Donald Trump’s desperate legal battle to block a damaging special counsel report on his 2020 presidential election loss and his efforts to overturn 34 felony convictions in New York state is final However, former prosecutors said it was clear that he continued to flout the rules and his knowledge of the law and his penchant for rewriting history.
As President Trump prepares to return to the White House, one area where it could be an imminent development is that there will be a “massive attack” on participants in the January 6, 2021, attack on the Washington He has repeatedly promised to grant “amnesty.”
President Trump and many of his allies have repeatedly sought to recast the events of January 6th as simply a frenzied protest by patriots rather than an attempt to prevent the certification of Joe Biden’s legitimate election victory. , critics say, highlights President Trump’s reluctance to tell the truth about the insurrection. .
As President Trump approaches his inauguration, lawyers for President Trump have filed a petition with the Supreme Court on January 10 to block a New York state judge’s no-punishment sentence for falsifying records to hide $130,000 in hush money. He appealed, but lost in vain. In 2016, Trump became the first felon to be elected president when he sanctioned a porn star accused of having an affair.
Trump’s lawyers have sought to block the release of a two-part report by special counsel Jack Smith detailing federal charges about Trump’s efforts to prevent his 2020 defeat. The case has been fought aggressively in court for several days, with some success so far. After leaving office, he improperly removed a large cache of classified documents.
A federal judge in Florida, appointed by President Trump, blocked the release of Smith’s report on both federal lawsuits for several days, but on Monday he announced that Smith’s report on Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 defeat would be released. Withdrawn its objection to the Justice Department’s publication of the report.
The department released its report Tuesday, delivering a major rebuke to the president-elect. Smith said his office remains “fully supportive” of the prosecution’s merits and believes the case would have been successful had it gone to trial as originally scheduled last year.
Although the 137-page report contained few new details, it provided a powerful review of the two-year investigation into Mr. Smith, which included grand jury testimony from more than 55 witnesses and voluntary interviews with more than 250 people. A historical explanation was provided, highlighting that Trump had attempted illegal activity multiple times. Prevent his loss.
The report highlights that President Trump has repeatedly promoted “clearly and in many cases patently false” claims about his loss in the 2020 election, making them an integral part of his pressure tactics. This was a contributing factor to the attack on January 6th.
“However, given Mr. Trump’s election and impending return to office, the authorities have determined that the admissible evidence is sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial,” Smith emphasized.
President Trump, who has repeatedly denied all charges, slammed Smith on Truth Social at 2 a.m. Tuesday as a “brainless prosecutor who couldn’t get a trial before the election.”
The case was scheduled to go to trial last year, but was halted by a highly criticized Supreme Court ruling barring prosecution for the president’s “official acts.” It was abolished after Trump won the election because a sitting president cannot be prosecuted.
The Justice Department’s release of the election destruction report by Smith, who unexpectedly resigned as special counsel on Friday, just days before Trump’s inauguration, is what legal experts say is a historical landmark in its review of the election destruction case against Trump. It is considered important for historical records. Mr. Trump.
In another legal battleground, President Trump, despite strong concerns, announced in the “first hour” of his presidency that the 1,500 insurrectionists charged in the Capitol attack (which Trump called “patriots”) He promised to grant “massive amnesty” to some of the Legal experts say such a pardon would have a negative impact on the criminal justice system. About 1,000 people have pleaded guilty to felonies or misdemeanors, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.
Legal commentators have also cited the potential danger posed by Trump’s drumbeat of dangerous threats to retaliate against political opponents, including Smith and former Rep. Liz Cheney, who led the House committee hearings into the Capitol attack. We are concerned about serious violence and damage to the rule of law.
President Trump has repeatedly referred to the federal and New York lawsuits against him as a “witch hunt,” citing a “legal system” that Democrats are portraying in conspiratorial terms as politically driven. are.
But former prosecutors and legal scholars say Mr. Trump’s sentencing, Mr. Smith’s legal maneuvers to thwart his election-destroying report, plus talk of promised pardons and revenge, undermine the rule of law and undermine public opinion. They claim it is a desperate attempt to rewrite history to avoid stigma.
“We are often told that we are a nation of laws, not men,” said Barbara McQuaid, a former federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Michigan who now teaches law at the University of Michigan. “Trump seems to want us to become a nation of one man: Trump.”
“What happens with the Jan. 6 pardons, Smith’s report on President Trump’s retention of classified documents, and Trump’s calls for retaliatory prosecutions will continue to undermine the integrity of the rule of law,” McQuaid said. “We will clarify whether they are maintaining the same.”
