President Trump’s lawyers responded to special counsel Jack Smith’s request to file a gigantic 180-page “opening brief” in the January 6 case in DC.
Jack Smith knows he can’t get to trial before the election so he is trying to release a “hit piece” on Trump in the January 6 case as he addresses the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling.
Tanya Chutkan, the Obama-appointed judge overseeing the case, previously signed off on Jack Smith’s request for an “irregular” filing.
Now Jack Smith wants to file a 180-page document so he can attack Trump before the election.
“The Motion is a new development illustrating the unprecedented and irregular nature of the Office’s approach on remand, as they are seeking permission to file a document that would quadruple the standard page limits in this District. The Office cites no case in which such relief was granted, just as they cited no authority for the previous request to file a free-standing brief relating to Presidential immunity that is not responsive to a pending defense motion,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in a 9-page court filing reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
Trump’s attorneys rightfully argued that Jack Smith’s allegations presented through the 180-page document will “enter the dialogue around the election.”
They also argued that the gag order prevents Trump from even responding to the allegations and explaining in detail why Jack Smith’s selective biased account is inaccurate.
“False, public allegations by the Special Counsel’s Office, presented through a document that has no basis in the traditional criminal justice process, will undoubtedly enter the dialogue around the election. The Gag Order prevents President Trump from explaining in detail why the Office’s selective and biased account is inaccurate without risking contempt penalties. While the D.C. Circuit modified and addressed the Gag Order previously, the court was careful to note that “the general election is almost a year away, and will long postdate the trial in this case,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.
Trump’s attorneys said the Justice Department should stick to its ’60-day rule’ by citing former FBI Director James Comey.
“The huge public filing that the Motion portends would also violate the Justice Manual, which prohibits “Actions that May Have an Impact on an Election.” Justice Manual § 9-85.500 (emphasis added). “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,” they wrote.
Separately, prior to this case, DOJ followed an “Unwritten 60-Day Rule” summarized as follows:
- Former FBI Director Jim Comey: “[W]e avoid taking any action in the run up to an election, if we can avoid it.” DOJ-OIG Report at 17.
- Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch: “[I]n general, the practice has been not to take actions that might have an impact on an election, even if it’s not an election case or something like that.”
- Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates: “To me if it were 90 days off, and you think it has a significant chance of impacting an election, unless there’s a reason you need to take that action now you don’t do it.”
JUST IN: Trump says Jack Smith should not be allowed to file a 180-page “hit piece” this close to the election, particularly while Trump is restricted by gag order from commenting on witnesses. https://t.co/cLhjVak6fm pic.twitter.com/9voQrHO64l
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 23, 2024
