The fruits of Jack Smith’s 2-year investigation into Trump will land on Tanya Chutkan’s desk today
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
www.politico.com /news/2024/09/26/jack-smith-trump-investigation-dossier-00181108
The fruits of Jack Smith’s 2-year investigation into Trump will land on Tanya Chutkan’s desk today
By Kyle Cheney and Josh Gerstein 09/26/2024 05:00 AM EDT Link Copied 7-8 minutes
Special counsel Jack Smith is scheduled to submit detailed evidence his team has amassed against Donald Trump in the federal election case. | Jacquelyn Martin/AP
Special counsel Jack Smith, stymied at every turn by federal courts from putting Donald Trump on trial, is about to submit his most compelling evidence that the former president conspired to derail the peaceful transfer of power after the 2020 election.
Whether the public sees it before the 2024 election rests with U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan.
On Thursday, Smith’s prosecutors are scheduled to submit to Chutkan a 180-page dossier distilling their case against Trump — the fruits of a two-year investigation that included secret grand jury testimony from former Vice President Mike Pence and former chief of staff Mark Meadows. It is likely the special counsel’s final chance before Election Day to lay out his case for why Trump deserves to be put on trial and convicted.
The filing — a legal brief accompanied by supporting exhibits — is expected to contain never-before-seen evidence about Trump’s efforts to subvert the last election. It could include snippets of interviews prosecutors conducted with some of Trump’s top advisers, documents Smith procured from the National Archives and a log of Trump’s Twitter activity as violence raged on Jan. 6, 2021.
But prosecutors are not going to file these documents publicly. They must first submit them “under seal” to Chutkan, who will then decide how much of the evidence is fit for public release.
It’s all a far cry from the dramatic courtroom showdown Smith’s team had been preparing for a year ago, when they hoped to bring the case quickly before a jury. But it is likely to include damaging details for Trump just weeks before Election Day.
Trump’s lawyers oppose any disclosure of the evidence that prosecutors have amassed, arguing that it amounts to interference in the final weeks of the campaign. They have repeatedly called for the entire case to be dismissed in light of the Supreme Court’s July 1 decision granting broad immunity for official presidential acts.
But the very purpose of Smith’s brief is to advise Chutkan on how much of the case can proceed in light of the immunity ruling. Prosecutors are expected to argue that most of Trump’s allegedly criminal acts were in his capacity as a political candidate, not as president — or that any purportedly official acts are not entitled to immunity.
Hanging over the entire case is the Nov. 5 election. If Trump wins, the case is all but certain to be shut down, because Trump or his next attorney general could fire Smith and order the case to be dismissed. (And even if they didn’t do that, Justice Department policy bars prosecution of a sitting president.)
Chutkan, for her part, has emphasized that the political calendar will not affect her handling of the case. And in a procedural order on Tuesday, she chided Trump’s lawyers for their claims of election interference.
“Defendant’s concern with the political consequences of these proceedings does not bear on the pretrial schedule,” Chutkan, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote.
Smith charged Trump last year with orchestrating a breathtaking conspiracy to disenfranchise millions of voters, browbeat state officials, assemble fraudulent presidential electors and pressure members of Congress to keep him in power despite losing the 2020 election. The special counsel had hoped to put Trump on trial early this year, but the Supreme Court froze the case for eight months while it considered whether Trump should be deemed immune from the charges altogether.
The justices ultimately adopted a sweeping view of presidential immunity and sent the case back to Chutkan for her to apply the ruling to the allegations against Trump. Smith responded by trimming some of the allegations but seeking to proceed with four felony charges.
Chutkan, over Trump’s objection, agreed this week to let prosecutors file an unusually lengthy brief to lay out their massive roster of evidence against the former president. How much of it becomes public — and when — is largely within her discretion. But because much of the evidence was obtained through a grand jury, subjecting it to formidable secrecy rules, Chutkan may be limited in how much she can release. She may also need to contend with renewed objections from Trump’s team, who could move to block the release of the evidence shortly after the special counsel submits it to the judge.
The battle over the evidence has prompted a role reversal, at least as compared to a more typical criminal case. Defense attorneys usually demand details about the prosecution’s plan for a trial, while prosecutors insist the defense isn’t entitled to a preview of the government’s case.
The murkier question is precisely what new evidence Smith might reveal. The broad case against Trump is widely understood and has been previously pieced together by congressional investigators, Georgia prosecutors, civil lawsuits, news reports and prior filings by Smith’s team.
