Jack Smith’s October Surprise for Donald Trump
Why the latest filing in Trump’s federal prosecution may not even matter despite its harrowing details
Arguably the most telling moment of the JD Vance and Tim Walz Vice Presidential debate was when Walz asked Vance if he believed Donald Trump lost the 2020 election. Vance refused to answer the question and said he was “focused on the future.”
One man, however, is still bothered by the past. He thinks what Donald Trump did after the 2020 election was criminal. That man is Special Counsel Jack Smith.
You might think that Jack Smith would be deterred in the wake of Trump v. United States. After all, in that case, the Supreme Court granted Presidents broad immunity from criminal prosecution for “official” acts.
Instead of admitting legal defeat, Smith struck back with a motion that goes into excruciating detail (for 165 pages) about what evidence he should still be able to admit in a criminal trial against Donald Trump. The motion is a harrowing tale of elaborate frauds, conspiracies, and deceptions made by Donald Trump and his numerous enablers to overturn the 2020 election.
Jack Smith presents compelling arguments for why most of the activities and statements to execute this criminal plot were…
