unclear whether the “misimpressions” prosecutors say they’re trying to correct are ones they fear Cannon could fall prey to, whether the target audience for the brief is a larger one, and how the Fort Pierce, Fla.-based Trump appointee will respond to the tactic.
I wouldn't think they'd do it for any judge, but Cannon isn't just any judge. They may be trying to pen her in if they think she's going to try to lay the blame on political pressure in any way.
The substance of the prosecution brief is aimed at countering the demands by Trump and his two co-defendants — Walt Nauta and Carlos DeOliveira — for access to a broad range of documents from across the government that the defense attorneys contend could be useful in defending their clients.
[...]
The filing included some new details about the origins of the probe. [...] Though Trump has long portrayed the Biden White House’s involvement in the process as a sign of sinister politics, Smith’s team described it as limited, necessary and well-known to Trump’s aides, who did not protest.
[...]
The brief is also peppered with factual claims that make Trump’s behavior sound more serious and egregious. When discussing the defense’s request for more information from the Secret Service, prosecutors assert that their interaction with the federal agency that guards the president and his family underscored Trump’s recklessness in keeping a large volume of classified information at his Florida home, which also serves as a social club and a site for political and social events with lengthy guest lists.
Also, in related news, the FBI inexplicably left a hidden room and a locked room
uninvestigated. Well, the hidden room they may not have known about at the time they went in. But the locked room? No excuse.
No comments:
Post a Comment