The FBI search at Trump's Mar-a-Lago home

Jack Smith May Execute Shady “Backup Plan” If Mar-A-Lago Case Falls Apart
By Clayton Keirns

President Trump’s battle against the latest witch hunt might take another turn for the worst as Special Counsel Jack Smith could have another trick up his sleeve. According to NYU Law Professors Ryan Goodman and Andrew Weissmann, if the classified documents case against Trump falls though in Florida, Smith could pursue charges of “dissemination of classified documents” in the state of New Jersey in a completely separate indictment.

Their new article in The Atlantic opined that Smith may have omitted these charges in his initial indictment because he is taking a “cautious, narrow approach” due to the complexity of this case. The professors say there were many other legal issues that Smith was trying to likely avoid by including New Jersey charges in a Florida indictment, but the fact remains that he left his options on the table to pivot under any circumstance.

“Smith appears to have taken a cautious, narrow approach. Even though the indictment describes alleged dissemination and disclosure of national-security secrets, the indictment did not charge Trump with those offenses,” they write. “One possible explanation for his decision: venue. The Constitution requires prosecutors to bring charges in the location—or venue—where the alleged criminal conduct took place. Justice Department prosecutors could not necessarily bring charges against Trump in Miami for alleged criminal conduct that occurred in another state, in this case New Jersey. But the absence of such charges in the indictment raises the intriguing possibility of another indictment to come, in a jurisdiction, no less, with a pool of jurors and judges more favorable to the government’s case against Trump,”.

The significance? According to Weissman and Goodman, if the Florida judge were to delay the case proceedings after the November 2024 election, Smith could go forward with charges in heavy-Democrat New Jersey as a backup plan.

“The legal uncertainties that surround bringing charges in Florida for dissemination of national-security secrets in Bedminster leaves open the possibility that charges might yet be brought in New Jersey—a backup plan of sorts for Smith. If Aileen Cannon, the Florida judge assigned to the case, were to seek to pocket-veto the charges before her by, say, scheduling the trial for after the 2024 presidential election, the special counsel would be able to sidestep her tactic by proceeding with charges in New Jersey,” they add.

“Smith might still decide against bringing a separate indictment for dissemination, because such a move could be painted as overcharging,” they wrote. “The government usually tries to avoid being seen as piling on, at least in such a high-profile matter. But if Cannon acts consistently with her prior Trump-friendly rulings, which were twice found by unanimous panels of conservative appellate judges to be both factually and legally flawed, Smith might go looking for another way to ensure accountability — and another venue where he could do so.”

In case it wasn’t already clear, Jack Smith is likely doing everything he can to make sure that the deck is stacked against President Trump in every which way. Since Judge Cannon of Florida has given Trump-friendly rulings in the past, Smith wants to have every backup plan necessary.

Although the Democrat establishment and the DOJ is doing everything they can to bring Trump down in this witch hunt, it’s clear that the people still have his back.

Shortly after pleading not guilty at a Miami courthouse on Tuesday, Trump surprised a cafe full of supporters who prayed over him and sang happy birthday to him.

“Are you okay?” someone can be heard asking. “We’re with you!”, they added.

After greeting several people and shaking hands, Trump asked for the owner and then said “Are you ready? Free food for everyone!”

Judge Orders Trump Not To Disclose Evidence In Classified Documents Case
Martin Walsh, June 19, 2023

Special Counsel Jack Smith has picked up an early win in his battle against former President Donald Trump in the case involving the former president’s handling of classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago resort.

A federal judge approved a protective order sought by Smith to keep Trump from disclosing sensitive information in his classified documents case.

“Smith sought the order to ensure that neither Trump nor codefendant Walt Nauta, Trump’s presidential valet, disclose sensitive information obtained during the discovery process, where prosecutors will show the defense what evidence it has amassed during their investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents since leaving office,” ABC News reported.

The protective order said Trump and Nauta “shall not disclose the Discovery Materials or their contents directly or indirectly to any person or entity other than persons employed to assist in the defense, persons who are interviewed as potential witnesses, counsel for potential witnesses, and other persons to whom the Court may authorize disclosure.”

