Jack Smith’s Rush To Prosecute Trump Tests America’s Commitment to Fair Trials

In America, every defendant is supposed to get a fair trial. It’s guaranteed in our Bill of Rights. That guarantee sets us apart from banana republics, and we take pride in it.Democratic prosecutors have rolled out four indictments against President Trump, including the latest by the Fulton County district attorney, Fani Willis, announced Monday night.Will he get fair trials? In Georgia, it’s too soon to say, but at Washington, D.C., the writing is on the wall. Federal prosecutor Jack Smith already is telling a string of lies to rig the trial against Trump for allegedly conspiring to overturn the 2020 election. The left and the liberal media are going along.Whether you like Mr. Trump or loathe him, Mr. Smith’s legal trickery should trouble you. It diminishes us as a nation and threatens your own rights.Here are Mr. Smith’s four biggest lies since he indicted Mr. Trump on Aug. 1:Lie No. 1: Mr. Smith claims the public is entitled to a speedy trial.Truth: Mr. Smith is pushing to start it January 2, 2024, affording Mr. Trump a mere five months to prepare a defense. Yet the Justice Department had 31 months to prepare its case.Mr. Smith’s speedy trial claim is a slick reversal of what the Sixth Amendment is intended to do: protect the defendant against a powerful government. The speedy trial right belongs to the defendant alone, and the defendant has the right to waive it in order to get time to prepare a defense.Lie No. 2: Minutes after releasing the indictment on August 1, Mr. Smith railed against the violence at the Capitol as “an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy,” implying that he was holding Mr. Trump accountable for it.Truth: Mr. Smith’s indictment is not about the violence at the Capitol. Nothing in the indictment links Mr. Trump to the Proud Boys and other rioters who have been convicted of seditious conspiracy for violently attacking the Capitol, even though prosecutors in those cases told jurors that the rioters were “Donald Trump’s army.”Mr. Smith alleges that Mr. Trump broke the law by lobbying state officials to hunt for voter fraud, asking supporters in battleground states to choose an alternative slate of electors, and trying to persuade Vice President Pence to count those alternate electors instead of the officially designated ones. Word crimes.The jury will decide whether Mr. Trump’s words violated the law or are protected by the First Amendment, as Mr. Trump’s attorneys and many legal scholars argue. After all, Vice President Gore’s complaints that the 2000 election results in Florida were defective didn’t get him indicted.Lie No. 3: A lie of omission. Paragraph 104 of the indictment quotes Mr. Trump on January 6, 2021, telling supporters, “If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”Truth: Mr. Trump also told his supporters to go “peacefully and patriotically” to the Capitol. Yet Mr. Smith deliberately omits those words from the narrative. Prosecutors who hide or omit exculpatory evidence in order to nail a defendant are themselves breaking the law. That’s what Mr. Smith’s indictment does.Lie No. 4: Mr. Smith claims he wants Mr. Trump’s case tried in a courtroom, not in the court of public opinion.Truth: Mr. Smith wants Trump muzzled, while the evidence the government has is being leaked to left-wing media.On August 4, Mr. Smith asked Judge Tanya Chutkan to muzzle Mr. Trump from discussing the government’s evidence to prevent the “improper dissemination or use of discovery materials, including to the public.”Yet on August 8, lo and behold, the New York Times reported it had “obtained” a memo referred to in Smith’s indictment but never before seen by the public. The Times says it’s “the missing piece” showing how “Trump’s allies developed their strategy to overturn Joseph R. Biden’s victory.”Days later, an MSNBC opinion piece claimed the same memo is “at the heart of the alleged crimes.” Mr. Smith is using lies and leaks to engineer a guilty verdict in court and in the public square.Historians will not judge Smith’s trickery kindly, if they ever have access to it. That’s a big “if.”Mr. Smith made an unprecedented request, granted by the Court, that Mr. Trump’s attorneys destroy or return to the government all unpublicized materials after the legal proceedings. Smells like a cover-up.America is better than this.Tell the House of Representatives to cut off Mr. Smith’s funding in the September 30 budget deal.Respect America.Creators.com

Jack Smith’s Rush To Prosecute Trump Tests America’s Commitment to Fair Trials

Jack Smith’s Rush To Prosecute Trump Tests America’s Commitment to Fair Trials

More from the New York Sun

Judge in BBC Defamation Suit Threatens Trump Over ‘Lack of Participation’ in Discovery Process

French Protests Boil Over With Buildings Torched and Hundreds Arrested Nationwide

A Disillusioned Democrat Burns Her Bridges, Seeking To Light the Way For the Left

Justice Department Seeks To Disqualify Biden-Appointed Judge Over ‘Animosity for the Trump Administration’

Iran Dials Up Pressure on Hormuz With Record Number of Weekly Strikes on Shipping

‘Beyond Irresponsible’: Republicans on Capitol Hill Denounce Trump’s Decision To Waive Russia Sanctions

Out of Adversity, a Japanese American Design Vision

The Tesla Roadster Can Really Fly, But It’s Not a Real Car Yet

More from the New York Sun

Judge in BBC Defamation Suit Threatens Trump Over ‘Lack of Participation’ in Discovery Process

French Protests Boil Over With Buildings Torched and Hundreds Arrested Nationwide

A Disillusioned Democrat Burns Her Bridges, Seeking To Light the Way For the Left

Justice Department Seeks To Disqualify Biden-Appointed Judge Over ‘Animosity for the Trump Administration’

Iran Dials Up Pressure on Hormuz With Record Number of Weekly Strikes on Shipping

‘Beyond Irresponsible’: Republicans on Capitol Hill Denounce Trump’s Decision To Waive Russia Sanctions

Out of Adversity, a Japanese American Design Vision

The Tesla Roadster Can Really Fly, But It’s Not a Real Car Yet