Jack Smith is the prosecutor Joe Biden is counting on to send Donald Trump to prison.
Smith is now facing his moment of truth.
And Clarence Thomas sprung a trap on Jack Smith that has Democrats sweating bullets.
As American Patriot Daily reports:
Since Jack Smith indicted Donald Trump on politically motivated charges over challenging the outcome of the 2020 election last August, Smith has claimed there was a “public interest” in a speedy trial.
Smith first requested a trial 120 days after the indictment when most defendants in federal conspiracy cases get years to prepare for trial.
When Donald Trump appealed a decision to drop the charges based on presidential immunity in December, Smith filed a motion to the Supreme Court demanding they jump ahead of the D.C. Circuit Court and immediately hear Trump’s appeal because keeping the March 4 trial date was in the “public interest.”
Now that Trump requested the Supreme Court grant a stay so he can pursue an appeal of the D.C. Circuit Court rejecting his immunity claims, Smith is once again demanding the Supreme Court rule against Trump in the name of the “public interest” in holding a speedy trial.
Even anti-Trump legal experts called out Smith for his politically motivated machinations.
Former Bush administration official Jack Goldsmith is no Trump fan.
In 2020 Goldsmith published a book titled “After Trump: Reconstructing the Presidency,” and believes that a second Trump presidency is a threat to the country.
But what Goldsmith also recognizes is a threat to the country is a weaponized justice system acting in service of one political party.
In an essay published on Lawfare, Goldsmith argued that a prosecutor demanding such a compressed trial schedule would violate any sense of fairness and potentially the defendant’s constitutional right to a proper legal defense.
“If this were any other defendant than Donald Trump, the rush to trial—which cannot possibly give the Trump legal team adequate time to prepare its defense—would be deemed wildly unfair,” Goldsmith stated.
Goldsmith also wrote that Smith’s demand for a trial that runs this close to the election violates Justice Department policy.
Section 9-85.500 of the Justice Department’s Justice Manual states:
Federal prosecutors and agents may never select the timing of any action, including investigative steps, criminal charges, or statements, for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party. Such a purpose is inconsistent with the Department’s mission and with the Principles of Federal Prosecution. See § 9-27.260. Any action likely to raise an issue or the perception of an issue under this provision requires consultation with the Public Integrity Section, and such action shall not be taken if the Public Integrity Section advises that further consultation is required with the Deputy Attorney General or Attorney General.
Goldsmith continued writing that the rule itself isn’t what’s important.
What matters, according to Goldsmith, is the fact that politics are guiding Smith’s prosecutorial decisions.
“In a sense, the rule is a formality, and ultimately irrelevant. What matters is that Smith’s timing decisions are influenced by the election and, ultimately, by politics and political outcomes. And that is wrong,” Goldsmith added.
An NBC News poll found that in the event of a criminal conviction, a five-point Donald Trump lead would flip to a two-point advantage for Joe Biden.
Goldsmith is someone who holds great sway with the center-right legal establishment in Washington, D.C.
That’s why it was not an accident that Trump’s attorneys cited Goldsmith’s piece at the top of their response to Smith’s demand that the Supreme Court reject Trump’s stay request.
Jack Smith is asking the Supreme Court to be a party to a scheme to deputize the courts in the stop-Trump effort.
Even Trump haters recognize this is wrong.
Will the Supreme Court agree?