U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart that the defense team “not disclose the Discovery Materials or their contents directly or indirectly to any person or entity other than persons employed to assist in the defense, persons who are interviewed as potential witnesses, counsel for potential witnesses, and other persons to whom the Court may authorize disclosure.”

“A knowing violation of this Order by Defendants, Defense Counsel, and Authorized Persons may result in contempt of court or other civil or criminal sanctions,” the order warned.

Last week, a former Trump criminal defense attorney is arguing that the investigation into Trump over alleged mishandling of classified documents may not even go to trial.

During an interview on Fox News, Timothy Parlatore — who served as a criminal defense attorney for Trump until last month — spoke with host Laura Ingraham about Trump appearing in Miami on Tuesday for his arraignment in the case brought against him by Smith, who Biden’s Department of Justice appointed.

Trump pleaded “not guilty” in federal court. If he is found guilty on all counts, Trump — who is President Joe Biden’s chief rival in next year’s presidential election — could face decades in prison.

Parlatore argued he believes there are fundamental flaws with the case, particularly over the grand jury process and breaches of attorney-client privilege. Parlatore said he believes this could result in the entire case being thrown out.

Parlatore said Trump’s attorneys should “attack the conduct of the entire investigation and show through death by a thousand cuts why this entire investigation is irreparably tainted by government misconduct,” adding: “The case, therefore, should be dismissed or, at a minimum, the prosecutor should be disqualified.”

Last week, a concerning report emerged that Smith may execute a “backup plan” if his case in Florida against Trump does not stick.

NYU Law Professors Ryan Goodman and Andrew Weissmann published an op-ed in The Atlantic, where they speculate that if the classified documents case against Trump in Florida falls through, Smith could pursue charges of “dissemination of classified documents” in the state of New Jersey in an entirely separate indictment.

The report goes on to speculate that if the Florida judge were to delay the case proceedings after the 2024 presidential election, Smith could move ahead with charges in New Jersey — a Democrat stronghold that would likely not be favorable to Trump.

The charges “include willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record, corruptly concealing a document or record, concealing a document in a federal investigation, a scheme to conceal, and false statements and representations,” ABC News reported.

“Maximum sentences for the respective charges, per their statutes, range from five up to 20 years, although any eventual sentence should Trump be convicted would likely be much lower,” the outlet added.

Judge Cannon Just Set an Incredible Trump Trial Date
Jose Pagliery
Tue, June 20, 2023 at 6:47 AM MDT

In a baffling turn of events, the Donald Trump-appointed federal judge overseeing his Mar-a-Lago classified documents debacle appears to have placed the case on warp speed—setting a trial just two months away.

On Monday morning, federal court records showed that U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon created what's referred to as a “rocket docket” to speed his trial through the system.

Cannon issued an order stating that the most historic criminal trial in American history will commence Aug. 14. That’s just 55 days away, while most federal trials take up to a year or more as both sides prepare for an epic showdown in court.

Peter Carr, a spokesman for Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith, could not confirm that this decision was correct, and not simply a typo. Trump’s defense lawyers did not immediately respond to questions.

Legal scholars have noted that this judge is something of a loose cannon, consistently making puzzling decisions that lean heavily in favor of the president who appointed her in his final months in office.

When she previously oversaw another case, Trump’s legal challenge to the initial search of his south Florida oceanside estate of Mar-a-Lago, she inserted herself on dubious authority to halt the FBI investigation with red tape.

The New York Times, having reviewed her extremely short history on the bench so far, recently determined that she has spent only 14 days overseeing four criminal trials—a jaw-dropping level of inexperience for someone who is about to judge such a consequential trial involving long-lasting precedent on the nation’s democracy.

The Second-Most Important Person at Trump’s Trial Wasn’t at His Arraignment

According to her order filed Monday morning, federal prosecutors and Trump’s defense lawyers must file motions in July and show up at her satellite courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, on Aug. 8.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a person’s right to a speedy trial, a measure meant to protect against jailing someone indefinitely through Kafkaesque bureaucracy. In practice, defense lawyers like to spend several months reviewing documents to poke holes in a case and search for exculpatory evidence that would either disprove a prosecutor’s theory of the crime—or create reasonable doubt that it ever happened. Meanwhile, prosecutors use that time to further investigate and find additional witnesses.