But Smith won legal fights to interview an array of witnesses who refused to cooperate with congressional investigators. Chief among those witnesses was Pence, who was the subject of Trump’s last-ditch pressure campaign to reverse the election results on Jan. 6. Meadows provided thousands of text messages to Congress that became a crucial timeline for investigators, but he refused to interview with lawmakers. And Trump’s social media adviser Dan Scavino, who was with Trump during key moments on Jan. 6 — when rioters were ransacking the Capitol — also spoke to Smith’s investigators despite spurning Congress.
In addition, Smith obtained reams of data from Twitter, now known as X, that could shed light on Trump’s movements during the Jan. 6 riot, including where he was when he tweeted an attack on Pence just as rioters were descending on his location in the Capitol. Trump’s tweet inflamed the mob and preceded some of the largest spasms of violence that day.
Other witnesses, like Trump White House Counsel Pat Cipollone and his deputy Pat Philbin, spoke to Congress but halted their testimony at key moments, citing executive privilege. Smith was able to secure court rulings to override Trump’s privilege claims, giving him access to details that other investigators were unable to learn.
Some commentators sharply critical of Trump have been building expectations for the special counsel’s filing.
“Donald Trump is afraid — very afraid — of what is in special prosecutor Jack Smith’s 180-page brief,” MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell declared on-air Tuesday.
Tags
Who is online
443 visitors
The judge has a civic duty to release all this evidence asap.
She will.
I'm not so sure about that.
lol.
at least your open about it’s not about the rule of law but a judge and the DOJ interfering in the election.
The truth interferes in the election? Only if one of the candidates is continually lying. Wouldn't you want to know the truth?
There is no new evidence, and even if there was, it would not go to trial before the election.
There will be when this is released.
This is the very best we will get prior to the election. Trump's attorneys, select judges, and the SCotUS have collectively succeeded in pushing his important trials —those dealing with his actions while PotUS— until after the election. The electorate is denied a legal resolution prior to voting.
But at least this evidence will be disclosed and reported upon. And that is NOT a trivial event.
Trump put out a "truth" today blaming the deep state for jan 6th. I have to think that is timed to coincide with Smith's filing of evidence today.
Trump is substantially beyond the point where any other politician would have been run out of town. What is wrong with the electorate? How is this guy still a viable candidate?
White grievance.
If that's so, why do his numbers keep going up among minorities and down with whites? If he were getting even John McCain level of support among whites, he'd win in a cakewalk .
Trump should be losing by 20 pts.
Why do you think "white grievance" appeals to minorities and repels whites?
My guess would be some folks think everything is about race and can't seem to get past the idea.
Trump wouldnt even be in politics if it were not for white grievance. It is a topic that has never been talked about enough.
That is because most folks know it is ridiculous
You do know that Trump broke into politics by being a racist dont you?
Most people know that is ridiculous also.
But he's NOT, and you keep ignoring the reasons why.
"Trump wouldnt even be in politics if it were not for white grievance. It is a topic that has never been talked about enough."
That's because there is not one shred of truth proving that to be true.
I thought he blamed Harris, he's now blaming her for everything else .
The wider electorate is simply not concerned about J6, alleged fraud where none happened, where 34 statute of limitations limited misdemeanors magically became felonies, and whether some rich lady was alleged groped by Trump 30 years ago.
Get over it, Trump ain't going to jail. The vast majority of voter are pretty aware of what the democrats have been trying to do for the past four years, and they simply disregard it.
On the J6 part, it is a sad commentary on our nation if it does not matter if a PotUS violates the peaceful transfer of power by attempting to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement.
Do you actually think that the J6 indictment is without merit?
They dont know anything about it. That has been clear for quite some time.
Most of the folks still flying the Jan 6th banner were not going to vote for Trump anyway.
They know the basics. It just doesn't matter to most voters. It is years old news in a 24 hour news cycle world. Voters care about their wages, rent, inflation, safety. That's why Harris is so eager to pretend she has nothing to do with the Biden Presidency and claiming that she's the "fresh start"
What a dangerous failure of the electorate to not care that a nominee as PotUS violated the peaceful transfer of power by attempting to steal a presidential election through fraud, coercion, lying, and incitement.
That's democracy for you. LBJ committed probably the most brazen act of election theft in American history and it didn't hurt his career any.
The alleged fraud regarding LBJ's 1948 Senate race was not even close to what Trump did. Not even in the ballpark. Get real.
