The classified documents case against former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> &#8220;reeks&#8221; of the FBI&#8217;s infamous Russia collusion investigation, a top official in his administration said on Sunday.
Former Director of National Intelligence <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/john-ratcliffe" target="_blank" rel="noopener">John Ratcliffe</a> made the comparison to Crossfire Hurricane while speaking to Fox News anchor Maria Bartiromo.
Alluding to special counsel Jack Smith&#8217;s team <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/03/mar-a-lago-trump-classified-documents-00156124" target="_blank" rel="noopener">conceding</a> last week that documents seized by the FBI may have become jumbled despite previously saying otherwise, Ratcliffe suggested there was evidence tampering.
&#8220;What Jack Smith admitted in court this week was that, in his words, they mishandled the classified documents and misrepresented those to the court,&#8221; Ratcliffe said during his <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/video/6352366664112" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;Sunday Morning Futures&#8221; appearance</a>.
Ratcliffe contended that prosecutors got &#8220;caught&#8221; when Trump&#8217;s lawyers and the other co-defendants raised the issue of scanned copies not matching up with the records of when they were taken from Mar-a-Lago in 2022.
Smith has &#8220;absolutely blown the chain of custody,&#8221; Ratcliffe emphasized.
Ratcliffe went on to say the classified documents case &#8220;reeks of Crossfire Hurricane, when the Obama-Biden administration fabricated evidence before the FISA court, lied to the court about it to pursue Donald Trump.&#8221;
He was referring to the FBI&#8217;s use of an unverified dossier that raised allegations of collusion between Trump and Russia to obtain the authority to wiretap Carter Page, who served as an aide to Trumps&#8217; 2016 campaign.
&#8220;And now we&#8217;re seeing it again in this classified documents case. The judge could dismiss this case at any point in time, Maria,&#8221; Ratcliffe said.
He surmised the judge has not done so yet in order to let the public &#8220;see just how this case is being prosecuted, how unfairly Donald Trump has been persecuted in this matter by Joe Biden&#8217;s Department of Justice.&#8221;
Trump, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges in the documents cases and three other criminal matters as he seeks re-election, similarly reacted to Smith&#8217;s filing in Florida by claiming there was evidence tampering.
&#8220;These deeply Illegal actions by the Politicized &#8216;Persecutors&#8217; mandate that this whole Witch Hunt be DROPPED IMMEDIATELY. END THE &#8216;BOXES HOAXES.&#8217; MAGA2024!&#8221; he said in a <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112379718145784478" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post</a> to his Truth Social platform.

John Ratcliffe

Trump Docs Case ‘Reeks’ Of Russia Collusion Probe, Ratcliffe Says

Trump Docs Case 'Reeks' Of Russia Collusion Probe, Ratcliffe Says

Donald Trump

Jack Smith

U.S.

A top House Republican is accusing special counsel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jack Smith</a> of election interference as the prosecutor leads two criminal cases against former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a>.
House Republican Conference Chairwoman <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/elise-stefanik" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Elise Stefanik</a> (R-NY) <a href="https://twitter.com/EliseStefanik/status/1785282244493357291" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> on Tuesday that she had filed an ethics complaint against Smith with the Office of Professional Responsibility at the Department of Justice (DOJ).
In her letter, which Stefanik posted to X, the congresswoman requested that Office of Professional Responsibility counsel Jeffrey Ragsdale open an investigation into Smith&#8217;s &#8220;apparent violations&#8221; of DOJ standards and ethical duties.
Stefanik insisted that Smith should face discipline for allegedly attempting to expedite the trial in the special counsel&#8217;s election interference case against Trump in Washington, D.C.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
🚨🚨🚨 I just filed an official ethics complaint against Jack Smith with the Department of Justice&#39;s Office of Professional Responsibility for his illegal election interference.
It’s obvious to any reasonable observer that Jack Smith is trying to interfere with the 2024 election… <a href="https://t.co/lNW4MUz5Oi">pic.twitter.com/lNW4MUz5Oi</a>
&mdash; Elise Stefanik (@EliseStefanik) <a href="https://twitter.com/EliseStefanik/status/1785282244493357291?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 30, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The congresswoman also faulted Smith over how his team continued to file motions despite the case being stayed pending an immunity-focused appeal, a gripe that was the focus of a bid by Trump&#8217;s team to get the special counsel held in contempt.
A U.S. judge <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-rejects-trumps-bid-to-hold-jack-smith-in-contempt-but-limits-substantive-filings" target="_blank" rel="noopener">declined</a> to hold Smith in contempt, but did limit both sides from filing “substantive pretrial motions” without first seeking permission. The Supreme Court is considering the debate over immunity, with oral arguments taking place last week.
Smith &#8220;has sought to accelerate his illegal prosecution of President Trump for the clear (if unstated) purpose of trying him before the November election,&#8221; Stefanik said in a statement, adding that the DOJ&#8217;s &#8220;own policies clearly prohibit Smith from doing so.&#8221;
&#8220;Smith’s conduct has brought disrepute to the Department of Justice and the entire federal government, and the DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility should impose the discipline that such conduct warrants,&#8221; Stefanik added.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1714314649401000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0R7buYDr5ycgwzOHpoxkHS">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
A spokesperson for Smith declined to comment on the letter to The Daily Wire, but did point to the <a href="https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-trump-20" target="_blank" rel="noopener">judge&#8217;s ruling</a> on contempt and comments by DOJ investigator Jay Bratt last month in the Florida-based classified documents case against Trump.
During a hearing, Bratt said Smith&#8217;s team was in <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dojs-60-day-rule-role-play-trump-trial/story?id=107789927" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;full compliance&#8221;</a> with the DOJ Manual, and he argued that prosecuting an existing indictment in the period leading up to an election does not violate the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/09/27/us/politics/what-is-60-day-rule.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;60-day rule&#8221;</a> meant to avoid influencing voters.
Trump, who is facing two other criminal cases as well as civil litigation as he runs another White House campaign, has broadly denied any wrongdoing and has argued that politically motivated prosecutors are conducting a “witch hunt” against him.
Last month, The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-matt-gaetz-calls-on-doj-inspector-general-to-investigate-jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">exclusively reported</a> that another Republican, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), asked the DOJ inspector general to look into whether Smith was allowing the 2024 election to impact the timeline of his prosecutorial endeavor.