But in setting a trial just two months away, Judge Cannon appears to be doing Trump a favor: making the decisive legal battle early enough that it would not disrupt Trump’s 2024 run for president, which is expected to heat up later this year.

They could indict Trump ten thousand times and I would still vote for him.

DOJ requests a later start date for Trump's classified docs trial
NBC Universal
GINGER GIBSON AND DANIEL BARNES
Updated June 23, 2023 at 10:07 PM

WASHINGTON — Prosecutors from special counsel Jack Smith's office have requested that former President Donald Trump's criminal trial for alleged mishandling of classified documents be delayed until December, according to a court filing on Friday.

Earlier this week, Judge Aileen Cannon set a trial date for Aug. 14 and estimated that the court proceedings would take two weeks. But prosecutors said more time is needed before the trial can begin and requested that the trial be delayed until Dec. 11.

If the date is approved and isn't further delayed, Trump, who is seeking a return to the White House, could face the jury in December and voters in January. While a final date has not been set for the Iowa caucuses, the first primary contest is expected in mid-January.

In a separate case, Trump is set to face a criminal trial in New York City, starting in March, halfway through the primary voting process.

Prosecutors in special counsel Smith’s office also told the court on Friday that they had discussed the delay with Trump's lawyers.

"Defense counsel confirmed they do not oppose an adjournment of the current trial date," the filing said.

Prosecutors pointed to the need to obtain security clearances for the defense attorneys as the primary reason for the requested delay. Interim clearances can be obtained within 48 hours, the court filing said, but final approval needed to review all of the documents will take 45 to 60 days. Not all defense attorneys have submitted the proper paperwork to begin the process, the filing said.

Trump is accused of mishandling classified documents that he took with him after leaving the White House. The indictment that was made public this month indicated the documents in question remain classified.

The Classified Information Procedures Act provides a set of guidelines to allow classified documents to be used in a trial. The filing detailed a proposed timeline to allow both sides to litigate how classified documents will be addressed during the trial.

Trump and codefendant Walt Nauta face 37 counts on seven charges, including making false statements, conspiracy to obstruct and willful retention of national defense information.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing, insisted he was entitled to keep the documents and charged that his prosecution is politically motivated. He pleaded not guilty at a Miami courthouse earlier this month.

Florida Venue For Trump’s Classified Docs Trial Could Work to His Advantage
Jon Dougherty, June 24, 2023

Former President Donald Trump handily won the state in 2020, and that could definitely work to his advantage when it comes to his federal trial for allegedly mishandling classified documents.

As Newsmax reported on Friday, the jury pool will come primarily from counties that Trump easily won in 2016 and 2020, and that could definitely work to his advantage when the case comes to trial.

In addition, the federal judge hearing the case is Aileen Cannon, whom Trump appointed. And on Friday, she signaled that the trial would take place in Fort Pierce, the federal courthouse where she usually sits, at the northern end of the Southern District of Florida.

As The New York Times added, the region is home to one swing county and four solid red ones. But that said, Cannon did leave open the possibility that the case could be moved.

“I’m not convinced this case is going to go in Fort Pierce,” Dave Aronberg, an outgoing Florida state attorney in Palm Beach County, told the Times. He went on to predict that the case could be moved to West Palm Beach, where Trump lives and where the classified documents were actually found.

But for now, if the case remains in Fort Pierce, that will bode will for Trump when it comes time to select a jury.

“For years, it’s been a very conservative venue for plaintiffs’ lawyers,” trial lawyer John Morgan told the Times. “It is solid, solid Trump country.”

Newsmax adds:

Trump won Okeechobee County, a rural county where just more than 16,000 people voted in the 2020 election, with 71.5% of the vote, according to the county’s election tally. He took Highlands County with 66.8% in 2020. That county is a rural area where more than 52,000 people voted.

In Martin County, where more than 98,000 people voted, Trump won with 61.8%. In Indian River County, where more than 97,000 voted, the then-president won with 60.2% of the vote.

The swing county of St. Lucie County was one in which Trump won narrowly in both 2016 and 2020. He got 50.4% of the vote in 2020 to defeat President Joe Biden.