“President Trump is trying to rewrite history by promising to pardon the January 6 defendant and demonizing the law enforcement officers who investigated him,” McQuaid warned. As former Attorney General William Barr quipped, “History is written by the victors.”
Other former prosecutors agree that Mr. Trump has a long history of retaliating against political critics.
“President Trump’s narcissism compels him to attack anything and anyone that portrays him negatively,” said Ty Cobb, a former Justice Department official who served as a White House adviser during Trump’s first term. speaks. “Mr. Trump fully supports transparency when it comes to the actions of his enemies, but he obstructs transparency in any way it applies to him.”
Other Justice Department veterans have expressed concern about the dangers posed to the justice system by Mr. Trump’s efforts to block the release of Mr. Smith’s report and the New York sentencing.
“We shouldn’t be surprised by President Trump’s continued efforts to secure a conviction in the New York case,” said Michael Bromwich, a former Justice Department inspector general. “That’s what he’s doing. But it’s frustrating that the Supreme Court came so close to overturning the New York ruling.”
Bromwich said the release of Smith’s election destruction report is “a pale substitute for a public trial, but a form of political and historical responsibility.” Ironically, several of President Trump’s lawyers who “tried to cover up the special counsel’s report” have been selected by President Trump for top positions in the Justice Department, and their work has been “suppressed by the special counsel’s report.” “We will abide by the regulations,” he said. Their arguments should make for interesting questions during confirmation hearings. ”
Despite his critics, Trump launched a numbing personal and political attack on Smith and the New York judge who sentenced him.
Even though Juan Melchán sentenced Trump to “unconditional release” with no jail time or probation and allowed him to attend the hearing remotely, Trump has filed the entire lawsuit against him. I slammed it down.
“It was done to damage my reputation so that I would lose the election, and it clearly didn’t work,” Trump said.
A week earlier, when Marchand announced his sentencing date of January 10, President Trump, despite a recent strong public warning from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, tweeted Marchand on his Truth Social platform. “Corrupt,” Marchan said, without mentioning President Trump. It denounced the growing threat to judges and the judicial system.
And President Trump, in apocalyptic fashion, said the judge’s decision to sentence him “will be the end of his presidency as we know it.”
In an equally conspiratorial and false tone, ahead of the release of Mr. Smith’s election destruction report, Mr. Trump attacked Mr. Smith on Truth Social over the weekend, saying, “Deranged Jack Smith was arrested today by the Department of Justice.” I was fired,” he wrote. Trump later endorsed and expanded on an online post calling for Smith to be “disbarred” and “indicted.”
The attacks have left legal commentators even more alarmed by Trump’s repeated threats to seek retribution against his political opponents and issue large-scale pardons when he takes office.
John Jones, a former federal judge and current president of Dickinson College, said, “It is a fundamental principle of our criminal justice system that we do not prosecute for retaliation.” “Nor should they be prosecuted selectively,” he said, stressing that these are “bedrock commandments.”
Similarly, Jones defended the fairness of the legal system that led to 1,500 convictions and guilty pleas by defendants on January 6th.
“Those who have been prosecuted have been afforded almost excessive due process,” he said, adding that a blanket amnesty “allows future insurgents to go unpunished for acts of violence that disrupt government operations.” It sends a signal that it is sexual,” he added.
Legal watchdogs also have concerns about Trump’s promised pardons.
“President Trump’s plan to pardon the January 6th attackers shows the president’s intent to abuse his power. Pardoning supporters of political violence is a way for dictators to achieve their own goals. It’s an act,” said Adab Noti, executive director of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center.
Similarly, Bromwich warned that there would be serious repercussions if President Trump follows through on his promise to pardon participants in the January 6 insurrection, including those who assaulted police officers. If he did so, it would be the most serious abuse of pardon power in American history.
“The work of prosecutors, attorneys, judges, and juries involved in lawful prosecutions will all be in vain. Justice Department officials who support the rule of law should do everything in their power to prevent that from happening. .”
Daniel Richman, a former federal prosecutor and now a law professor at Columbia University, said he believes there is a public interest in Trump’s sentencing and the release of Smith’s election destruction report.
Both “will be landmarks in history,” Richman said. Trump is now a convicted felon and first-time president. And Mr. Smith’s report reveals an account of criminal misconduct that says Mr. Trump’s successful delay tactics were the only reason Mr. Smith never got a chance to testify in court. It remains to be seen whether these are just time capsules or small moves towards responsibility. ”
