Kamala Harris and her prosecutor pal Jack Smith had one trick left up their sleeves.
But it didn’t play out like they hoped.
And Jack Smith tried to launch an October surprise and got hit with one nasty curveball.
Jack Smith’s attempted October surprise
Judge Tanya Chutkan subverted the rules of criminal procedure and allowed Jack Smith to file a 165-page brief outlining his case against Donald Trump in the January 6th witch hunt.
Normally the defense files a motion first asking for charges to be dismissed, and then the prosecution responds.
But in this case, the Supreme Court’s Presidential Immunity ruling meant Smith wouldn’t get his show trial before the election.
Chutkan, wanting to help Smith try and defeat Trump, allowed Smith to file his brief about Trump’s charges falling outside the immunity ruling so Smith could try his case in public without Trump having the chance to mount a proper defense.
Smith then wanted to make the evidence he collected against Trump public one month before the election.
There is no legal or public interest in making the evidence public now.
It just serves the political interest of Smith’s bosses in the Democrat Party.
Trump argued releasing the evidence was election interference.
Chutkan issued an insane ruling which claimed that keeping Smith’s claims of evidence from voters was election interference.
And even though American jurisprudence is set up to protect a defendant’s rights, Chutkan contends that Trump’s rights are subservient to Jack Smith’s goal of helping Kamala Harris win the election.
“[L]itigation’s incidental effects on politics are not the same as a court’s intentional interference with them,” Chutkan ruled. “As a result, it is in fact Defendant’s requested relief that risks undermining that public interest: If the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it, that withholding could itself constitute—or appear to be— election interference,” Chutkan wrote.
Smith’s October surprise fizzles out
The Trump campaign issued a statement slamming Jack Smith as a “crazed liberal” perverting the justice system for Kamala Harris’ political benefit.
“Radical Democrats are hell-bent on interfering in the presidential election on behalf of Lyin’ Kamala Harris,” Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung’s statement read. “With just over two weeks until Election Day, President Trump is dominating this race and Crazed Liberals throughout the Deep State are freaking out.”
“As mandated by the Supreme Court’s historic decision on Presidential Immunity and other vital jurisprudence, this entire case is a sham and a partisan, Unconstitutional Witch Hunt that should be dismissed entirely — as should ALL of the remaining Democrat hoaxes,” Cheung’s statement concluded.
Judge Chutkan, a Barack Obama appointee, chose to make Smith’s briefing public.
The anti-Trump media couldn’t wait to dive in to find new details to spin to make the final two weeks of the campaign all about Trump and January 6.
But the Smith filing was a bust.
Anti-Trump POLITICO activist Kyle Cheney whined on social media that the “evidence” was just a collection of documents and testimony already in the public realm.
“Just went through Volume 4 — very little unredacted, and the stuff that is has already been public. It’s a collection of documents gathered by the Jan. 6 committee, Peter Navarro’s Hatch Act report, transcripts of Trump’s Jan. 6 speech and video message to rioters, etc.,” Cheney wrote on X.