Fort Myers is situated along Florida’s Atlantic coast, about 100 miles north of Miami. Cannon has set the trial date for Aug. 14 “or as soon thereafter as the case may be called.”

Trump found out who government prosecutors will be calling on to testify against him in the case, according to reports on Wednesday.

The revelation stemmed from the Justice Department’s release of “grand jury testimony of witnesses who will testify for the government at the trial of this case” as part of the pre-trial discovery phase.

That said, the DOJ’s filing did not list the witnesses specifically nor what they said during their grand jury testimony.

On Monday, a federal judge handling the case blocked the former president from releasing any evidence that is given to his legal team by federal prosecutors.

“The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court,” Federal Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart noted in his order.

In addition, the order stated that Trump and his legal team also are not allowed to disclose any of the material, due to the sensitivity of its contents, in “any public filing or in open court without notice to, and agreement from, the United States, or prior approval from the Court.”

The defense counsel has also been instructed to keep all the documents securely in their custody. Furthermore, it stipulates that upon the conclusion of the case, all the materials must be either returned to the U.S. government or completely destroyed within 90 days.

The defendants are explicitly prohibited from retaining any copies of the material. However, they are permitted to take notes on the material, provided that these notes are securely stored, the Daily Wire reported.

Iran memo not among 31 records underlying Trump federal charges
Andres Triay | CBS News
Updated Tue, June 27, 2023 at 7:52 PM MDT

Washington — The Defense Department memo on Iran — at the heart of the now-public audio recording that captured a July 2021 meeting with former President Donald Trump — is not part of the 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information charged in special counsel Jack Smith's indictment of the former president, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to CBS News.

In the recording of the meeting at Trump's Bedminster, New Jersey golf club, the former president can be heard apparently showing and discussing what he described as "highly confidential, secret" documents with aides. Sources say the documents were related to plans for a potential U.S. attack on Iran.

"It is like highly confidential, secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this," Trump said in the audio tape obtained by CBS News. "See, as president I could have declassified, but now I can't, you know…Isn't that interesting? It's so cool."

The document and recording are described in the indictment Smith's team secured against Trump earlier this month, recounted as an alleged meeting with "a writer, a publisher, and two members of" Trump's staff, "none of whom possessed a security clearance."

But according to a source familiar with the matter, Trump was not charged with unlawfully holding onto the Iran-related document discussed in the recording.

Smith's 37-count indictment against Trump includes 31 charges of willfully retaining national defense information. It generally outlines each of the 31 classified records that prosecutors allege Trump illegally kept, without naming the exact subject matter. The Iran memo is not part of the list of the 31 records in the indictment, the source said.

Throughout the years-long federal investigation into Trump's White House records, investigators have collected more than 300 documents with classified markings on them — including 103 seized during the execution of a search warrant at Trump's Florida residence last year.

Multiple sources familiar with the investigation previously told CBS News that defense attorneys were not certain the Iran memo in question was ever recovered and returned to the government. Still, the 2021 incident is one of two instances referenced in the indictment, in which Smith describes Trump allegedly showing national defense information to individuals without proper clearance.

Trump can be heard in the audio apparently acknowledging he had a sensitive record after he left office and no longer had the power to declassify it.

On Tuesday, Fox News asked Trump about the recording and he insisted he "did nothing wrong."

"My voice was fine," Trump told Fox News. "What did I say wrong in those recordings? I didn't even see the recording. All I know is I did nothing wrong. We had a lot of papers, a lot of papers stacked up. In fact, you could hear the rustle of the paper. And nobody said I did anything wrong."

And in another interview, Trump told Semafor and ABC News that he did not have any sensitive records, calling his discussion captured on the recording "bravado." "I just held up a whole pile of — my desk is loaded up with papers. I have papers from 25 different things," he said.

The existence of the audio tape and the July 2021 meeting was first reported by CNN, which was also first to obtain a recording of the discussion.

Sources familiar with the matter said that the discussion of the allegedly classified document arose as Trump was talking about Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley, who had been portrayed in a story in The New Yorker as having fought in the last days of the Trump administration to keep the president from attacking Iran.

