Expert Warns of Potential Pitfall in Jack Smith’s Latest Indictment

A former high-level Justice Department official expressed his concerns on Tuesday regarding the recent developments in the J6 case against former President Donald Trump. He suggested that Jack Smith may have inadvertently included a significant legal complication that could jeopardize the case’s integrity.

Jim Trusty, who previously served as the chief of the DOJ’s organized crime and gang division, highlighted a recent Supreme Court ruling concerning presidential immunity related to “official acts.” According to Trusty, this ruling emphasizes how the introduction of “immunized” evidence could distort a jury’s view of a defendant. Such nuances are critical in the context of Trump’s legal team’s arguments, which assert that the evidence Smith and Judge Tanya Chutkan have cited against Trump should not have been admissible. Trusty articulated this concern by stating, “The opinion states that immunized information is not only inappropriate during the trial but can also undermine the integrity of the grand jury process if it informs the indictment.”

(VOTE: Are You Supporting TRUMP Or KAMALA In November?)

In essence, Trusty warned that the prosecution has potentially included evidence that could hinder Trump’s right to a fair trial. “That’s a huge landmine,” he elaborated. “Smith is attempting to address these issues preemptively before Judge Chutkan rules on what evidence is permissible. However, if Smith misjudges even once—for instance, mischaracterizing Pence’s role during these events—he might have to return to the grand jury for a third indictment, presenting a convoluted legal scenario.”

When pressed by the media about the complexities of charging a current or former president for actions taken while in office, Trusty referred to the foundational principles of the U.S. Constitution. “Our Constitution is clear on this point. It suggests that we should not put presidents in a position where they are encumbered by the fear of prosecution from both state and federal entities,” he noted.

WATCH:

On the same day, Smith submitted a second, revised indictment against Trump. This new filing claims Trump directed Vice President Mike Pence to obstruct the certification of the 2020 election results. Changes in the indictment included referring to Pence as “President of the Senate,” an adaptation believed to be an effort to navigate around the extensive immunity traditionally granted to sitting presidents regarding their official duties.

Despite Smith’s strategic adjustments in this indictment, critics argue that the foundation of his case may have been weakened since it has been essentially paused since December, pending Trump’s ongoing appeal for immunity in federal courts following the Supreme Court’s ruling in June. The likelihood of reaching a final judgment before the forthcoming November election appears increasingly bleak. Should Trump win, it is anticipated that he might instruct the DOJ to dismiss Smith and cease the ongoing proceedings.

(FREE RED HAT: “Impeached. Arrested. Convicted. Shot. Still Standing”)