In the response brief submitted by Special Counsel Jack Smith in relation to the appeal made by the Trump legal team against U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan’s gag order on former President Trump, Smith made reference to the possible witnesses as “political witnesses,” which appeared to be an inadvertent disclosure.
In the preceding month, Judge Chutkan issued an extraordinary restraining order on the former president, prohibiting him from engaging in discourse pertaining to crucial elements of the case. The executive directive has elicited extensive criticism from proponents of civil liberties and has been met with allegations of electoral intervention by the Trump campaign.
The motion was granted at the behest of Smith; however, Chutkan then revoked her own order following Trump’s submission of an appeal. Approximately one week following its reinstatement, the injunction was temporarily halted by a court of appeals in Washington, D.C.
As a component of the appeals process, both the prosecution and defense were directed to submit briefs in advance of the deadlines allocated to each party. In Smith’s legal document, his agency cited several social media posts made by Trump as supporting evidence for the imposition of the gag order.
“At the hearing that followed, the district court reviewed several of the defendant’s social media posts, which fell into ‘roughly five categories,’” as stated by Smith. The aforementioned content encompassed assertions pertaining to Judge Chutkan and personnel affiliated with the district court, remarks concerning Smith and his associates, and comments on individuals characterized as “political witnesses.”
Smith’s statement appeared to be directed towards individuals who may potentially provide information as witnesses. However, the presence of a potentially revealing mistake has generated curiosity and skepticism. In an X piece, independent reporter Julie Kelly remarked “Talk about slip of the tongue.”
LOLOLOL talk about slip of the tongue.
In his response brief opposing the appeal of Judge Chutkan’s gag order, Jack Smith refers to “political witnesses” instead of “potential witnesses.”
Too good. pic.twitter.com/eg6A6mAYaW
— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) November 17, 2023
During the ongoing process of appealing Chutkan’s gag order, former President Trump has achieved a significant victory in the fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. This victory came about when an appeals court decided to lift the gag order that had been imposed by Judge Arthur F. Engoron.
Judge David Friedman of the appeal division’s first department made the verdict via the bench Friday, based on an article by the Associated Press. Friedman invalidated the gag order based on constitutional principles, invoking the protection of free expression afforded to former President Donald Trump.
As we reported on Saturday, “Smith is attempting to prosecute former President Trump on 37 criminal counts regarding Trump’s handling of classified materials that were stored at the former president’s home in Florida.”
Smith has claimed that the materials contain national security secrets and information relating to nuclear weapons in the U.S.
Those who have been following the FBI seizure of the documents from the Trump home, Mar-a-Lago, saw Trump and his family posting while the search and seizure were happening and will remember that the former president provided transparency from his end during the process.
Trump has maintained that the documents were known to the FBI and DOJ, and the storage situation was known as well. Trump related in posts how the FBI had visited Mar-a-Lago to see where documents were stored and approved with the exception of asking for another lock, which Trump had installed.
Smith has asked Judge Aileen Cannon to nail down pre-trial dates prior to the expected May 2024 start date for the trial.
Cannon indicated on Thursday that she will not do so.
Also on Thursday, Smith filed a request to begin expediting the discovery of classified evidence that will be used by Trump’s attorneys in the defence of the former president.
Trump’s attorneys did not even have a chance to object before Judge Cannon ruled against Smith’s request.
Smith has already been reprimanded for refusing to grant President Trump’s attorneys access to the evidence used against him as well as for attempting to store the evidence in Washington, D.C., more than 1,000 miles away from Mar-a-Lago and the site of the alleged crimes.
As Trump’s attorneys have been asking for the trial to be pushed, citing the upcoming election and calling foul on the prosecuters for election interference, Judge Cannons rulings in these matters indicate that the trial may indeed be pushed.
Cannon has stated that politics will not play a role in her reasoning regarding the case, and on Thursday stated that she would decide about future trial dates during a March 2024 hearing, giving both sides more than four months to iron out the terms for sharing evidence.
There are 1.3 million pages of documents and thousands of hours of video footage from Mar-a-Lago from cameras that were kept rolling to be viewed and documented, which indicates that the discovery process would be lengthy.
The question of why the FBI would order security cameras at Mar-a-Lago to be turned off during the raid is being asked, as Trump posted during the raid that such was ordered and he refused to comply.
Trump has continually maintained his innocence in the entire matter, saying that he himself declassified the documents before leaving office and the storage was viewed and approved.
The post Jack Smith’s Office Busted Making Fatal ‘Error’ appeared first on The Republic Brief.
About Author