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY)

Elise Stefanik Accuses Special Counsel Jack Smith Of Election Interference In Ethics Complaint

Elise Stefanik Accuses Trump Prosecutor Of Election Interference In Ethics Complaint

Congress

Department of Justice

Elise Stefanik

House Republicans

U.S. House of Representatives

The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court</a> is set to hear oral arguments on Thursday about whether former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> can invoke presidential immunity to shield himself from federal prosecution. 
The court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-takes-up-trump-immunity-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">agreed</a> to take the case in February after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit panel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/appeals-court-denies-trumps-immunity-claim-in-2020-election-interference-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled against</a> an immunity claim Trump had asserted to shield himself from special counsel Jack Smith&#8217;s 2020 election case. Trump has contended that presidential immunity is necessary to ensure that presidents are able to do their jobs without fear of political retaliation. 
“If a President does not have Immunity, the Opposing Party, during his/her term in Office, can extort and blackmail the President by saying that, ‘if you don’t give us everything we want, we will Indict you for things you did while in Office,’ even if everything done was totally Legal and Appropriate. That would be the end of the Presidency, and our Country, as we know it, and is just one of the many Traps there would be for a President without Presidential Immunity,” Trump <a href="https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/112298099795296351" target="_blank" rel="noopener">posted</a> on Truth Social last Friday. 
“Obama, Bush, and soon, Crooked Joe Biden, would all be in BIG TROUBLE. If a President doesn’t have IMMUNITY, he/she will be nothing more than a ‘Ceremonial’ President, rarely having the courage to do what has to be done for our Country,” the former president added. “This is not what the Founders had in mind! Protect Presidential Immunity.”
The Supreme Court will hear <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/25/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-immunity-case.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">arguments</a> on “whether and if so to what extent does a former president enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office.”
The former president has been <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-hear-arguments-trump-presidential-immunity-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">blocked</a> from attending the Supreme Court arguments because a judge has ordered that he must stay in New York for his trial over alleged payments made to porn actress Stormy Daniels. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1714129450076000&amp;usg=AOvVaw11MUL_oXewNl-yGfGqnuu8">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“A president has to have immunity,” Trump said Thursday morning outside of the courtroom for Bragg’s case. “If you don’t have immunity, you just have a ceremonial president.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
President Trump on today’s Supreme Court arguments: “A president HAS to have immunity” <a href="https://t.co/bXzBLNlbbs">pic.twitter.com/bXzBLNlbbs</a>
&mdash; RSBN 🇺🇸 (@RSBNetwork) <a href="https://twitter.com/RSBNetwork/status/1783445200020414801?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 25, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Smith, who accused Trump of engaging in an illegal effort to challenge the outcome of the 2020 election, previously hoped the Supreme Court would weigh in on the issue in December, hoping to fast-track the case. The Supreme Court denied that effort, and its decision to hear the case in April will likely make it difficult for a trial to be scheduled prior to the 2024 presidential election if they rule against Trump. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1714074641207000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0TPXL7MyqvoOZpo3dQ8NTe">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Trump is <a href="https://apnews.com/live/trump-supreme-court-immunity-updates#0000018f-14f9-d5aa-a3df-97f97d240000" target="_blank" rel="noopener">represented</a> by D. John Sauer, who was previously Missouri’s Solicitor General and Deputy Attorney General for special litigation in Missouri. Sauer also clerked for former conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. 
Former U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. Dreeben, who was part of Smith’s team that investigated Trump over the 2020 election charges, will argue against Trump&#8217;s assertion of presidential immunity. Dreeben was also part of special counsel Robert Mueller&#8217;s probe into whether Trump&#8217;s 2016 presidential campaign conspired with Russia to influence the election.

Donald Trump Makes An Appearance In Manhattan Ahead Of Court

Supreme Court To Hear Arguments On Whether Trump Has Immunity From Federal Prosecution

