“No Legal Need for It”: Jack Smith’s Hit Piece Against Trump Serves No Purpose Other Than to Influence the Election

(DCNF)—Former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy accused special counsel Jack Smith Thursday of tainting a potential jury pool with the release of a brief tied to the federal election interference case against former President Donald Trump.

United States District Judge Tanya Chutkan of the District of Columbia released Smith’s brief, which sought to address the Supreme Court’s July 1 ruling regarding presidential immunity in the election interference case, Wednesday evening over the objection of Trump’s attorneys. McCarthy said that most judges would have expressed concerns over the effects the release of the brief would have on potential jurors.

“The point of this was to try to get this information, which has been hashed out again and again before the American people. None of this is new, but the idea was to get the evidence out in as spectacular a way as possible. And by Smith’s light, hopefully get Trump convicted in the run-up to the election in hopes of influencing the outcome of the election. And now we have the release of this book-length size recitation of Smith’s case under circumstances where there is no possibility of having this trial before November and there was no reason to have it brought out in public now.”

WATCH:

“In fact, in most cases, a judge would be concerned about, for example, poisoning or prejudicing against the defendant a jury pool. In most cases a judge would be very concerned that evidence not be broadcast in public without the usual due process cautions that go on in a trial that the defendant be presumed innocent, the fact that allegations are not evidence of anything,” McCarthy continued. “The point of releasing this now can only be to affect the election. There is no legal need for it.”

Smith secured a superseding indictment against Trump on Aug. 27, after the Supreme Court ruled former president had immunity for official acts. McCarthy noted the release of the brief was in contrast to how the Justice Department addressed allegations surrounding Hunter Biden.

“That’s kind of an unwritten rule of common sense you don’t do anything that you don’t have to do publicly for purposes of being perceived trying to put your thumb on the scale of the election, but there is no hard and fast rule about that,” McCarthy told “America’s Newsroom” co-anchor Dana Perino, referencing Trump’s Truth Social post accusing Smith of violating a Justice Department policy not to take actions that could affect an election in the 60 days before voters head to the polls.

Smith’s brief focused on conversations Trump had with then-Vice President Mike Pence, including a Dec. 21, 2020 lunch in which Pence reportedly urged Trump to view the results of the election as “an intermission.”

“I think he does have a point that the rules have been slanted against him and for example, all deference was given to President Biden and Hunter Biden to keep the Hunter Biden stuff under wraps in the run-up to the 2020 election,” McCarthy continued.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].