Prosecutors on Wednesday said they plan to stop releasing part of the special counsel's report, Jack Smith, detailing his investigation into President-elect Donald J. Trump's refusal to return dozens of classified documents he took from the White House after he left office.
But if the Justice Department wins an injunction preventing the rest of the report from being released, it plans to release a separate volume about Mr. Smith with the efforts of Mr. Trump to deny his loss in the 2020 election, prosecutors said.
The department's rulings — filed in federal appeals court in Atlanta — brought some clarity to the value of the final chapter of Mr. former president in American history.
Since all the charges were brought against Mr. With Trump dismissed, the two-volume report – only half of which may see the light of day – was intended to be Mr Trump's voice. a number of alleged crimes.
The Justice Department's moves on Wednesday almost meant that the incoming Trump administration would decide whether to release part of Mr. Trump's report. Smith. And that seemed impossible: The lawyers of Mr. Trump himself has been fighting its disclosure.
The report war has been going on since Mr. Trump was re-elected in November. His victory made Mr. Smith dropped both charges — one being tried in Florida, the other in Washington — under a long-standing Justice Department policy barring the pursuit of criminal charges against sitting presidents.
But under different Justice Department rules, Mr. Smith is still required to file a report on his work with Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, explaining why he brought the charges he did and why he didn't bring other charges he might have considered.
In their court filings on Wednesday, prosecutors acknowledged that releasing the volume about the classified documents case is legally problematic. That was because, although Mr. Trump's role in the matter is over, the case is still active against his two co-defendants, Walt Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira, and any new information about it could interfere with their defense efforts. .
To avoid that injury, prosecutors said, Mr. Garland had decided, on the recommendation of Mr. Smith, not to release the volume of classified documents until all actions against Mr. Nauta and Mr. De Oliveira are finished. That process may continue until the second term of Mr. Trump since 20 Jan.
At that time, Mr. Trump can pardon these men and drop the case altogether. The nominees would have the power to continue to maintain that part of Mr. Smith is confidential.
Prosecutors say that although Mr. Garland will not reveal the volume about the case documents publicly, he intends to make it available to the chairs and members of the level of the House and the Senate Judiciary Committees, without the details covered by the great secret of the judge. to rule.
It is possible that even a volume release of the costs of election interference may not contain much in the way of new or revealed information. This is because in October, Mr. Smith filed a 165-page brief outlining the evidence he planned to give at trial.
Justice Department rules regarding special counsels deem their final reports “confidential.” But it has become common practice for attorneys general to make those reports public with some delay.
That's what happened in the report about the relationship between Russia and the campaign of Mr. Trump's 2016 investigation led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and the Russia investigation by special counsel John H. Durham.
The contention of the report of Mr. Smith started on Monday when the lawyers of Mr. Trump and the lawyers of Mr. Nauta and Mr. De Oliveira started many efforts to prevent it from coming out. The lawyers said they jumped into action after Mr. Smith's supporters showed them the copy of the report last weekend.
The lawyers of Mr. Trump started by writing to Mr. Garland's letter, saying that the draft they saw was “one-sided” and “a political violation, designed to harm President Trump politically.” The lawyers also complained that the draft made “a baseless attack on some of the expected members of the incoming administration of President Trump.”
In addition, the lawyers told Mr. Garland that Mr. Smith has absolutely no authority to file a report. In making that claim, they cited a ruling by Judge Aileen M. Cannon, who dismissed the classified documents case this summer, ruling — against decades earlier — that Mr. Smith was illegally appointed to his role as special counsel.
Within a day of sending their letter to Mr. Garland, the team of lawyers of Mr. Trump changed course, met with the lawyers of Mr. Nauta and Mr. De Oliveira in seeking to obtain an official court order to stop the release of the report to both Judge Cannon. and the appellate court before him.
On Tuesday, their efforts paid off when Judge Cannon issued a surprise order blocking the release of the report until the appeals court makes its own decision on how to proceed. It is that decision that made the prosecutors file documents in court on Wednesday, stating how they intend to proceed with this report.
In those documents, prosecutors also asked the appeals court to overturn Judge Cannon's order. They argued that he was wrong when he ruled in July that Mr. Garland had no legal authority to appoint Mr. Smith as special counsel.
The conflict with the report of Mr. Smith was the latest clash between the special counsel's office and Judge Cannon, who has a history of issuing unusual rulings in favor of Mr. His decision to close the report temporarily so that it does not come out has caused suspicions among legal experts who say that he does not have the legal authority to issue this law because the case of the documents is before the court of appeal, not him.
.
Source link
