In Trump 

Prosecution,

Special Counsel

Seeks to Avoid 

Distracting Fights

I was irritated, and still am, at Jack Smith’s office’s conduct at Trumpie’s arraignment, specifically at this:

Now that is really bullshit by Smith. To agree with the defense that Trumpie can have contact with his CO-DEFENDANT is a matter of first impression with me. That makes the pre-trial process ripe for corruption and the theorizing in this article does not allay my concerns one bit.

By not pressing to limit contact between Mr. Trump and potential witnesses who are also his aides and other employees or advisers and lawyers, the prosecutors were seeking to minimize the potential for any violations of those strictures that might disrupt their efforts to keep the trial focused on the core charges involving national security secrets and obstruction.

So if we don’t place any restrictions on Trumpie then Trumpie can’t violate any, see! If we prohibited Trumpie and Waltie from coordinating defenses, YOU KNOW Trumpie would violate, AND WE DON’T WANT THAT! As strategy or tactic, if it was either of those, Smith’s position is preposterous. It made the judge step in and do the prosecution’s job, something that angers judges.

 

Judge Goodman...seemed puzzled why Mr. Smith’s team would not, as a bare minimum, insist that a defendant who has been accused repeatedly of pressuring witnesses be given no constraints at all.

 

SEE!

 

Mr. Smith’s decision not to demand any conditions at the arraignment, people familiar with the situation said, reflected a belief that prosecutors should avoid impairing Mr. Trump’s ability to campaign.

 

His approach also seems to be a nod to the political sensitivities created by years of Republican protests — and misinformation — about prior investigations into Mr. Trump by the Justice Department and the F.B.I.

 

So to avoid mixing politics and law we'll mix in a little politics, see!

Smith...seems intent on avoiding unnecessary confrontation.

Conspicuously absent from the indictment was a potential charge...:Section 2071 of the federal criminal code...the concealment and mishandling of sensitive government documents...,the only crime on the sheet...requiring that anyone convicted of it “shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.”

Many legal scholars believe that the provision is unconstitutional and would have ultimately been struck down if it were imposed on Mr. Trump. But Mr. Smith’s team sidestepped the issue altogether, leaving it out of their 37-count indictment on a section of the Espionage Act that imposes a prison term but no restrictions on holding office.

“I think it’s a very savvy move not bringing that charge,” said John P. Fishwick Jr., who was the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia from 2015 to 2017. “It makes this much less about politics — this is about the evidence, not about blocking him from office.”

But Mr. Smith’s team has also taken pains to spare the former president unnecessary embarrassment or inconvenience, as evidenced by their deferential attitude at the arraignment toward Mr. Trump and his co-defendant, Walt Nauta.

...

There is also a sense among some close to the case that much of the evidence needed to convict the defendants — in the form of text messages, photographs, camera footage, sworn testimony and the detailed notes of M. Evan Corcoran, a Trump lawyer — is already in place...

In other words, we have so much evidence we don't even have to try to convict him. That's a humble brag and that can come back to bite you in the ass. Loose Cannon as trial judge? Sure. Only one juror needed to hang the case, not worried, "We'll take the first six judge!" That's beyond a humble brag, that's arrogance.

“Despite the parties’ recommendations to me, I am also going to be imposing some additional special conditions,” the judge said.

Then he barred Mr. Trump from discussing the case with Mr. Nauta or any other “witnesses and victims” — once prosecutors assembled a list of witnesses.

Mr. Harbach said his team would comply, then joked that the “elephant in the room” was that no such list existed yet.

"No such list existed yet." Ha-ha-ha are you fucking kidding me? ARE they trying? Smith also said at his presser that the government will press for a speedy trial. How can you press for a speedy trial when you don't even have the witness list ready at arraignment. That is ROUTINELY turned over to the defense at arraignment.

“No-contact orders are routine — even in cases where you don’t have a defendant, like Trump, who has tried to influence witnesses,” said Mary McCord, a former top official in the Justice Department’s national security division. “But in this case, Jack Smith has a lot of what he needs already, so he seems to be avoiding a fight that could slow the whole process down.”

 As a matter of foundational law, Smith is flaunting his news conference statement that “We have one set of laws in this country and they apply to everybody.” Manifestly, we do not. We have one set of pre-trial restrictions that apply to a corrupt, treasonous, illegitimate, ex-president and we have another set for everyone else.

But some critics, including Andrew Weissmann, who was the lead prosecutor in Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of the Trump campaign’s connections to Russia, see all this as a double standard that unfairly shields Mr. Trump from the conditions placed on others accused of serious offenses.

Exactly.