In the recording of the meeting, the former president tells those with him the document discredited any criticism against him.

Smith's office declined to comment.

Earlier this month, Trump pleaded not guilty to a total of 37 counts, which included conspiracy to obstruct justice. Prosecutors allege he and an aide, Waltine Nauta, worked to move boxes containing classified records throughout Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort.

Nauta was set to be arraigned in a Miami federal court on Tuesday, but flight troubles and difficulty securing local legal counsel delayed the hearing until next week.

Special counsel Jack Smith could hit Trump with up to 45 more charges in classified documents case, report says
Dave Goldiner, New York Daily News
Thu, June 29, 2023 at 6:52 PM MDT

Special counsel Jack Smith is reportedly ready to drop a hammer blow of up to 45 additional criminal charges on former President Donald Trump in the classified documents case, especially if Trump-friendly Judge Aileen Cannon looks set to thwart the case.

The ex-Brooklyn prosecutor is prepared to bring additional charges in various federal jurisdictions against Trump based in part on multiple additional incriminating tapes of Trump, The Independent reported Thursday, quoting “people familiar with the matter.”

Prosecutors are readying what is known as a superseding indictment in part as a back-up plan in case Cannon seeks to stall or derail the case against Trump that was filed in the southern district of Florida, in which Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort home is located, the paper said.

The new charges could come “in the coming weeks.”

One likely venue for additional charges against Trump would be New Jersey because Trump allegedly kept and even showed off some of the highly classified documents to aides at his Bedminster golf resort.

Smith’s team is poised to “stack (an) additional 30 to 45 charges” on Trump as well as top aides based on what the paper described as fresh evidence that is not yet publicly known, including more tapes of Trump.

The report suggests Smith’s team is deeply concerned about the possibility that Cannon could act in unforeseen ways to protect Trump.

Cannon, an arch-conservative with very limited experience on the bench, issued several rulings that sought to protect Trump after the August 2022 search of Mar-a-Lago turned up more than 100 classified documents that Trump kept in defiance of a federal subpoena.

She even made a bizarre claim that Trump holds a special status as a former president that merits deferential treatment from prosecutors. A conservative appeals court panel overturned Cannon’s ruling in a sharply worded ruling.

The report about Smith’s aggressive plans came on the same day that a separate published report said the Miami grand jury that indicted Trump is still investigating different aspects of the classified documents case.

The panel has issued new subpoenas since Trump was charged, suggesting the south Florida panel could wind up issuing its own new charges or adding evidence to the 37 counts that Trump already faces there, The New York Times reported.

Meanwhile a trusted campaign aide to former President Donald Trump has been revealed as a key figure in special counsel Jack Smith’s classified documents probe.

Susie Wiles, a top official in Trump’s failed reelection bid, is the person to whom Trump allegedly showed a classified map in summer 2021, ABC News first reported late Wednesday, citing sources.

Wiles is only identified in the indictment of Trump as a “PAC Representative” who was meeting with the former president when he showed off the map during a discussion of what he said was a deteriorating security situation in the unnamed nation.

Trump told Wiles that he “should not be showing the map” to her and “not to get too close,” the indictment claims.

The damning episode is cited in the indictment along with Trump’s caught-on-tape claim to show a highly classified plan for a U.S. attack on Iran to book researchers at Bedminster in 2021.

The incidents could amount to powerful evidence against Trump because they show he knew he held onto classified information and that he wanted to use the documents for his own personal reasons.

Trump has spun various excuses for his actions, including most recently asserting that he was only expressing “bravado” in the Bedminster meeting and didn’t actually have any classified documents.

Legal analysts say the tape would likely prove very persuasive evidence to a jury, despite Trump’s denial. The classified map incident could further bolster the case against Trump, especially since his own top aide would be the one relating the episode.

Special counsel Jack Smith says Trump aide is proposing an 'unnecessary' delay by trying to push a Friday hearing without any replacement date
Brent D. Griffiths
Mon, July 10, 2023 at 3:49 PM MDT

Jack Smith urged a federal judge to reject a Trump aide's efforts to further delay his case.

Smith wants Judge Aileen Cannon to refuse Walt Nauta's request to delay a Friday hearing.