2020 Election

Alvin Bragg

Immunity

New York

Supreme Court

With jury selection getting underway in the New York hush-money case on Monday after a <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/14/trump-trial-hush-money-delay/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one-month delay</a>, the slate of criminal trials that former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> faces as he runs for re-election has begun in earnest.
A grand jury voted last spring to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-indicted-on-34-felony-counts-of-conspiracy-falsifying-business-records-pleads-not-guilty" target="_blank" rel="noopener">indict</a> Trump on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to allegedly cover up payments, including to adult film star Stormy Daniels, in a bid to conceal damaging information as part of a <a href="https://manhattanda.org/district-attorney-bragg-announces-34-count-felony-indictment-of-former-president-donald-j-trump/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">“catch-and-kill”</a> scheme to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Trump, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-blasts-hush-money-case-ahead-of-jury-selection-attack-on-america" target="_blank" rel="noopener">assailed the case</a> brought by Manhattan District Attorney <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/alvin-bragg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alvin Bragg</a> ahead of jury selection. &#8220;This is a political persecution, a persecution like never before. Nobody has ever seen anything like it,&#8221; he said.
Prosecutors <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/04/15/prosecutors-want-trump-fined-3000-for-violating-judge-merchans-gag-order/?sh=49e49877749d" target="_blank" rel="noopener">argued</a> Trump should be fined for allegedly violating his gag order after criticizing potential witnesses. Jury selection <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/04/15/jury-selection-trump-hush-money-trial/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">could take weeks</a> as prospective jurors are vetted until 12 people and several alternates are picked. Opening statements and testimony <a href="https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/15/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/no-access-hollywood-tape-00152240" target="_blank" rel="noopener">may not even start</a> until May.
Trump has broadly denied any wrongdoing in three other criminal cases that have not reached the trial stage. He has also been <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-steele-dossier-uk-lawsuit-russia-55427915a83f33a8ead484109b8a89f6" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ordered</a> to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-fined-350-million-in-civil-business-fraud-trial-banned-from-doing-business-in-ny-for-3-years#" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pay hundreds of millions</a> of dollars in civil litigation, including as part of a New York business fraud judgment that the former president is <a href="https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-york-civil-fraud-appeal-letitia-james-2f8cc521e00e4a34a1342b961c1416ce" target="_blank" rel="noopener">appealing</a>.
<h4>Fani Willis: 2020 Election Interference Case In Fulton County</h4>
In Georgia, Fulton County District Attorney <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fulton-county-prosecutors-have-another-recording-of-trump-pressuring-georgia-house-speaker-to-overturn-election-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Fani Willis</a> is leading a 2020 election interference case against <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a> and his allies. Trump and 18 co-defendants pleaded not guilty to a bevy of charges, but four of them have since taken <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/fourth-trump-co-defendant-takes-plea-deal-in-georgia-election-interference-case/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">plea deals</a>.
The case got sidetracked as the defense raised concerns about Willis and her special prosecutor, Nathan Wade, having an improper relationship. A judge allowed Willis to stay on the case Wade <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nathan-wade-steps-down-as-special-prosecutor-in-trump-georgia-case-following-judges-ruling" target="_blank" rel="noopener">resigned</a> in March. Afterward, CNN reported Willis <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/21/politics/fani-willis-trump-georgia-trial/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hoped</a> to have the trial before the 2024 election.
Willis has <a href="https://www.11alive.com/article/news/special-reports/ga-trump-investigation/fulton-county-da-court-appeals-decline-review-disqualification-ruling/85-43861f0b-9934-4ab7-8d21-591ab3332656" target="_blank" rel="noopener">requested an</a> appeals court uphold the ruling after the defense <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/29/trump-fani-willis-nathan-wade-georgia-election/77209956-ee03-11ee-8f2c-380a821c02db_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sought a review</a>. She said in a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fani-willis-responds-to-jordans-demand-for-docs-after-contempt-threat" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recent letter</a> to House GOP investigators seeking documents that &#8220;nothing that you do will derail the efforts of my staff and I to bring the election interference prosecution to trial.&#8221;
<h4>Jack Smith: 2020 Election Interference Case And Classified Documents Case</h4>
The two remaining criminal matters hanging over Trump are being spearheaded by special counsel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jack-smith">Jack Smith</a>. One case accuses Trump of unlawfully plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The other pertains to Trump&#8217;s handling of classified documents after leaving office and his allegedly trying to obstruct an investigation into his retention of those records.
Smith has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/exclusive-matt-gaetz-calls-on-doj-inspector-general-to-investigate-jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pressed</a> the Supreme Court to fast-track consideration of Trump’s presidential immunity claim to clear the way for a trial in the election case in Washington, D.C., which has already blown past the presiding judge&#8217;s plan for a March 4 start date. The high court <a href="https://twitter.com/AnnaBower/status/1765450613066715420" target="_blank" rel="noopener">is expected to hear</a> oral arguments on April 25.
The trial in Smith&#8217;s documents case has been <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-trial-date-documents-case-may-20-2024/">set to begin on May 20</a> in Florida, though the judge in that matter has indicated she may postpone it. Prosecutors have proposed the trial be pushed back to July 8 while Trump&#8217;s legal team <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-jack-smith-propose-new-trial-dates-classified-docs-case-rcna141272" target="_blank" rel="noopener">settled on August 12</a> as their preferred start date after pressing for it to start after the November election.
Trump is now the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, after his major rivals dropped out and he secured enough delegates to clinch the nomination, even as much of his time and resources have gone into the court battles and paying legal bills. He has claimed that prosecutors and others are waging a &#8220;witch hunt&#8221; against him in an effort to boost his 2024 rival President Joe Biden.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump

Where All The Trump Cases Stand As Hush-Money Trial Begins

2024 Election

Fani Willis

Readers Pass

Stormy Daniels

Former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump’s</a> hush money trial in Manhattan was delayed by around three weeks on Friday by the judge overseeing the case.
New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan sent a letter to District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office pushing the scheduled March 25 start date back 30 days from the date of his Friday letter, meaning jury selection won’t start for Trump’s hush money trial until at least mid-April, The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/03/15/trump-hush-money-trial-bragg-delay/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>.
Merchan delayed the trial after Trump’s lawyers asked for a 90-day delay, arguing that the prosecution wasn’t giving them enough time to review a new dump of 100,000 pages of material that could be used as evidence in the case. The former president and current frontrunner in the 2024 election is accused of trying to cover up alleged hush money payments he sent to porn actress Stormy Daniels in 2016. Trump has denied sending Daniels any hush money along with denying the alleged affair between them.
The hush money case, brought by leftist DA Alvin Bragg and widely viewed as the weakest case against the former president, was the first in a slew of criminal charges against Trump and made Trump the first ex-president to be charged with a crime. The former president pleaded not guilty last year to all 34 charges of falsifying business records leveled against him by Bragg.
With the delay in the hush money case against Trump, all four criminal trials indicting the Republican presidential nominee now face different types of delays as the 2024 election nears.
Federal Election Interference Case
In the 2020 election interference case against Trump being tried in Washington, D.C., the court is awaiting a ruling from the Supreme Court on Trump’s claim of presidential immunity. The high court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-takes-up-trump-immunity-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">announced</a> late last month that it would take up the issue of whether former President Donald Trump can invoke presidential immunity to shield himself from federal prosecution.
The D.C. case, which was brought by special counsel Jack Smith, is unlikely to begin before the 2024 election, according to legal experts, as the Supreme Court will not begin oral arguments on the immunity claim until April 24.
Trump has pleaded not guilty in the federal case in which he is accused of unlawfully plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. His lawyers filed to dismiss the case in October by arguing that Trump’s actions were “within the heartland” of his “official duties.”
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Classified Documents Case
In Florida, special counsel Jack Smith has also leveled criminal charges against Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents after leaving office, but that case has also run into a roadblock as the judge is considering complex legal questions.
Earlier this week, Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed Trump’s motion to dismiss charges in the case based on unconstitutional vagueness, but she still has to rule on the former president’s argument to dismiss charges based on his presidential authority to declare documents his “personal” records, CNN <a href="https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-classified-documents-hearing-03-14-24/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. Cannon <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/14/cannon-trial-date-trump-classified-document-case-00147056" target="_blank" rel="noopener">has not hinted</a> at a potential start date for the trial.
Georgia Election Interference Case
The case against Trump in Georgia — alleging that he conspired to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the state — is in the midst of a months-long setback after Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis was accused of misusing taxpayer dollars and showing favoritism to special prosecutor Nathan Wade.
Willis was accused by Trump’s co-defendant Mike Roman of being romantically involved with Wade at the time she hired him for the Trump case. A witness testified last month that the romantic relationship between Willis and Wade began before the case started, while Willis maintains that the relationship didn’t take place until later.
Testimony from a former employee in the DA’s office, who said Willis and Wade began their relationship in 2019, contradicted claims by both Willis and Wade that their personal relationship did not begin until 2022.
On Friday, Judge Scott McAfee <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-rules-that-fani-willis-or-nathan-wade-has-to-leave-the-georgia-trump-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruled</a> that either Wade or Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis had to exit the 2020 Georgia election case against Trump for the prosecution to continue. Hours later, Wade <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nathan-wade-steps-down-as-special-prosecutor-in-trump-georgia-case-following-judges-ruling" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sent</a> his resignation letter to the district attorney’s office.
Willis is being investigated by the House Judiciary Committee, which subpoenaed the district attorney last month. The Georgia state Senate is also investigating Willis, allowing it to issue subpoenas and put witnesses under oath.
It remains to be seen if any of the criminal trials against Trump officially begin jury selection and get off the ground before election day, which is now less than eight months away. The delays are a welcome sign for the former president and his campaign as Trump leads President Joe Biden in the polls, including in vital swing states, according to the <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">RealClearPolitics</a> average.

