Special Counsel Jack Smith, who prosecuted President-elect Donald J. Trump on charges of trying to cling to power after losing the 2020 election, said in his final report released early Tuesday morning: He said he believed the evidence was sufficient to convict Trump. At trial, if his success in the 2024 elections had not made it impossible for the prosecution to continue.
“The Department's view that the Constitution prohibits continued indictment and prosecution of the President is categorical and takes into account the seriousness of the crimes charged, the strength of the government's case, and the merits of the prosecution. “The Department fully supports this,” Smith wrote.
He continued: “Certainly, but given Mr. Trump's election and impending return to office, authorities have determined that the admissible evidence is sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.” Ta.
The Justice Department submitted its 137-page report, half of Mr. Smith's final report, to Congress shortly after midnight on Tuesday, although the portion related to the classified documents case was still classified.
The report, obtained by The New York Times, amounts to an unusual rebuke of the president-elect, and is a serious warning that he is poised to regain power as the nation's highest office after being charged with crimes that hit the nation's heart. That concludes the legal story. American democracy. And while Mr. Smith resigned as special counsel over the weekend, the recount of his case also served as a reminder of the extensive evidence he collected and the detailed account of Mr. Trump's actions.
The partial release comes just one day after a Florida judge in another of Trump's federal lawsuits, accusing him of mishandling classified documents, ruled that some of the documents could be released. Ta. But Judge Eileen M. Cannon, an appointee of Mr. Trump himself, also barred the Justice Department from immediately releasing the second volume of its report on the docket case to Congress.
For more than a week, Trump's lawyers, who were shown a draft of Smith's report before it was released, have called it a “political damage attempt aimed solely at disrupting the presidential transition.” I have criticized it for being too much. At least one of Trump's allies, former Justice Department official Jeffrey Clark, has come forward and said he may have been implicated in the report as an unindicted co-conspirator in the election interference case.
In August 2023, Mr. Smith indicted Mr. Trump in federal district court in Washington on three intersecting conspiracy charges, accusing him of plotting to overturn his 2020 election loss. Mr. Smith also filed a separate indictment in Florida alleging that Mr. Trump illegally retained classified documents after leaving office and conspired with two co-defendants to obstruct repeated efforts by the government to retrieve classified documents. I made an accusation.
But after Trump won the 2024 election, Smith dropped the case, citing Justice Department policy barring prosecutions of sitting presidents. Under separate departmental regulations, he submitted final reports (one each) on both cases to Attorney General Merrick B. Garland.
The Justice Department announced last week that it would hold off on publishing a booklet on the classified documents case until Garland completes all legal proceedings related to two of Trump's co-defendants.
Co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira fought the release last week by obtaining an initial restraining order from Judge Cannon, who dismissed the classified documents lawsuit last summer.
In Monday's order, Judge Cannon ordered the defense and prosecution to appear in U.S. District Court in Fort Pierce, Fla., on Friday to argue the department's plan to release classified documents to Congress.
This is a developing story. Please check back for the latest information.
