Jack Smith, the special counsel from the Biden-Harris Justice Department who filed new January 6 allegations against former President Donald Trump that a federal judge released on Wednesday may be putting Trump’s right to a “fair trial” at risk, according to a CBS analyst.
Rebecca Roiphe, a legal contributor for the network and former Manhattan federal prosecutor, remarked on the “unusual” level of detail included by Smith in his filing. One of the most notable aspects was an alleged incident in which President Trump reportedly responded with “So what?” upon learning that a mob was ransacking the Capitol building while former Vice President Mike Pence was inside. The host asked Roiphe how a jury might interpret the evidence presented by Smith.
“When there are motions, those motions become public. and those motions contain certain factual allegations. I think what is unusual here is the level of detail. Now, of course, this is an important case,” Roiphe explained, the Daily Caller reported. “This is responding to a ruling from the Supreme Court that was fairly vague. And so it’s not that the level of detail is inappropriate, but there is a level of detail that one doesn’t normally see in motion filings.”
Lawyers for President Trump swiftly replied to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, arguing that Smith was infringing on their client’s right to a fair trial by presenting innuendo as facts. Chutkan disagreed with the defense’s characterization of Smith as having a “bad-faith partisan bias” and ordered the release of a partially redacted transcript of Smith’s filing.
“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,” Roiphe continued.
WATCH:
Just before Smith filed the 165-page document, Trump’s attorneys submitted a filing of their own, asserting that the prosecutor is trying to sway the court of public opinion by releasing witness testimony just a month before the election. They further contended that Smith’s newfound interest in publicizing this testimony contradicts his earlier requests to keep witness statements confidential to protect their identities.
Most legal observers anticipate that if Trump wins, he will swiftly move to dismiss Smith’s remaining case upon taking office. A second case related to storing classified documents at Mar-a-Lago has already been dismissed after Florida U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland improperly appointed Smith. Chutkan, an Obama appointee, has permitted Smith’s January 6 case to proceed, even though it is unlikely to be resolved before Election Day. Other observers believe that Smith may have compromised his case by introducing “immunized evidence,” which could jeopardize Trump’s right to a fair trial.