Judge Delays Trump’s Hush Money Case. Here’s Where The Former President’s 4 Criminal Trials Now Stand.

Judge Delays Trump's Hush Money Case. Here's Where The Former President's 4 Criminal Trials Now Stand.

Courts

Manhattan

Rep. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/matt-gaetz" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Matt Gaetz</a> (R-FL) is asking the independent watchdog of the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate special counsel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jack Smith</a> over whether the prosecutor is allowing the 2024 election to impact the timeline of his case against former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a>.
In a Wednesday <a href="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/02/Jack-Smith-OIG.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">letter</a> obtained exclusively by The Daily Wire, Gaetz raises concerns to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz about Smith <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/293970/20231221105032440_United%20States%20v.%20Trump_CBJ%20Reply.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pressing the Supreme Court</a> to fast-track consideration of Trump&#8217;s presidential immunity claim to clear the way for a trial. The congressman draws attention to <a href="https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-85000-protection-government-integrity" target="_blank" rel="noopener">a section of the Justice Manual</a> that says federal prosecutors &#8220;may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party.&#8221;
The congressman says the memo is &#8220;quite clear&#8221; and opined that Smith&#8217;s filing to the Supreme Court in December &#8220;tacitly concedes&#8221; a violation of DOJ rules, as Trump is running another campaign for the White House in this year&#8217;s election. &#8220;Specifically, that reply brief repeatedly urges &#8216;rapid&#8217; review of the federal prosecution of Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump, and the incredible &#8216;public importance&#8217; of the case, without once explicitly stating why the rapidity is warranted, or what the public importance is,&#8221; Gaetz says.
&#8220;Were there a legitimate, non-election related purpose for this request, these attorneys, who have filed in appeals courts many times, would have listed such. Since charges have been filed and the defendant himself is taking a legal position on timing and lodging various appeals, that justification cannot, for example, be the rights of the defendant under the Constitution or Speedy Trial Act,&#8221; Gaetz continues. &#8220;So, there can be only one conclusion: Special Counsel Jack Smith sees it as of paramount importance to hold a trial before the November 2024 election, but he is unable to explicitly say so, as such a justification is in violation of Departmental policy and law.&#8221;
Trump has pleaded not guilty in the federal case in which he is accused of unlawfully plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. His lawyers <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/05/trump-election-case-immunity-motion-00120225" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed</a> to dismiss the case in October by arguing that Trump’s actions were “within the heartland” of his “official duties.” The ensuing battle over the immunity claim led to the presiding judge&#8217;s plan for a March 4 trial <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/08/28/judge-sets-march-4-trial-date-for-trumps-federal-election-interference-case/?sh=50ff4b547905" target="_blank" rel="noopener">start date</a> to <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/02/02/donald-trump-federal-trial-delayed/72448799007/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fall by the wayside</a>.
The Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-jack-smith-refuses-to-quickly-take-up-trump-immunity-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rejected</a> Smith&#8217;s request to quickly take up the immunity question in December, leaving the issue to first be considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. After a panel of the appeals court ruled against the immunity claim, the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-takes-up-trump-immunity-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">agreed</a> to take up the issue last month and has scheduled an oral argument date <a href="https://twitter.com/AnnaBower/status/1765450613066715420" target="_blank" rel="noopener">for April 25</a>.
Gaetz told The Daily Wire that Smith&#8217;s investigation is clearly a &#8220;partisan exercise.&#8221;
&#8220;The witch hunt against President Trump by Attorney General Garland and Special Counsel Smith is a partisan exercise, and the American people know it,&#8221; Gaetz said on Wednesday. &#8220;The actions of the Special Counsel Smith to speed up the trial against President Trump violate the DOJ’s rules and the law. His public comments and his office’s briefs before the Supreme Court demonstrate that he has no reason for his actions other than to unlawfully interfere in the 2024 presidential election.&#8221;
Trump is facing three other criminal cases, including another one led by Smith over the former president’s handling of classified documents, as well as civil litigation. Trump has broadly denied any wrongdoing and has argued that politically motivated prosecutors are conducting a “witch hunt” against him. Trump recently <a href="https://www.axios.com/2024/02/23/trump-classified-documents-presidential-immunity" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cited</a> presidential immunity in a request to get the documents case dismissed.
Gaetz, a lawyer, lays out his argument in the letter for why it&#8217;s legally improper to carry out the case during &#8220;election season.&#8221;
&#8220;It is indisputable that we are already in an election season. However, the Justice Manual does not set hard dates,&#8221; Gaetz says in his letter. &#8220;It is the core of prohibited conduct that a purpose (not the purpose) of any official action of a prosecutor be to affect any election: it may be morally correct that the American people should see swift resolution of this case, perhaps with dropped charges or a Trump acquittal before the November 2024 Presidential election, but wielding Executive Branch authority in the service of this is a violation of law. Prosecutors must be held to a higher standard.&#8221;
After accusing the DOJ of failing to comply with oversight requests from Congress, Gaetz goes on to implore Horowitz to give his &#8220;immediate attention into compliance of the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith with Departmental regulations, particularly related to investigatory and prosecutorial actions during an election season.&#8221;
&#8220;The precise scope of an investigation may be as narrow as interviewing the Special Counsel, and determining that he has a lawful purpose in seeking the expediting of his case against Donald Trump, and determining that he did not have the purpose of keying a trial date to the election calendar. Or it may be wider,&#8221; the letter concludes. &#8220;Please alert my office of any developments in this matter.&#8221;