They are desperate. And its going to get worse.
The basics are that Trump tried to steal the election. It isn't even controversial among people who know the facts.
But I believe MAGAs dont care. They are in a cult.
He stole an election with fake votes. Literally. He barely even tried to hide it. It's not even debatable.
Trump didn't come close to such brazen fraud.
The Democrats in Chicago tried to steal a governors election in the early 80s. Hartigan was their candidate. The FBI caught them stuffing the ballot boxes with ten of thousands of illegal votes.
I'm sure you left the Democratic Party and no longer voted for them right? You must have opposed Mayor Washington on principle, right?
Trump approved of this plan, and wanted it to happen. Trump defenders are out of their minds.
This plan, if gone through with, would have disenfranchised many millions of voters. Trump didnt blink an eye at the thought.
Why are you so desperate to defend Donald Trump? It is concerning.
The difference was 87 votes out of one million — a razor thin election that could easily go either way. And on top of it all, the allegation was wrongdoing by D operatives not directly tied to LBJ himself (although if true LBJ likely involved). None of this has been proven so it remains a mere allegation in ancient history. It was a Senate election and LBJ had no special power to abuse at the time.
In direct contrast, we are talking about an election that (albeit close) was clearly won by Biden. Trump was front-and-center in the Big Lie con job. The evidence is overwhelming and that is just what has been publicly available (not counting what we will see once Smith's evidence is released). And this was a Presidential election. And Trump was the sitting PotUS at the time and abused his oath of office by trying to circumvent the CotUS.
Not even remotely close. A desperate comparison. But a typical attempt by a Trump supporter who is not a Trump supporter.
ut I believe MAGAs dont care. They are in a cult.
So are you in a cult? Why didn't you leave the Democratic Party when it tried to steal a governor's election and disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters in your state?
You want to rationalize stealing an election now? Go ahead. Tell us how stuffing ballot boxes in a close election is fine and dandy.
ot directly tied to LBJ himself (although if true LBJ likely involved).
C'mon. let's be serious. How desperate do you have to be suggest LBJ, of all people, wasn't involved in trying to steal his own election.
of this has been proven so it remains a mere allegation in ancient history.
Lol. IF you knew the first thing about what happened in that election, that's the last thing you'd ever claim because you know how ridiculous it is to say that in public. The cheating was brazen, almost comical in how open and obvious it was, and not even his supporters even bother to deny it.
Sad that you can't even admit an obvious historical fact because of your partisan needs.
He's scared shitless right now by what's about to come out obviously because he has a two paragraph delusional lying rant on truth social that some are posting as proof of his innocence???????????????????????????
You're rationalizing the former 'president's failed attempt TO STEAL THE ELECTION.
You have jumped the shark when it comes to this election.
I'm just curious how you justify remaining a democrat after your cult claims about MAGA. Your party literally stuffed ballot boxes to steal an election. It was much more organized, thorough and blatantly illegal than anything Trump did in 2020. Yet I'll bet you weren't out cheering for Republicans moving forward.
Can you not understand that Republicans who still support Trump do so for the same type of reasons you remained a Democrat after they were caught trying to steal an election? Or do you just accept you are in a cult, as you believe Republican Trump supporters are?
Here's what I think - Trump is a known traitor. Was Hartigan? Fuck Trump.
Right wingers are going to have to face reality sooner or later. It cannot be avoided.
I'll have to go back and see if Hartigan said a thousandth of the crazy shit Trump does every day. I think thats going to be a no.
You want a mentally ill person to be president of the United States . Good god !
Don't you call him a traitor because he tried to steal an election?
That and he sat eating junk food for three hours while his fans were assaulting the nation's capital, and he keeps lying about it. Meet The Press asked him what he was doing during the riot and he said "I'm not going to tell you that". Immense consciousness of guilt. Liz Cheney called it the greatest dereliction of duty in presidential history and she's probably right.
Trump approved a plot to have him DECLARED president. If thats not being a traitor I'd hate to see what is.
Nope, it's past and done and just about everyone has moved on. Biden won the election and has botched up royally for the past four years.
That's impressive. Who do you think bought them?....
No one cares. About either 'attempt'
Your meme smacks of stupidity.
The shooter at Butler was terminated with prejudice.
There should have been dancing in the streets by Trump supporters, not looting.
See any?
The second lame attempt ended a short while later when Routh was pulled over, in part for the stolen license plates on his personal car.
