In a recent legal development, Special Counsel Jack Smith has taken a significant step by urging Trump-appointed Federal Judge Aileen Cannon to address what he perceives as “clear errors” in her rulings that may expose witnesses to threats and intimidation from what he refers to as the “Trump world.”
The series of events unfolded back in August 2022 when the FBI conducted a raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort home, leading to Trump’s arrest and arraignment on 37 counts related to Espionage Act violations. Since then, the legal proceedings have faced criticism, with accusations against Judge Cannon of intentionally prolonging the case and issuing rulings that appear unfavorable to the prosecution.
Smith has now filed a detailed 22-page motion, outlining multiple instances of what he considers “clear errors” committed by Judge Cannon. He argues that these errors could potentially endanger witnesses involved in the case. According to Smith, the Court applied an incorrect legal standard, justifying the need for reconsideration to “correct clear error.” Legal precedents are cited in the motion to emphasize the importance of applying the correct legal standard.
Moreover, Smith contends that reconsideration is necessary to “prevent manifest injustice.” He points out that the Court’s orders mandate the public identification of over two dozen individuals associated with the investigation, some of whom may never testify at trial. Smith argues that their anonymity should be maintained, as their identities have no bearing on the resolution of the motion to compel.
In the motion, Smith respectfully requests the Court to reconsider its recent orders and allow the sealing or redaction of exhibits that identify potential government witnesses or contain sensitive information. He further requests a stay on the orders directing the filing of newly redacted submissions until the resolution of the motion to reconsider. It’s noteworthy that the defense counsel opposes this request after consultation with the government.
Smith raises concerns about potential intimidation from what he terms “Trump world,” emphasizing the risks associated with revealing witnesses’ identities or the substance of their FBI interviews. He cites a specific example of a witness who declined to have his interview recorded, expressing concerns about risks in the “Trump world.” This witness’s opinions, non-public information about the case, and details about uncharged obstructive conduct are part of Exhibit D, along with speculation about witness tampering by an uncharged individual.
In essence, Special Counsel Jack Smith is urging the court to reevaluate its decisions to protect the anonymity and safety of witnesses, highlighting the potential threats stemming from the broader “Trump world.” This development underscores the ongoing complexity and challenges surrounding the legal proceedings involving former President Donald Trump. Read the full story here ▶