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL)

EXCLUSIVE: Matt Gaetz Calls On DOJ Inspector General To Investigate Jack Smith

Matt Gaetz Asks DOJ Inspector General To Investigate Jack Smith

Matt Gaetz

Special counsel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jack Smith</a> does not want potential jurors to be asked how they voted in the 2020 presidential election — but he does want the court to ask them whether or not they feel that President Joe Biden&#8217;s Justice Department has treated former President Donald Trump &#8220;fairly.&#8221;
According to a <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/2895743/jack-smith-pushes-court-not-ask-jurors-whom-voted-for-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">report</a> published Thursday by The Washington Examiner, attorneys for the former president had called for jurors to be asked about their political party affiliations in addition to whether or not they cast a vote in 2020.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon asked for both Smith&#8217;s team and Trump&#8217;s to submit a <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653/gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.351.1.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">jury questionnaire</a> — which would allow the court to pre-screen potential jurors and rule out those who could not view the case in an objective manner — by Wednesday, and it was immediately clear that the two sides were at loggerheads over a few of the possible questions.
Among the questions that the special counsel and his team objected to were the following:
<ul>
<li>Are you registered to vote?</li>
<li>If you answered &#8220;yes&#8221; to the prior question, are you registered with a particular party affiliation?</li>
<li>Did you vote in the 2020 presidential election?</li>
</ul>
Smith&#8217;s team also nixed a question regarding whether or not potential jurors held a negative view of politicians, but agreed along with the Trump team to go ahead with questions about whether they held negative opinions of police officers, the FBI, or judges and other court officers.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The two parties also butted heads when it came to asking jurors about personal media consumption habits. Trump&#8217;s team asked that jurors rank media outlets — from the one they went to most to the one they went to least — while Smith&#8217;s team objected, asking jurors to simply &#8220;check all that apply&#8221; when given a list of media outlets.
Trump&#8217;s team also noted objections to several questions, including the following:
<ul>
<li>Have you read about or heard about the FBI’s execution of a search warrant at the Mar-a-Lago Club in August 2022?</li>
<li>Have you seen, read about, or heard about any statements by Mr. Trump about this investigation?</li>
</ul>
Trump&#8217;s team also objected to a question regarding whether jurors believed the former president was &#8220;being treated unfairly by the court system,&#8221; saying that if that question were included — instead of a simple &#8220;yes&#8221; or &#8220;no&#8221; — respondents should be permitted to answer &#8220;I don&#8217;t know.&#8221;
Smith also objected to several other questions presented by Trump&#8217;s attorneys — most notably: &#8220;An indictment is not evidence. It is a document that sets forth the charges made against a defendant; it is an accusation. It may not be considered as any evidence whatsoever of a defendant’s guilt. Can you think of any reason that would interfere with your ability to follow and apply this principle of law?&#8221;

COMBO-US-JUSTICE-POLITICS-TRUMP

Jack Smith Doesn’t Want Jurors Asked How They Voted In 2020. Here’s What He Does Want To Know.

Jack Smith Doesn't Want Jurors Asked How They Voted In 2020. Here's What He Does Want To Know.