Nauta's lawyers argued that they can't both be present for the hearing.

Special counsel Jack Smith on Monday urged a federal judge to reject Trump aide Walt Nauta's efforts to further delay his case related to former President Donald Trump's handling of classified documents.

Smith asked Judge Aileen Cannon to refuse Nauta's request to delay a scheduled Friday hearing because one of his attorneys, will be attending an unrelated trial in Washington, D.C.

"An indefinite continuance is unnecessary, will inject additional delay in this case, and is contrary to the public interest," Smith wrote.

The special counsel and his team have at times struggled to keep the case against Nauta on track. The arraignment for Nauta, who remains employed by Trump, was delayed multiple times as Nauta struggled to find a local attorney. The Trump aide is a key part of the government's case against former President Donald Trump that alleges he obstructed efforts to obtain classified documents that he had in his possession.

The request on Nauta's behalf did not propose a new date for the hearing, only suggesting that the two sides find a time that "is mutually agreeable to all necessary counsel of record. Nauta's side also said that they need more time to obtain the necessary security clearances needed since the case deals with classified documents.

Smith was unpersuaded by either point. He suggested that Nauta's attorneys failed to give a good reason why he can't be represented by Sasha Dadan, his local Florida attorney at the hearing. Smith further said that Woodward has thus far failed to complete the necessary form required to receive an interim security clearance.

The special counsel had hoped to put Trump on trial in mid-December, but it is likely the former president will try to object to that timeframe. He and Nauta are also expected to respond to the trial timeline later today.

Read the original article on Business Insider

Judge overseeing Trump documents case agrees to push first pretrial conference
Melissa Quinn | CBS News
Tue, July 11, 2023 at 9:03 AM MDT

Washington — The federal judge overseeing the criminal case involving former President Donald Trump's alleged mishandling of sensitive government records agreed to postpone the first pretrial conference scheduled in the proceedings to next week.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon said in a brief order Tuesday that the conference, which involves matters relating to the use of classified material as the case proceeds, would be pushed back four days, from Friday to July 18. The proceeding is set to take place at the federal courthouse in Fort Pierce, Florida, where Cannon sits.

The order comes after Walt Nauta, an aide to Trump who prosecutors name as a co-conspirator in the case, filed a request Monday to delay the conference, as his lawyer, Stanley Woodward, is involved in a bench trial that began this week in Washington, D.C. The filing also indicates that Woodward has not yet received a security clearance.

Trump's lawyers did not oppose the request. But special counsel Jack Smith and his team argued that "an indefinite continuance is unnecessary, will inject additional delay in this case, and is contrary to the public interest." Federal prosecutors also wrote in a filing that Woodward has yet to complete the necessary form to obtain a security clearance.

Lawyers for Trump later told the court that the parties, including Nauta's attorney and federal prosecutors, could meet for the conference on July 18.

Trump was indicted by a federal grand jury last month and has been charged with 37 felony counts, including 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information, related to his handling of government documents discovered at his South Florida resort, Mar-a-Lago, after he left the White House in January 2021.

The former president has pleaded not guilty to the charges. Nauta, who was charged with six felony counts, pleaded not guilty during his first appearance last week.

Since Trump's arraignment, his lawyers and the Justice Department have been wrangling over when to start a trial. Cannon initially set an Aug. 14 trial date, but Smith's team asked for it be pushed back to mid-December.

Then, on Monday, Trump's lawyers urged Cannon to postpone the start of the trial "until after substantive motions have been presented and adjudicated." The former president's legal team did not put forward a timeline for when they would like the trial to begin, but suggested proceedings could take place after the 2024 presidential election.

"This extraordinary case presents a serious challenge to both the fact and perception of our American democracy," they wrote. "The Court now presides over a prosecution advanced by the administration of a sitting President against his chief political rival, himself a leading candidate for the Presidency of the United States."

Trump's lawyers claimed his candidacy could make it difficult to seat an impartial jury during the campaign.

"Here, there is simply no question any trial of this action during the pendency of a Presidential election will impact both the outcome of that election and, importantly, the ability of the Defendants to obtain a fair trial," they wrote.