Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy stated on Friday that U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan of D.C. risked prejudicing potential jurors against former President Donald Trump by permitting the release of additional documents from special counsel Jack Smith. Chutkan agreed to Smith’s request to make four documents, totaling over 1,800 pages of potential evidence in the federal election interference case against Trump, available to the public. McCarthy asserted that Chutkan’s decision indicated the case was a “political exercise.”
“I’m not curious, because I thought from the beginning this was a political exercise. Now, that doesn’t mean there’s not a case in there someplace, but the timing of this strategically has always been a political exercise,” McCarthy said when asked by “The Story” guest host Trace Gallagher if he found the timing “curious.” “I have to chuckle when Judge Chutkan says she would not want to let politics or anything like that enter into her decision-making. A judge in a normal case, Trace, would be concerned about the jury pool.”
“Contrary to what Judge Chutkan says, her responsibility is not to the American people writ large to fill the campaign airwaves with new information. Her responsibility is to give Trump a fair trial and make sure the jury pool’s not prejudiced,” McCarthy continued.
“And any judge who was making that her north star would be very concerned about releasing this information prior to the election. Jack Smith, if he was a normal prosecutor, if he was serious when he was running around saying that his defendant is a threat to democracy as we know it and could even be a threat to witnesses, the last thing you would do is release all your case if that was what you’re really concerned about,” he continued.
Smith obtained a superseding indictment against Trump nearly two months after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Trump’s claims of immunity in a case related to an earlier indictment secured by Smith concerning the former president’s efforts to contest the results of the 2020 presidential election.
WATCH:
Former prosecutor Joyce Vance, speaking on the podcast Stay Tuned With Preet Bharara earlier this month, stated that Smith’s filing benefitted Trump by disclosing the identities of potential witnesses and offering a glimpse into the structure of the case against him. “This brief puts Trump’s team in a better position to respond, to make their own immunity arguments, and to prepare their case,” Vance said according to Newsweek. “This is, in fact, a win for Trump. And I guarantee you that nobody in the public who spent their time reading 165 pages in detail didn’t have their mind already made up about this election, right? The broad contours here, they are well known. This is not impacting the election.”
On the podcast, Vance and host Preet Bharara discussed their disagreement with the portrayal of Jack Smith’s evidence brief. Bharara clarified that he does not overly idolize Smith, stating he doesn’t believe Smith “walks on water.” However, he pushed back against criticism from CNN’s Elie Honig, who called the move unfair, rejecting the idea that Smith is on an “obsessive quest” to target Trump. Instead, Bharara argued that Smith’s actions are aimed at seeking justice for the American public. Vance agreed, noting that Smith is diligently “keeping his head down.”