Joe Biden

Conservatives blasted Democrats&#8217; &#8220;lawfare&#8221; tactics on Tuesday, following a federal appeals court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/appeals-court-denies-trumps-immunity-claim-in-2020-election-interference-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ruling</a> that former President Donald Trump does not have presidential immunity from prosecution of alleged criminal acts relating to 2020 election interference.
Trump&#8217;s team made the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in connection to special counsel Jack Smith’s election interference case, which Smith is notably trying to rush before the 2024 election.
&#8220;The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruling that President Donald Trump does not have immunity from prosecution sets a dangerous precedent, violates our Constitution, and threatens the very bedrock of our nation,&#8221; Republican Rep. Elise Stefanik (NY) said in a statement sent to The Daily Wire.
&#8220;President Trump&#8217;s actions surrounding election integrity were within his official duties as the President as he was investigating legitimate Constitutional questions about the election,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;The precedent set today by the D.C. Circuit&#8217;s decision means that future presidents who leave office will likely face politicized prosecutions by the opposing party.&#8221;
Stefanik added that the president having immunity &#8220;is necessary for any presidency to function properly.&#8221;
&#8220;I fully support President Trump&#8217;s efforts to appeal this unconstitutional ruling to the Supreme Court, where I expect a thoughtful decision to overturn this dangerous precedent,&#8221; she closed the statement.
Stefanik is also cosponsoring a <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4451345-gaetz-stefanik-offer-resolution-declaring-trump-did-not-engage-in-insurrection/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">resolution</a> from Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) which asserts that Trump did not engage in an insurrection or rebellion against the U.S. 
&#8220;Rogue Democrat operatives are attempting to use this lie to illegally take President Trump off the ballot,&#8221; Stefanik said, adding during her public comments that political opponents are &#8220;shredding the Constitution&#8221; in their pursuit to destroy Trump. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1707335489655000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0IvhH0RmO0xBCqvnXMfCAW">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
I am honored to stand as an original cosponsor on <a href="https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RepMattGaetz</a>&#39;s resolution that President Donald Trump did not engage in insurrection or rebellion against the United States. That is a fact. 
Rogue Democrat operatives are attempting to use this lie to illegally take President… <a href="https://t.co/ypbvKvhKqg">pic.twitter.com/ypbvKvhKqg</a>
&mdash; Rep. Elise Stefanik (@RepStefanik) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepStefanik/status/1754916546680418432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R) also responded to the ruling on Tuesday, telling CNN reporter Manu Raju that the Left is using &#8220;lawfare&#8221; tactics against Trump.
“I believe they have been after President Trump for partisan political purposes, I think that’s obvious, and we call it lawfare,&#8221; Johnson said, &#8220;and I think there is no other way to describe it.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Asked Speaker Johnson this AM about Trump losing immunity case in court and whether he thinks he should get immunity.
“I believe they have been after President Trump for partisan political purposes, I think that’s obvious, and we call it lawfare and I think there is no other way… <a href="https://t.co/daT8fXtGQK">pic.twitter.com/daT8fXtGQK</a>
&mdash; Manu Raju (@mkraju) <a href="https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1754915664320421896?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 6, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Mollie Hemingway, the editor-in-chief of The Federalist, <a href="https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1754898735627161696" target="_blank" rel="noopener">responded</a> by linking to a piece she wrote in December about the rushed effort to prosecute Trump before the 2024 election.
In the piece, Hemingway <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2023/12/19/how-a-left-wing-appeals-panel-is-rigging-trumps-j6-case-through-bogus-fast-track-process/">explains</a> that the D.C. Circuit panel of judges that decided on Trump&#8217;s appeal was &#8220;particularly left-wing, even for the left-leaning D.C. Circuit.&#8221; Notably, the panel changes each month.
&#8220;Karen Henderson, the 79-year-old appointee of George H.W. Bush, is on the panel. More importantly, two relatively young Biden appointees named J. Michelle Childs and Florence Pan are also on the panel,&#8221; Hemingway wrote. &#8220;Panels in the coming months will reportedly not be as left-wing as the December panel. The scheduling question, then, becomes one of how hostile the panel of judges will be to Trump’s appeal.&#8221;
&#8220;By setting an aggressive schedule, the December panel can keep with the case and help ensure Democrats can get their conviction in time for it to affect the election,&#8221; she asserted.
Trump is expected to appeal the court&#8217;s ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. The high court could in theory reject to hear the question on immunity and the appeals court’s decision would stand. If the court does take up the case, the decision could derail Smith’s case, delay it past the 2024 election, or it could fall before the 2024 election.
In theory, if Trump won the White House, the Department of Justice could dismiss the charges, which Trump has argued are part of a “witch-hunt” and clear political targeting. Or, as president, he could pardon himself.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/appeals-court-denies-trumps-immunity-claim-in-2020-election-interference-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Appeals Court Denies Trump’s Immunity Claim In 2020 Election Interference Case </a>

Rep. Elise Stefanik

‘Shredding The Constitution’: Conservatives React To Latest Ruling Against Trump, Legal Cases

Republicans React To Latest Ruling Against Trump

Politics

A federal appeals court on Tuesday ruled that former President Donald Trump does not have presidential immunity from prosecution of alleged criminal acts relating to 2020 election interference.
The appeal was made to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by the Trump team in connection to special counsel Jack Smith&#8217;s election interference case in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.
“We have balanced former President Trump’s asserted interests in executive immunity against the vital public interests that favor allowing this prosecution to proceed,” the three-judge panel opinion <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/06/trump-election-case-appeals-court-denies-ex-president-immunity.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>.
“We conclude that ‘[c]oncerns of public policy, especially as illuminated by our history and the structure of our government’ compel the rejection of his claim of immunity in this case,” the panel said, upholding a trial judge’s earlier ruling.
The panel is composed of two judges appointed by Democrats and one appointed by a Republican.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1707320179581000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3QwbkQ2sIse8I0MoT7uOU3">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The former president is expected to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, which is part of a larger effort to slow down Smith&#8217;s case against the former president.
Smith wants the trial to move ahead as soon as possible, seemingly trying to avoid the possible outcome of Trump — the Republican nominee frontrunner — winning the 2024 election.
The U.S. Supreme Court could in theory reject to hear the question on immunity and the appeals court&#8217;s decision would stand. But if the high court does take up the case, the decision could derail Smith&#8217;s case or delay it past the 2024 election.
Following the appeal decision, legal analyst and attorney Jonathan Turley emphasized to Fox News that the Supreme Court doesn&#8217;t share the same &#8220;urgency&#8221; as Smith, regarding the case.
&#8220;The interesting dynamic about this case is that Jack Smith has been telling every court that &#8216;it&#8217;s absolutely urgent that we move this trial forward&#8217; and he made it clear that he wants this president tried and convicted before the election,&#8221; Turley said, Newsweek <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-doesnt-share-jack-smith-sense-urgency-donald-trump-trials-jonathan-turley-1867396" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a>. &#8220;The Supreme Court clearly didn&#8217;t share that urgency, it refused to do that, and so it&#8217;s not clear they&#8217;re gonna feel even greater urgency now.&#8221;
In theory, if Trump won the White House, the Department of Justice could dismiss the charges, which Trump has argued are part of a &#8220;witch-hunt&#8221; and clear political targeting. Or, as president, he could pardon himself.