Again, when this amateur would be assassin was arrested, did the Trump faithful celebrate his survival?
Was there a reason to loot or burn because law enforcement from the secret service to the Sheriff did what was expected of them?
I didn't see any and I live on a street bound and determined to reelect him.
Maybe if someone does actually hurt Mr. Trump, or worse, y'all will take to the streets like angry supporters and who knows?
I know it won't be a celebration or a barbecue.
That is precisely a purely partisan statement. In short, it connotes that everything Biden did was wrong and everything Trump did was right. No objectivity ... no room for analysis ... just a binary, simplistic conclusion.
This is a key reason why our nation is so divided. Partisans have dug in with a highly biased, fantasized political reality.
Deplorable
Hmmm
It won't matter, at all. First, the majority of voters don't know who Jack SMith is, don't care about Jan 6th and won't pay any attention to this story. This lesson has been obvious since the 90s. No matter how many times Clinton was accused of rape, sexual harassment or other felonies it didn't matter. Politics are just like rooting for a team. As long as the team stuck with him ( the Democratic Party), so would the fans (Democratic voters). It's only gotten worse since then, as the internet has provided more information for those who care and exposed the perfidy and dishonesty of the "experts" so often that they lack any credibility. Anyone who paid attention to the FISA gate scandal and coverup would be foolish indeed to believe the DOJ acts without partisan motivation and can be trusted implicitly.
Because the reality is most voters only care about whether they like someone on a personal level, and, even more importantly, how they feel about their life/economic situation and if they will benefit from supporting a party. As so many man on the street interviews have shown, they don't know which policies their own team supports, and they will happily support the policy of the other team if they are told it comes from their own. Harris is correct about one thing, the election, like all elections, is ultimately about vibes.
The only people paying attention to this story are those who've already made up their minds. No candidate in history has had more negative attention directed at him by the media and the culture in general than Trump. The idea that warmed over accusations in a legal brief are going to change anyone mind at this point is simply naive.
I think your entire argument in your comment is silly, but lets go with this sentence. Trumps personal popularity is underwater. People dont like him. I guess we can wrap this election up early then.
Democrats shouldn't even bother to go out to vote.
No kidding. Are you just figuring that out? He's the least popular candidate in history and the only reason he's so competitive is Democrats have done a remarkable job of selecting candidates who are about as unlikeable.
And surprise, surprise, he's currently trailing in national polls by the same amount Harris is more liked than him.
I guess we can wrap this election up early then.
even more importantly, how they feel about their life/economic situation and if they will benefit from supporting a party.
Way to ignore that and focus on the secondary reason, though
You know that Trump is simply unacceptable to be president again, and yet in essence you make an argument for him in many of your comments. Why?
If we put this deranged traitor back in office there will be no social peace in this country, nothing will get done, if the Democrats get the House they will impeach him and the country will be in utter chaos for four years. For what? This asshole ?
It's not pro Trump. I wish more voters actually cared about issues. By and large, they don't. It's just the reality of how our country works.
One would think that this little microcosm would be at least somewhat representative of the general electorate. Apparently not because most GOP and GOP leaning members here claim they are not going to vote for Trump.
They will make excuses for him, deflect from criticism of him, and rail on whoever is his political opposition. But ... they are not going to actually vote for him ... ... ...
It's not. At all.I'd say almost all posters on this site are more invested in politics than 80% of the population.
rail on whoever is his political opposition
Yeah, because Harris's ideology is poison.
"It's not pro trump"
Who do you think you're fooling?
dont believe a word of it
"They will make excuses for him, deflect from criticism of him, and rail on whoever is his political opposition. But ... they are not going to actually vote for him ... ... ..."
I don't.
You favor Trump's positions? Have you listened to the nutcase?
What are his positions?
He was President for four years. I'm fine with most of those policies and those I disagree with aren't anywhere near as damaging to this country as Harris's would be.
They think Trump will get elected and America will be "great again". It is insanity.
look at this
What policies?
They don't like who trmp is up against now because Harris makes him look like a doddering old fool.
Anyone who thinks Jan 6 doesn't matter should stop calling themselves patriots
People like Laura Ingraham and Kevin McCarthy said for months if not years that Biden was the worst thing they had ever seen because he was doddering, confused, lost, whatever.
Now that Biden is gone from the picture they say his replacement is WORSE, based on nothing at all. If Harris was somehow replaced before the election by another Democrat they would say that person is worse than Harris. They are so stupid and predictable.