A week before the presidential inauguration, Jack Smith released a "Final Report" about the prosecution of Donald Trump and his co-defendants related to the January 6th events. The report is meant to persuade the public of Trump's guilt but, instead, reveals Smith's incompetence and bias. Trump's lawyers, John Lauro and Todd Blanche, vehemently counter the report, highlighting violations of legal norms and the presumption of innocence.
• Smith's Overreach: Trump’s attorneys criticize Smith for overstepping by publicly declaring Trump’s guilt before a trial. They emphasize the importance of the presumption of innocence and cite the Justice Manual's prohibition against such declarations by prosecutors.
• Concerns About the Transition Act: Smith allegedly ignored the Presidential Transition Act, which prevents DOJ officials from interfering in a president-elect’s preparations for office.
• Incitement Allegations: Smith asserts Trump incited a riot on January 6, using the term "riot" numerous times. However, key military leaders' testimonies that Trump's instructions were to ensure safety on that day are absent in Smith's report.
• Ignored Evidence: Smith does not address certain exculpatory evidence, including statements from General Mark Milley and Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller contradicting claims of Trump's violent intentions.
• Social Media Impact: Smith criticizes Trump for his social media usage but overlooks that Trump's rhetoric also led to threats against him.
• False Claims About Court Decisions: Smith inaccurately claims all of Trump's fraud lawsuits were dismissed, while many were actually dismissed for procedural issues.
• Misrepresentation of DOJ Actions: Smith falsely asserts that DOJ found no support for Trump's fraud claims, ignoring that the DOJ rarely pursued investigations into those allegations.
• Unresolved Allegations of Fraud: Many claims regarding fraud and irregularities in states like Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania were overlooked by DOJ and Smith.
• Placeholder Electors: Smith mischaracterizes Trump's alternative electors as "fake," rather than acknowledging them as legally necessary placeholders, a practice used by both parties historically.
Smith’s report is criticized for fostering false accusations and ignoring fundamental legal principles, such as Trump’s right to a presumption of innocence and the provisions of the Presidential Transition Act. Furthermore, the report fails to acknowledge key evidence exonerating Trump and overlooks significant unresolved allegations of election fraud. The criticisms laid out by Trump's attorneys highlight a consistent pattern of political overreach by Smith, raising serious concerns about the implications of prosecutorial power on the justice system. Joe Fried, the author, brings attention to these issues and articulates the importance of restricting the prosecutorial power that he believes threatens the separation of powers.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/01/what_jack_smith_left_out.html
Comments
Post a Comment