LONDONDERRY, NH – January 23:  Former president Donald Trump sp

Appeals Court Denies Trump’s Immunity Claim In 2020 Election Interference Case 

The trial for former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> in Washington, D.C., over his alleged election interference has been postponed from March 4.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee, announced that the trial date for the allegations brought forth by Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith would be bumped with no future date yet set.
“The court will set a new schedule if and when the mandate is returned,” Chutkan <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/02/politics/trump-trial-date-postponed/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a>, referring to a bid from Trump to establish immunity from prosecution that is currently before an appeals court.
The March 4 start date had been heavily scrutinized because it was one day before Super Tuesday, <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-trial-delayed-special-counsel-jack-smiths-jan-6-investigation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">when</a> voters in Alabama, Alaska, American Samoa, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Vermont are set to pick their choice for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.
Trump, the GOP frontrunner, has easily won the first two contests in Iowa and New Hampshire, and his only major challenger left is former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, who trails him widely in her home state, according to recent polls.
The former president was <a href="https://www.justice.gov/storage/US_v_Trump_23_cr_257.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">charged</a> in August with conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, and a conspiracy against rights.
Trump has maintained his innocence of all charges brought against him by the Justice Department. In October, his lawyers <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-rejects-trumps-bid-to-hold-jack-smith-in-contempt-but-limits-substantive-filings" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed to dismiss</a> the case by arguing that Trump’s actions were “within the heartland” of his “official duties.” The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is currently looking at this immunity claim.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1706370777182000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1rZs278QeRErxuxwtCwcq8">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Chutkan’s order came just hours after <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/judge-delays-verdict-in-trumps-ny-civil-business-fraud-trial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news broke</a> that the verdict in Trump’s New York civil business fraud trial was delayed at least another week after Judge Arthur Engoron initially said that he would try to announce his final ruling by the end of January.
A spokesman for the New York State Office of Court Administration said that Engoron’s verdict is expected to come in early to mid-February, but he added that was a “rough estimate” and “subject to modifications,” CNBC <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/01/trump-new-york-business-fraud-verdict-delayed-.html">reported</a>. Closing arguments in the trial finished last week as New York Attorney General Letitia James seeks to fine Trump more than <a href="https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4443327-trump-ny-fraud-verdict-now-expected-by-mid-february-court/#:~:text=A%20New%20York%20judge%20is,a%20court%20spokesperson%20said%20Thursday.">$370 million</a> in a lawsuit alleging Trump misled over the value of his company’s assets in financial statements.
Trump has faced an onslaught of suits at the state and federal level, prompting him to spend tens of millions on legal fees as he attempts to mount a presidential campaign.

Former President Trump Visits The Teamsters Headquarters In Washington, D.C.

D.C. Trial For Trump Over Alleged Election Interference Bumped From Super Tuesday Start Date

D.C. Trial For Trump Over Alleged Election Interference Bumped From March Start Date

Washington D.C.

The judge presiding over special counsel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jack Smith&#8217;s</a> 2020 election case in Washington, D.C., delivered a mixed ruling on Thursday in response to former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a>&#8216;s push to hold prosecutors <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-accuses-jack-smith-of-violating-court-order-wants-prosecutor-held-in-contempt" target="_blank" rel="noopener">in contempt</a> for allegedly violating a court order pausing the proceedings while an immunity-focused appeal plays out.
U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee, granted the recommendation by Trump&#8217;s lawyers to forbid both sides from filing &#8220;substantive pretrial motions&#8221; without first seeking permission from the court. But she denied the rest of Trump&#8217;s motion, which included a push for the court to order Smith to &#8220;show cause&#8221; why prosecutors should not be held in contempt.
Lawyers for Trump <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.192.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">claimed</a> that prosecutors <a href="https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1746179466986934716" target="_blank" rel="noopener">violated</a> the judge&#8217;s stay last month by making <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jack-smith-asks-court-to-bar-improper-evidence-from-trump-2020-election-trial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filings</a>, including thousands of pages of discovery, during the appeal. They also accused Smith&#8217;s team of seeking to &#8220;weaponize&#8221; the pause &#8220;to spread political propaganda, knowing that President Trump would not fully respond because the Court relieved him of the burdens of litigation during the Stay.&#8221;
Prosecutors argued Trump&#8217;s motion should be denied as they prepare for what is currently scheduled to be a trial set for early March. &#8220;The Government has not violated — and never intentionally would violate — an order of the Court, and the defendant’s recycled allegations of partisanship and prosecutorial misconduct remain baseless,&#8221; Smith&#8217;s team <a href="https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24254799/contemptresponse.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">wrote in a filing</a>. Prosecutors also said they intended to &#8220;comply with its continuing discovery obligations and to voluntarily satisfy the remaining deadlines.&#8221;
The clash began after Chutkan rejected Trump&#8217;s bid to dismiss the case, in which the former president is accused of unlawfully plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. She paused the proceedings when Trump&#8217;s legal team filed an appeal that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-asks-federal-appeals-court-to-dismiss-2020-election-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hinges on</a> presidential immunity and double jeopardy claims. With the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-jack-smith-refuses-to-quickly-take-up-trump-immunity-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">refusing</a> to quickly take up the question of whether presidential immunity provides Trump broad protections against prosecution, a <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/jack-smith-asks-appeals-court-to-reject-trumps-immunity-claim-48de11df" target="_blank" rel="noopener">three-judge panel</a> of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering the matter. Oral arguments took place last week, and reporting on the hearing indicated that the judges <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/09/trumps-immunity-claim-gets-frosty-reception-at-appeals-court-00134512" target="_blank" rel="noopener">were</a> <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/09/trump-smith-face-off-in-court-on-election-case-immunity-claim.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">skeptical</a> of the immunity claim.
A trial is currently <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/08/28/judge-sets-march-4-trial-date-for-trumps-federal-election-interference-case/?sh=50ff4b547905" target="_blank" rel="noopener">set</a> to start on March 4 — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-trumps-trial-schedule-lines-up-with-the-2024-election-calendar" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one day before Super Tuesday</a> — but that may change depending on how long it takes for the presidential immunity issue to be settled.  Upon <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.186.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">freezing</a> the case in mid-December, Chutkan said her stay would stop &#8220;any further proceedings that would move this case towards trial or impose additional burdens of litigation on Defendant.&#8221; But there were some caveats, underscoring that stayed deadlines and proceedings have not been <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.186.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;permanently vacated&#8221;</a> and protective measures — <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-2020-election-case-paused-appeal-immunity/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">such as the gag order</a> against Trump — would remain in place unless a higher court ruled otherwise.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1705604838822000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2_j2KMpwVRLCzwAoGaYKL5">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
Chutkan stated in her ruling on Thursday that any party seeking permission to make a &#8220;substantive&#8221; filing &#8220;shall state whether the proposed motion is ancillary to the pending appeal and so requires a timely response or other action before the mandate is returned.&#8221; She added, &#8220;This measure is an addition to the Stay Order, aimed to further advance its purposes, and does not reflect a determination that the Government has violated any of its clear and unambiguous terms or acted in bad faith.&#8221;
As he runs a third campaign for the White House, Trump is facing three other criminal cases, including another one led by Smith over the former president&#8217;s handling of classified documents, as well as civil litigation and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/maine-judge-delays-trump-ballot-decision" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ballot access challenges</a>. Trump has broadly denied any wrongdoing and has argued that politically motivated prosecutors are conducting a &#8220;witch hunt&#8221; against him.

