CBS Pundit: Jack Smith’s ‘Unusual’ Jan 6 Brief ‘Interferes’ with Trump’s Right to a Fair Trial

Special Counsel Jack Smith is “interfering” with President Donald Trump’s right to a fair trial, a legal pundit for left-wing CBS has admitted.

CBS legal contributor Rebecca Roiphe was responding to Smith releasing a detailed evidentiary brief to the public

When his January 6 prosecution stalled, Smith took the “unusual” step of releasing a 165-page filing.

Smith is claiming Trump “resorted to crimes” to stay in power after the 2020 election.

The anti-Trump prosecutor wanted to bring the 45th president to trial before the 2024 presidential election.

However, the prosecution has been bogged down in appeals.

In July, the Supreme Court sided with Trump in a historic dispute on presidential immunity.

The ruling forced Smith to revise the indictment.

The trial judge, Obama-appointed Tanya Chutkan, released a lengthy evidentiary brief from Smith on Wednesday.

Chutkan raised concerns about the jury pool being tainted.

The Supreme Court’s “vague” guidelines explain the “unusual” detail in Smith’s motions, CBS’s Roiphe said.

However, she insisted that it’s not a stretch for Trump to argue his rights are being trampled on.

“And so, you know, I think that’s worth pausing and mentioning that the former president’s argument that this was interfering with his constitutional right to a fair trial, you know, it’s not a far-fetched argument to make given how much detail is actually in there,” she said.

Slay the latest News for free!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

While he charges Trump with electoral interference, Smith is doing just that by releasing a gratuitous legal brief ahead of the presidential election, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy said.

With no chance of the case proceeding before the election, Smith has no legal reason for releasing the evidence now, McCarthy said.

The apparent purpose of Smith’s move is to affect the presidential election, in which Trump is the Republican candidate.

“In fact, in most cases, a judge would be concerned about, for example, poisoning or prejudicing against the defendant a jury pool,” McCarthy continued.

“In most cases, a judge would be very concerned that evidence not be broadcast in public without the usual due process cautions that go on in a trial that the defendant be presumed innocent, the fact that allegations are not evidence of anything.

“The point of releasing this now can only be to affect the election.

“There is no legal need for it.”

While there is no legal justification for what Smith is doing.

Smith has an obvious political incentive: If Trump wins the presidency, the Democrats’ politically motivated prosecution is in jeopardy.

READ MORE – Trump Vows to ‘Absolutely’ Deport All Haitian Migrants from Springfield Ohio

SHARE:
join telegram

READERS' POLL

Who is the best president?

By completing this poll, you gain access to our free newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.

Subscribe
Notify of

Recommended

1
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x