Defense attorneys filed a report Monday night with both the Justice Department and a federal judge detailing special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into President-elect Donald J. Trump’s mishandling of classified documents after he leaves office in 2021. He asked that the publication of the book be stopped.
The two-pronged effort to block the release of the report came just two weeks before Trump was inaugurated for his second term. The case against Mr. Trump has already been dismissed, and the report will essentially be Mr. Smith’s last chance to reveal any new details or evidence damaging to him.
In an aggressively worded letter to Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, Mr. Trump’s lawyers said they had recently been shown a draft of Mr. Smith’s report, which they described as the special counsel’s report against Mr. Trump. This is an example of a politically motivated attack. . They called on Mr. Garland not to allow Mr. Smith to release his report and to “immediately remove him from office.”
“The release of a confidential report prepared by this out-of-control private citizen in violation of the Constitution while posing as a prosecutor is nothing more than a lawless political stunt designed to politically harm President Trump.” wrote the lawyers. Lawyers for Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira, two of Trump’s co-defendants in the classified documents case, said in separate court documents that they have a more direct approach to blocking the release of Smith’s report. I searched for. They asked Judge Eileen M. Cannon, who oversaw the case, to issue an emergency order barring Smith from releasing the report until the case “reaches final judgment and the appellate process is concluded.” Ta.
Either attempt to stop Mr. Smith could face an uphill battle.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers had no authority to compel Mr. Garland to block the release of the report, and their letter was little more than a bellicose request. Judge Cannon also asked the attorney general how to handle the report by the special prosecutor she appointed, especially when the case is technically out of her hands and before the Court of Appeals. It is also unclear whether he has the authority to give instructions.
That’s because Judge Cannon threw out the case in its entirety in July, ruling that Smith was illegally appointed special prosecutor, ignoring decades of precedent. Mr. Smith and his attorneys challenged the decision, which was being considered by a federal appeals court in Atlanta when Mr. Trump won the November election.
Citing the Justice Department’s policy against prosecuting sitting presidents, Smith withdrew the appeal that Trump had feared, effectively ending his role in the case. However, he did not withdraw the appeal against Nauta and de Oliveira. Federal prosecutors in Florida now plan to pursue the appeal after Smith resigns, possibly before Inauguration Day on Jan. 20.
Smith is also moving to dismiss another federal lawsuit he filed against Trump, accusing him of plotting to overturn the 2020 election. It remains unclear when Mr. Smith plans to submit his report in this case, and whether it will be included in the docket report or in a separate document.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers’ efforts to block the report’s release are the latest in an effort to kill or block legal filings and proceedings that could be embarrassing or damaging to the president-elect. It was just an attempt.
A state judge in Manhattan earlier Monday rejected Mr. Trump’s latest attempt to delay sentencing on 34 felonies, saying the hearing would proceed as scheduled on Friday.
Department of Justice regulations require all special counsel to submit a report to the Attorney General explaining why they brought charges and why they decided not to bring other charges that they might have considered. I am asking you to submit it. The attorney general can then decide whether to release the report to the public.
It remains unclear when Mr. Smith planned to complete his report on the classified documents case. But lawyers for Nauta and de Oliveira said in court papers that the report was likely to be released “in the coming days.”
Even if one or both reports ultimately see the light of day, they are unlikely to contain much new or revelatory information.
Sensitive document incident reports can be complicated by the fact that the classified information they contain is likely to need to be carefully reviewed by intelligence agencies. The election interference report breaks important new ground, if only because Smith filed a vast 165-page brief listing the evidence he intended to present at trial in October. Maybe not.
Still, in a letter to Garland, Trump’s lawyers detailed a draft report in the classified documents case that said Trump had a “criminal agenda” and was the “mastermind of a criminal conspiracy.” complained that it was stated in Indictment. The lawyers also wrote in the draft: Trump violated multiple federal criminal laws. ”
Trump’s lawyers turned the tables on Smith, accusing him of “unethical” conduct and “inappropriate activities.” Given that two of the lawyers who signed the letter to Garland, Todd Blanche and Emile Bove, were selected by Trump to serve in high-level positions at the Justice Department, these accusations could potentially affect future decisions against Smith. It may affect retaliation. Garland has not publicly said whether he intends to release any of Smith’s reports, but he has released reports from other special counsels in the past.
For example, in February, Garland authorized the release of Special Counsel Robert K. Hur’s report on President Biden’s handling of classified materials after becoming vice president. The report concluded that criminal charges were not warranted, but also gave a less-than-flattering assessment of Biden’s memory and cognitive abilities in the midst of his 2024 presidential campaign.