Jack Smith and Donald Trump

Judge Rejects Trump’s Bid To Hold Jack Smith In Contempt, But Limits ‘Substantive’ Filings

Judge Rejects Trump's Bid To Hold Jack Smith In Contempt, But Limits 'Substantive' Filings

January 6

Former President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/donald-trump" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Donald Trump</a> accused special counsel <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jack-smith" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jack Smith</a> on Thursday of violating a court order pausing the proceedings in the case against the former president in which he is accused of unlawfully plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. Trump&#8217;s re-election campaign said Trump wants to hold Smith in contempt of court.
Lawyers for Trump pointed to a <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.186.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">stay</a> of the proceedings granted by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, an Obama appointee, after they appealed her rejection of their request to dismiss the case. Although the appeal, which <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-asks-federal-appeals-court-to-dismiss-2020-election-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">hinges on</a> presidential immunity and double jeopardy claims, was taken up by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, Smith&#8217;s team went along making submissions anyway, Trump&#8217;s attorneys noted.
Prosecutors violated last month&#8217;s stay &#8220;almost immediately&#8221; by serving thousands of pages of discovery and a &#8220;purported&#8221; draft exhibit list, <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.192.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the 15-page filing said</a>. Despite a &#8220;warning&#8221; from Trump that he would seek relief if their &#8220;malicious conduct&#8221; continued, prosecutors then <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jack-smith-asks-court-to-bar-improper-evidence-from-trump-2020-election-trial" target="_blank" rel="noopener">filed a motion</a> filled with &#8220;partisan rhetoric, including false claims,&#8221; the filing added.
&#8220;In this manner, the prosecutors seek to weaponize the Stay to spread political propaganda, knowing that President Trump would not fully respond because the Court relieved him of the burdens of litigation during the Stay,&#8221; Trump&#8217;s legal team wrote. &#8220;Worse, the prosecutors have announced their intention to continue this partisan-driven misconduct indefinitely, effectively converting this Court’s docket into an arm of [President Joe Biden&#8217;s re-election] Campaign.&#8221;
Trump&#8217;s lawyers asked the federal court in Washington, D.C., to order prosecutors to &#8220;show cause&#8221; for why they should not be held in contempt, be required to withdraw their filings, be forbidden from making future productions without express permission from the court, and assessed monetary sanctions for attorneys&#8217; fees and expenses incurred in the response.
Smith&#8217;s team did not immediately issue a reply to the filing, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/04/politics/trump-special-counsel-contempt/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">declining comment</a> to the media.
In <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.186.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">making her order</a>, Chutkan said the stay would pause &#8220;any further proceedings that would move this case towards trial or impose additional burdens of litigation on Defendant.&#8221; But there were some caveats, including to stress that stayed deadlines and proceedings have not been <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148/gov.uscourts.dcd.258148.186.0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;permanently vacated&#8221;</a> and protective measures — <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-2020-election-case-paused-appeal-immunity/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">such as the gag order</a> against Trump — would remain in place unless a higher court ruled otherwise.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
With the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/supreme-court-deals-blow-to-jack-smith-refuses-to-quickly-take-up-trump-immunity-claim" target="_blank" rel="noopener">refusing</a> to quickly take up the question of whether presidential immunity provides Trump broad protections against prosecution, a <a href="https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/jack-smith-asks-appeals-court-to-reject-trumps-immunity-claim-48de11df" target="_blank" rel="noopener">three-judge panel</a> in the federal appeals court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on January 9. The trial is currently <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/saradorn/2023/08/28/judge-sets-march-4-trial-date-for-trumps-federal-election-interference-case/?sh=50ff4b547905" target="_blank" rel="noopener">set</a> to start on March 4 — <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-trumps-trial-schedule-lines-up-with-the-2024-election-calendar" target="_blank" rel="noopener">one day before Super Tuesday</a> — but that may change depending on how long it takes for the presidential immunity issue to be settled.
As he runs a third campaign for the White House, Trump is facing three other criminal cases, including another one led by Smith over the former president&#8217;s handling of classified documents, as well as civil litigation. Trump has broadly denied any wrongdoing and has argued that politically motivated prosecutors are conducting a &#8220;witch hunt&#8221; against him.
&#8220;Rather than respect the rule of law, Jack Smith unilaterally decided to disobey the stay order and continue with his harassing litigation, all done in order to keep parroting the pathetic Biden Campaign’s corrupt talking points in the name of election interference,&#8221; said Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung in a statement from the former president&#8217;s re-election campaign. &#8220;As a result, President Trump is seeking to hold Deranged Jack in contempt of Court. No prosecutor is above the law.&#8221;

Special Counsel Jack Smith

Trump Accuses Jack Smith Of Violating Court Order, Wants Prosecutor Held In Contempt

Menu